Posted on 12/09/2004 1:16:14 PM PST by Lindykim
Pornography is Anything But a 'Victimless Crime' 12/8/2004 By Cheri Pierson Yecke How many more expert studies do we need to convince ourselves of this fact?
Jud Fry -- one of the characters in the Rodgers and Hammerstein musical Oklahoma! lives in a shack that is papered with pornographic images. He is a loner, lacks social skills, and is feared by his neighbors. He is clearly capable of murder. This insight into the character of a porn addict hit the Broadway stage in 1943.
Fast forward to 2004. A sexual assault and several attempted abductions of girls in the St. Paul, Minnesota, area are allegedly the work of 19-year-old Ryan Mely, who has been charged (for starters) with second-degree criminal sexual conduct. He apparently was a loner who was feared by his neighbors. Jud Fry is a fictitious character who bought his porn from an itinerant peddler. How did Ryan Mely get his start? Apparently, pornography was a family pastime. While some dads bond with their kids by fishing or playing hockey together, it appears that Mely and his father (a convicted sex offender) shared an interest in pornography. It was reported that sexually explicit material was found at the family home and on their computer.
Is anyone really surprised that pornography is involved here? It has been 60 years since a Broadway musical portrayed what social scientists and criminal analysis have now found to be true -- addiction to pornography can lead to violent sexual behavior. Dr. Victor Cline, a clinical psychologist and expert on sexual addictions, has identified four stages of progression among his patients.
The first stage is addiction, where the attraction to porn is overpowering and the viewer keeps craving more. The next stage is an escalation to more shocking and deviant images, as the earlier ones have lost their power to stimulate. Third is desensitization, where anything earlier seen as disturbing and repulsive becomes viewed as commonplace. Finally, satisfaction cannot be reached unless the perpetrator begins acting out the activities witnessed in the pornography. In effect, fantasy must become reality.
The events in which Mely was allegedly involved appear to follow this pattern. Perhaps the same is true for Alfonso Rodriguez, the man who allegedly abducted and murdered Dru Sjodin. Rodriguez apparently had an infatuation with Dru, who worked at Victoria's Secret, an upscale lingerie shop. On several occasions he allegedly called the store where she worked, asking for her by name.
Victoria's Secret is well known for its racy, soft-porn "fashion show" where voluptuous young models strut the runways in revealing lingerie. The liberal National Organization for Women called it "exploitative" and the conservative Concerned Women for America condemned it as a "high-tech striptease." Regularly protested by both sides of the political spectrum, the company announced in April that it will no longer air this event
The last Victoria's Secret "fashion show" aired on network television November 19, 2003. Dru was abducted three days later. Could it be that Alfonso Rodriguez, a convicted sex offender, watched the show and was propelled into Dr. Cline's fourth stage of sexual deviance? This is a question his judge and jury may consider.
In an interview the night before his 1989 execution, serial killer Ted Bundy revealed the influence of pornography on his life.
A case study for Cline's four stages of addiction, Bundy started his descent into sexual deviance and murder with magazines he found in the neighbor's trash. His addiction escalated until he felt compelled to act out his desires in more than 30 murders that were accompanied with violent sexual acts.
He warned Americans: "There are those loose in [your] towns and communities, like me, whose dangerous impulses are being fueled, day in and day out, by violence in the media, in its various forms -- particularly sexualized violence ... . There are lots of other kids playing in the streets around the country today who are going to be dead tomorrow, and the next day, because other young people are reading and seeing the kinds of things that are available in the media today."
Abundant evidence has demonstrated the tragic impact of pornography. How many more expert studies do we need to convince ourselves of this fact? The elections of 2004 have sent politicians the message that morals matter, so now is the time to focus on the impact of pornography -- the so-called "victimless crime."
Cheri Pierson Yecke is a Distinguished Senior Fellow for Education and Social Policy at the Center of the American Experiment, a conservative think tank in Minneapolis. She is a former Minnesota commissioner of education and is author of The War Against Excellence. This article first appeared in the Minneapolis Star Tribune. Used with permission.
Concerned Women for America 1015 Fifteenth St. N.W., Suite 1100 Washington, D.C. 20005 Phone: (202) 488-7000 Fax: (202) 488-0806 E-mail: mail@cwfa.org
Great rebuttal.
There again, you're making the illogical conclusion that I watch porn. I don't. Should I go watch some so that I can legitimately say I don't like it, or is it ok if I just say I don't like it without having to watch it?
If you don't like my attack on the other poster, that ain't my problem. She had it coming, due to personal attacks she made on me. Don't like it? too bad.
One does not need to snort coke to know that it is bad for you.
Oh how terribly naive of you. Porn is an accomplice in many broken homes, to the undisputed damage of any children involved. Consumption of pornography has generated or further perverted a horde of pedophiles who prey on innocent kids. It is also an integral part of the lives of many (most?) rapists and lesser sexual abusers.
Porn doesn't addict or destroy everyone it touches, but it destroys enough that it should be a much bigger concern than it is. Not everyone died of the plague either.
If you read the article, you can easily see that porn does have an impact on someone besides the one using it.
No, not everyone that uses porn becomes a serial killer. But then, not everyone that drinks alcohol gets drunk or drives drunk. Not everyone who takes drugs steals to support their habit. But it happens often enough to be cause for concern.
Uh. That's illegal. If you know of that happening, it's your responsibility to contact the appropriate authorities.
All laws are legislated morality. Sex has a moral component to it.
...without their consent.
This is the flimsy concept upon which the followers of Hortense the Mule Faced Philospher (aka Ms. Rand) hang all their arguments.
So if someone can find themselves some consenting 14 year olds then hey, that's cool.
Every single person involved, from finance to production to consumption, is a consenting adult. If you're not involved and don't want to be, butt out and let others enjoy life in a free society.
You are correct. The problem, being more often than not, people equate correlation as causation. Which is exactly what is happening in this discussion.
Anything can be correlated with just about anything else. Proving causality is an entirely different issue.
Well, obviously, citing a fictional Broadway musical proves the author's thesis.
In case you did not follow, I had extrapolated well beyond the article...in fact never addressed THAt article.
You have NEVER addressed the central issue.
No surprise there.
Did you only read the opening paragraph? If not, then you know that there was evidence presented. Don't be disingenous.
Ah, but RAPE is the direct and violent taking of someone's will for the criminals pleasure. Rape victims don't enjoy such behavior. Next thing you'll be saying is gay sex isn't protected either. In their PRIVACY people may do as they wish.
BTW,I draw the line on homosexuality. If they marry, they no longer uphold a social contract. This is why I oppose gay marriage.
People are allowed to smoke, which has more evidence suggesting it being harmful than porno does. (How many people have died from watching a porn?) And you know what? I couldn't careless if people smoke (or even WHAT they smoke for that matter) so long as it doesn't hurt anyone else.
And whats the 4th Amendment if not a means of keeping private habits private anyway? just a question...
If anyone I knew owned pornography involving 14 year old girls, I would report them to the cops.
Do you have a cite for that statistic?
Or do you expect us to just believe it because it fits your agenda?
What do I win?
Depends, did you use your left hand or right hand to insert the money ... or God forbid, both ???
People like yourself scare me...would you outlaw bikinis? Skirts? Mandate that women wear slacks? Because basically, what you are arguing is that impure thoughts should be banned, which is just absurd.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.