pagerman @ work said:

---

Quote:

---

I respect the First Amendment

---

Clearly you don't.

---

Gooning isn't speech.

pagerman @ work said:

---

Quote:

---

I respect the First Amendment

---

Clearly you don't.

---

Porn clearly isn't speech in the traditional constitutional sense. And I say that as someone who doesn't think it should be banned. Calling it speech is very 21st century online neckbeard pseudointellectualism though.

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

And even with this setup, rape was a massive and widespread problem a couple orders of magnitude greater than what we see today. In many societies throughout history lower class women were more likely than not to be raped at some point in their lives.

---

Hard data to support that? And by hard data, I don't mean some random internet link or an academic's opinion unsupported by actual data.

I'm skeptical because of your assertion because, even if true, who was collecting the data?

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

pagerman @ work said:

---

Quote:

---

Porn clearly isn't speech in the traditional constitutional sense. And I say that as someone who doesn't think it should be banned. Calling it speech is very 21st century online neckbeard pseudointellectualism though.

---

---

---

Although I agree with your first sentence, unfortunately the Supreme Court doesn't.

It's known in the same way and with the same methods that it is known humans had very short life expectancies for most of our history as a species. The birthdates, death dates, cause of death and ages for 99.99999999999% of humans who have ever lived are entirely unknown. But contemporary historical accounts from as far back as they exist universally support the conventional knowledge of when and how humans generally died prior to the mass accumulation of data we have access to in populations today. The same is true for rape throughout history.

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

pagerman @ work said:

---

Quote:

---

I respect the First Amendment

---

Clearly you don't.

---

Porn clearly isn't speech in the traditional constitutional sense. And I say that as someone who doesn't think it should be banned. Calling it speech is very 21st century online neckbeard pseudointellectualism though.

---

LOL

KingofHazor said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

pagerman @ work said:

---

Quote:

---

Porn clearly isn't speech in the traditional constitutional sense. And I say that as someone who doesn't think it should be banned. Calling it speech is very 21st century online neckbeard pseudointellectualism though.

---

---

---

Although I agree with your first sentence, unfortunately the Supreme Court doesn't.

---

I understand that, I just contend they are wrong. And I mean objectively, not as a matter of opinion. Not a single individual involved in the creation of the constitution, the bill of rights or literally any living American prior to about 1920 would have regarded the modern concept of porn as "speech". The concept would be so foreign to them as to literally make having a conversation about it with them impossible. Moreover, the court's decision required effectively inserting language into the BOR that isn't there to make it work.

The court has been objectively wrong many times before and they are wrong here.

Interesting perspective.

So basically your premise is that mass, unfettered, access to porn via smart phones or other devices has lowered the levels of rape/sexual assault committed by young to middle aged men, by giving them an alternative outlet. Further, that if porn was somehow banned or made extremely difficult to access, rape/sexual assault number greatly increase.

It would be interesting to see a comparison of rape/sexual assault statistics from prior to a generally accepted date range of society being saturated with smart phones/other devices/high speed internet access (say mid 2000's) and what those same statistics are showing now.

I have an OnlyFans page. And let me tell you...the economy must be in a lot worse shape than people think.

I don't get the appeal of OnlyFans, but that's probably because I am absolutely swimming in p***y

Urban Ag said:

---

Interesting perspective.

So basically your premise is that mass, unfettered, access to porn via smart phones or other devices has lowered the levels of rape/sexual assault committed by young to middle aged men, by giving them an alternative outlet. Further, that if porn was somehow banned or made extremely difficult to access, rape/sexual assault number greatly increase.

It would be interesting to see a comparison of rape/sexual assault statistics from prior to a generally accepted date range of society being saturated with smart phones/other devices/high speed internet access (say mid 2000's) and what those same statistics are showing now.

---

You'd have to go back further than that, to a time before even the widespread use of pornographic printed material, to get a real feel for it. And by that point you're getting back to when reliable statistics on sexual assault are exceptionally hard to come by and when most cases went unreported.

Dan Carlin said:

---

I don't get the appeal of OnlyFans, but that's probably because I am absolutely swimming in p***y

---

One would have to be pretty down bad to pay for that garbage.

Dan Carlin said:

---

I don't get the appeal of OnlyFans, but that's probably because I am absolutely swimming in p***y

---

She gets around, huh?

AxelFoley85 said:

---

The war on drugs was won? What?

---

The drugs won.

TexasRebel said:

---

Dan Carlin said:

---

I don't get the appeal of OnlyFans, but that's probably because I am absolutely swimming in p***y

---

She gets around, huh?

---

Good for the women if they do! It's what I'm doing. No hypocrisy there. Just be smart with your health and ethical with your intentions.

Zachary Klement said:

---

InfantryAg said:

---

Zachary Klement said:

---

Porn and OF should be illegal. An argument could be made that this has had a greater negative impact on society than any drug or alcohol.

---

now do free speech or the right to own guns...

---

I think in terms of how addictive it is and the net detriment to society porn is, it's more comparable to meth than free speech.

Do you think methamphetamine should be legal?

---

Gambling is way more addicting than meth. Ask those who treat addictions. The dopamne release is extremely addicting.

What do you think would happen if we outlaw gambling. NFL would go bankrupt for starters as nobody would watch it.

Science Denier said:

---

Zachary Klement said:

---

InfantryAg said:

---

Zachary Klement said:

---

Porn and OF should be illegal. An argument could be made that this has had a greater negative impact on society than any drug or alcohol.

---

now do free speech or the right to own guns...

---

I think in terms of how addictive it is and the net detriment to society porn is, it's more comparable to meth than free speech.

Do you think methamphetamine should be legal?

---

Gambling is way more addicting than meth. Ask those who treat addictions. The dopamne release is extremely addicting.

What do you think would happen if we outlaw gambling. NFL would go bankrupt for starters as nobody would watch it.

---

We would be much better off if gambling were not accessible the way that it is now.

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

It's known in the same way and with the same methods that it is known humans had very short life expectancies for most of our history as a species. The birthdates, death dates, cause of death and ages for 99.99999999999% of humans who have ever lived are entirely unknown. But contemporary historical accounts from as far back as they exist universally support the conventional knowledge of when and how humans generally died prior to the mass accumulation of data we have access to in populations today. The same is true for rape throughout history.

---

I've read a LOT of history and archaeology and I've never read of rape being common as a norm in society. It was common in warfare and in conjunction with slavery, but not a norm within members of the same society.

Following your logic, Infection_Ag, do you support making AI generated child porn available?

If not, what's the difference?

For the record, I support any law the restricts the access to any porn. I reject the notion that the best way to deal with our carnality is to indulge it.

KingofHazor said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

It's known in the same way and with the same methods that it is known humans had very short life expectancies for most of our history as a species. The birthdates, death dates, cause of death and ages for 99.99999999999% of humans who have ever lived are entirely unknown. But contemporary historical accounts from as far back as they exist universally support the conventional knowledge of when and how humans generally died prior to the mass accumulation of data we have access to in populations today. The same is true for rape throughout history.

---

I've read a LOT of history and archaeology and I've never read of rape being common as a norm in society. It was common in warfare and in conjunction with slavery, but not a norm within members of the same society.

---

Prostitution was pretty much legal everywhere back then. I bet there is a high correlation to its outlaw and the rise of rape and other sex crimes.

porn is insidious. the more you partake the less satisfied you feel. the more you have to step up the use and the type to get the same 'relief'. it feeds itself and creates a bio-addiction to its consumption. you truly become a prisoner in your own head and desires. much of the disfunction we see in society from the inability to create bonds with intimate partners to the wide spread promiscuousness that destroys families derails relationships before they start is directly traceable to the rise and acceptance of hardcore porn

Penetrative sex on camera being called "speech" is just about the most ludicrous argument ever. And then you have the slippery slope which has led us to where we are today, where a porn website throws an absolute **** it when they are forced to verify the users are over 18. GMAFB

Tired porn debate aside, if the subscription does indeed promise "Full access to this user's content" and has no disclaimer to the contrary, as well as no refund policy, this may actually turn into something interesting.

Except OF can only grant access to content published on OF.

If the only content published on OF is advertisements for content published elsewhere (private web server, perhaps) then that's all the content OF contains.

"Full access" to content has been a term of trade in network accessible content for decades. It predates yhis service and has historically not been meant to be absolutist, down to the last fdata bit or file, but rather a package that is the broadest offered.

When you subscribe to a TV service with a similar offer language, they mean all of their generally available content, and not just specific packages or subsets, but not necessary every single thing they ever have or will offer. There is almost always fine print stating some custom or special event or production media is periodically available that could still require a special purchase.

I find it unlikely that special event or custom ordered content is not fine print exclusive still. At onlyfsns, some creeper subscribers are just too cheap to pay for it.

Squadron7 said:

---

I have an OnlyFans page. And let me tell you...the economy must be in a lot worse shape than people think.

---

I'm with you. It seems "White Chocolate" has lost his appeal. I need to find another way to make vacation money.

Silent For Too Long said:

---

Following your logic, Infection_Ag, do you support making AI generated child porn available?

---

Of course not

Quote:

---

If not, what's the difference?

---

Child pornography is a well known gateway to actually abusing children yourself. It's how people predisposed to that sort of thing dip their toe in, so to speak. Statistically nearly all child sexual abusers in the modern world started with child pornography. Pornography in general is not gateway to rape however.

On a more practical level, it's pretty clear at this point that our court system is not going to allow AI to subvert content and trademark laws. To date if something is illegal, trying to get around it by using AI has also been deemed illegal.

And all this is irrelevant tot he matter at hand as neither actual or AI generated porn of any kind is speech, which was my entire point to begin with. Porn can be illegal while also not being protected speech.

Quote:

---

For the record, I support any law the restricts the access to any porn. I reject the notion that the best way to deal with our carnality is to indulge it.

---

One, there substantive data to show your rejection in this instance is just factually incorrect.

Two, in this case individuals indulge. Societies allow. There is a difference.

Three, moral ideals at the cost of real world consequences is not a good foundational principle for governments to operate within. Doing something for a noble reason that increases societal harm doesn't mitigate the harm done.

B-1 83 said:

---

Squadron7 said:

---

I have an OnlyFans page. And let me tell you...the economy must be in a lot worse shape than people think.

---

I'm with you. It seems "White Chocolate" has lost his appeal. I need to find another way to make vacation money.

---

Yup.

The "Stag Ag" hasn't really panned out for me.

B-1 83 said:

---

Squadron7 said:

---

I have an OnlyFans page. And let me tell you...the economy must be in a lot worse shape than people think.

---

I'm with you. It seems "White Chocolate" has lost his appeal. I need to find another way to make vacation money.

---

Ever since President Trump was elected, the whole furry craze has died down. Looking for new work is hard for a bunny.

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

Zachary Klement said:

---

Over 90% of men regularly view porn. The average boy views porn for the first time at the age of 11. This surely has a profound impact on a man's ability to get into a relationship, a man's ability to function in a relationship, and then a man's ability to function as a father down the road from that.

Male loneliness has been the greatest its ever been, fewer men are getting married, there is a massively rising rate in guys that have never even been on a date with a woman. On top of all of that, there is the transgender issue that I'm sure many on here find to be morally objectionable. Pornography plays a massive role in all of these things and the general decay in society.

I don't know what porn being around since Biblical times has to do with anything. Does the Bible say that porn is okay, then? Rape, murder, and any most other crimes have been around since Biblical times. So what?

---

Historically, most societies had the combination of incentivized marriage, legal prostitution and accepted double standards for men and women sexually within relationships (ie affairs by men were tolerated to a much greater degree than they were for women). And even with this setup, rape was a massive and widespread problem a couple orders of magnitude greater than what we see today. In many societies throughout history lower class women were more likely than not to be raped at some point in their lives.

In the last 100 years or so, most western societies have disincentivized monogamy/marriage, outlawed prostitution and acceptable standards within relationships for men and women have more or less equalized (ie men at judge very harsh for affairs today even among the upper classes). Despite this, rape is far less of a problem now. Now some of that is improved law enforcement, less stigma rounding women reporting, etc. but it's impossible to ignore the role pornography has played in that. Like it or not it is by far the "best" outlet to date for the hypersexual drive of a statistically significant percentage of young and middle aged men. At the very least it is morally identical to prostitution (and I would say superior, since prostitution is incredibly physically dangerous for women) while being much better at stopping men from forcing their sex drives upon the general populace.

When you look at the combination of our current setup, and the demographics of rapists, I just don't think our society is ok with the things we'd have to do now to prevent a massive spike in sexual assault if porn was banned.

---

Not much doubt about your historical summary. I am not sure I agree with your assessment of the effect of making porn illegal on a potential vast increase in rape etc. For one thing, males continue to have much lower testosterone levels, on average so perhaps lower risk?.

You did not say this, but I think porn is not the primary factor in males losing female companionship. Aforementioned lower testosterone, screens (non-porn) limiting person -to -person interaction, and the increasingly mercenary view of women toward males are all much more important. I grew up with playboy and penthouse, if anything they made me more sexual, not less.

FatZilla said:

---

Prostitution was pretty much legal everywhere back then. I bet there is a high correlation to its outlaw and the rise of rape and other sex crimes.

---

What the heck are you talking about? Prostitution was legal when and where? When was it outlawed and where? What rise in rape and other sex crimes? How can you make that assertion when there is zero data to support it?

Are you just making stuff up to support you conclusion?

Over_ed said:

---

Not much doubt about your historical summary.

---

Baloney!

What do you think men were doing between 4000 BC and today? Sex crazed maniacs running around raping every woman they saw?

There's absolutely zero evidence that rape was common within a society towards members of that society in western or eastern cultures. War was the exception to the rule.

Sounds like OnlyFans is just like a strip club, they fake things to get your money. Shocked.

On that note, one of the funniest things about this is that when you DM one of these broads, you're really talking to some Indian or the like being paid to act as an intermediary but pretend like it's the girl. Oof.

I think this Onlyfans class action lawsuit will get dismissed because I don't see anything deceptive.