[Ken H]

My questions were simple and clear, and need no further defining. You know good and well that porn is more available now, primarily because of the internet, but also cable tv, camcorders, etc.

Your objections are disingenuous, IMO.

[dadfly]

not clear enough to me. don’t see how the existence of various forms of modern video distribution necessarily make porn (which i believe has come for decades or even centuries in form of literature, photos, grafiti, blue or “art” films, before we got computers and camcorders or even tv) more “available” to potential sex criminals whose crimes have been described for centuries.

i don’t think you mean or can prove that streaming 20 frames per second is defined as a greater availabilty of porn (i guess that’s technically true if your defining availablity by number of frames per second consumed.)

anyway i could think of other, more direct, statistical “experiments” that could theoretically support what i think you are trying to say better than the point you are trying to sell me.

but, being called “disingenuous” i guess is my cue to say movin on.