• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Does 'rape culture' accurately describe (many) societies?

theprestige said:
Yes, and none of them are documented examples of how social media + algorithm overrides responsible and engaged sex education.
Click to expand...
If that's the bar then there has never been and is never going to be any experiment on any complex social issue that satisfies it, principally because no such experiment would pass an ethics board, but also because experiments are designed to strip away as much complexity as possible and focus on a single or few variables.

What we do know is that humans can act very poorly when they are misled about base rates and sample sizes. These are what social media + algorithms distort and no one is immune because it's just the way our brains work. Even when you are aware of these biases it takes a lot of effort to compensate for them, something that no one can do the vast majority of the time. Often it's impossible to compensate because the necessary information does not even exist.
 
Poem said:
Start with: 'the NYT is wrong because.......'
Click to expand...

I didn't ask for a lesson in composition. I asked what evidence you would accept to demonstrate that a thing hadn't happened. What would you need to hear to make you change your mind.


(I really think you should read up on critical thinking at some point. It would help this conversation immensely)
 
Darat said:
This is evidence that what you want to happen, i.e. for all porn to be banned won't work.
Click to expand...
It's evidence that the decision by the US supreme court to deem the CPPA overbroad has had such a consequence.
 
3point14 said:
I didn't ask for a lesson in composition. I asked what evidence you would accept to demonstrate that a thing hadn't happened. What would you need to hear to make you change your mind.


(I really think you should read up on critical thinking at some point. It would help this conversation immensely)
Click to expand...
Is the NYT piece wrong?
 
Poem said:
It's evidence that the decision by the US supreme court to deem the CPPA overbroad has had such a consequence.
Click to expand...
May be but it is evidence that what most people would consider the worse kind of pornography, which is not only banned but is a criminal offence in most countries to even access does not stop that kind of pornography. Therefore, if all pornography were to be banned it is evidence that the then illegal pornography would still be available. Making all pornography illegal will not stop people from accessing pornography.
 
Poem said:
Is the NYT piece wrong?
Click to expand...

I don't know. Is it?

You're missing my point. I want to know if it's possible to change your mind. So I want to know what you would accept as evidence that either you or the piece is wrong. If you can't postulate evidence that would make you change your mind then there's no point, is there? If you tell me there's nothing that will change your mind, why would I waste my time.

So, again, what would you accept as evidence that the piece is wrong? In general terms, of course.
 
Darat said:
May be but it is evidence that what most people would consider the worse kind of pornography, which is not only banned but is a criminal offence in most countries to even access does not stop that kind of pornography. Therefore, if all pornography were to be banned it is evidence that the then illegal pornography would still be available. Making all pornography illegal will not stop people from accessing pornography.
Click to expand...
You are missing the point that Ashcroft v. The Free Speech Coalition has made it legal (in USA) to produce porn where actors look underage. Such material is rife on porn sites. Under UK law it's illegal on DVD.
 
Here's an idea: Pornhub's tax bill in your region of the world is based on how far the content it serves up deviates from what your society wants children to be taught about in sex education.
 
3point14 said:
I don't know. Is it?

You're missing my point. I want to know if it's possible to change your mind. So I want to know what you would accept as evidence that either you or the piece is wrong. If you can't postulate evidence that would make you change your mind then there's no point, is there? If you tell me there's nothing that will change your mind, why would I waste my time.

So, again, what would you accept as evidence that the piece is wrong? In general terms, of course.
Click to expand...
If there were numerous experts / newspaper articles saying the opposite I would listen. Is there?
 
Poem said:
You are missing the point that Ashcroft v. The Free Speech Coalition has made it legal (in USA) to produce porn where actors look underage. Such material is rife on porn sites. Under UK law it's illegal on DVD.
Click to expand...
I am not missing the point, you are. The point is clear - banning and making it a crime to watch, access or even receive child abuse "pornography" does not stop people from making and accessing such material. Therefore, banning all pornography will not prevent people from making and accessing pornography. What you want to happen - pornography to be totally banned - will not achieve what you want i.e. will not stop people accessing pornography.
 
Poem said:
In July 2024, the National Police Chiefs' Council (NPCC) and the College of Policing said that violence against women and girls is a “national emergency”. According to the NPCC, VAWG makes up just under 20% of all recorded crime in England and Wales.
Click to expand...
Oh, okay, so it's just politicians bloviating. No actual emergency is being declared or acted on.
 
Poem said:
Is the NYT piece wrong?
Click to expand...
I don't know about the article iteself, but the headline at least is a lie. The Internet is observably not "overrun" with such material.

(But like I've been saying, large swaths of the Internet are something like "overrun" with other kinds of manipulative and anti-social brainrot aimed at children. Remember the controversy about banning TikTok? Where was the NYT then, talking about a platform overrun with toxic crap? Nowhere. The NYT is not an authority on anything as far as I'm concerned. You need to stop these hand-wavy appeals to authority. You cannot use the ersatz opinions of others, to make your case by proxy. The best you can do is say that you found the claims of this police chief or that media outlet convincing, and let others make up their own minds.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom