[hyfe]

Originally Posted by Dante Hicks

But eventually, when graphics move forward enough to the point where we have photorealistic graphics then surely you'll support the banning of any videogame which has certain kinds of violence in it, right? I mean, I remember playing a game on the Spectrum (I think) where you had to kick blind people and knock over old woman. If the graphics were realistic enough and the animation, and the sound it might be just like the real thing. Obviously that would need to be banned in your eyes?

That is the logical conclusion of my current views, so yes. I do hope it won't come to that though.. with realistic motion being so bloody difficult, and getting the light right almost downright impossible (RGB won't cut it, you loose too much information on how light interacts then) I won't be holding my breath for it though.

The thing is I kind of agree that pornography could be having an effect on people's sexuality. It might be making attitudes towards sex or women worse (I think they had some article on French teenagers where they said their ideas of sex were totally hilariously wrong because most of them thought it would (or should) be something like porn). All these ideas are reasonable - it could be true.

But the point is you're not just saying "Hey maybe we should make less violent porn". You're saying it should be banned. Apparently some people are suggesting a custodial sentence for it. So you're advocating locking people up which is both horrendously expensive and a massive expression of violence / force by the state anyway (you'll probably ruin that persons life to an extent). Now, are you willing to do all this without any real solid evidence to back you up?

I'm perfectly comfortable with discussing other alternatives than banning. I just think the long-term effect potentially warrants an outright ban.

The purpose of banning wouldn't be locking people up though, it'd be removing it from "mainstream" circulation. Ie; remove (or atleast, lessen) the economic incentive of pushing it, and make it a conscious decision for somebody to brave the law in getting it. It's a question of limiting supply. Frankly, I don't care too much that people will break it. If people really want it, it means they actually get off on it, and we're probably better off with them getting it. I just want to keep it from moving into mainstream, and to keep it away from people with 'tendencies' and without partners to practice with.

Also, if we do want to cut the amount of rapes then there are better ways of doing it. If we look internationally (and at the countries with the most rapes) then I doubt the majority of offences are being committed by autistic engineers.

You're right.. but I do think the wast majority of offences are made by people with inheretly ****ed up views on women. You know how a lot of guys have concepts of 'female friends' (who're afforded the status of human beings) and 'females they want to ****'. This is objectifying women, and I still think it's the core problem in our society; because the logical implications in what you can do are horrible; and it's terribly, terribly common.