Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pornography Is Anything But A Victimless Crime
Concerned Women For America ^ | Dec. 8, 2004 | Cheri Pierson Yecke

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    


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: cwa; filth; garbage; morality; porn; puritanpatrol; talibornagain; thoughtpolice; vile
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 241-260261-280281-300 ... 641-651 next last
To: Modernman
Internet sites are very rarely broadcast in Times Square, as far as I know.

/sarcasm

261 posted on 12/09/2004 2:53:38 PM PST by Innisfree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 255 | View Replies]

To: najida

:-)

262 posted on 12/09/2004 2:53:52 PM PST by TheBigB (I sure could go for a charbroiled hamburger sammich and some french fried potatoes!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 230 | View Replies]

To: ContemptofCourt
No, but I believe that porn is absolutely and not merely "potentially" addictive to everyone but those whose are totally disgusted by it, which is enough. The physiological effect of porn is so desirable (just like a drug) that the stimulated addict just want to see it again and again.
263 posted on 12/09/2004 2:54:21 PM PST by Theophilus (Save Little Democrats, Stop Abortion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 241 | View Replies]

To: Modernman
As you must surely know, minors are legally presumed to be unable to consent to certain things. We're talking about pornography involving only consenting adults.

Let's review.

Legally presumed. So, that is your only objection? If the law said they were able to consent, then that's ok, right?

The question cannot be more clear.

264 posted on 12/09/2004 2:54:50 PM PST by AreaMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 258 | View Replies]

To: dascallie
Show the stats on the breakdown of marriage and societal mores.

Very well:

U.S. Per Capita Divorce Rates

Since 1990: 1991- 0.47% 1992- 0.48% 1993- 0.46% 1994- 0.46% 1995- 0.46% 1995- 0.43% 1997- 0.43% 1998- 0.42% 1999- 0.41% 2000- 0.41% 2001- 0.40%

Divorce rates

More porn is correlated with more stable marriages, yes?

265 posted on 12/09/2004 2:55:39 PM PST by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]

To: Politicalities

Hell man, I can still name the entire ignoratio branch of fallacies, in Latin.


266 posted on 12/09/2004 2:57:47 PM PST by Melas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 223 | View Replies]

To: TChris

Then make OCD people into outlaws. Force really cranky people to do hard time. Forbid marriage if an obscure aunt isn't happy with it!

We all got our problems. If you have a wife, kids, and job and your biggest problem is staying up late watching HBO, I'll say you're doing fairly well.


267 posted on 12/09/2004 2:59:07 PM PST by MacDorcha
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 219 | View Replies]

To: Innisfree
The production of pornographic imagery does not constitute a "private activity between consenting adults."

Why not? It would be my guess that for the most part, the performers, as well as the crew, are all there voluntarily.

And if you reply that they're only there because they're being paid, well, the only reason I go to work is because my boss pays me! If I win the lottery, I'm out of here like a shot!

Mark

268 posted on 12/09/2004 3:01:51 PM PST by MarkL (Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. But it rocks absolutely, too!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: TChris
OK, now you've shifted the rebuttals to be about when someone dies from their activities. Again, misses the point. I have never claimed that the consumer of pornography will die, thereby leaving his widow with a difficult burden. You're fighting a straw man here.

No, I'm not. You're fighting a straw man by saying I'm fighting a straw man. I never restricted my examples to ones causing death.

Pornography contributes to real harm to real people.

So does alcohol. So does tobacco. So do trans-fatty acids.

Pornography increases likelihood of divorce => Kids harmed. Pornography contributes to both the perversion and number of pedophiles => Kids harmed. Pornography excites and emboldens sexual predators => Women and children harmed.

You think alcoholics aren't more likely to beat their wives and children? You think smokers aren't more likely to impose undue financial burden on their families? You think people who suffer non-fatal heart attacks due to overconsumption of cholesterol-dripping burgers don't hurt those who love them?

Other people don't own you, not even your family, not even your loved ones. You have the right to make your own choices, even if they don't like it, even if it imposes harm on them. They have the right to walk out on you if they don't like it.

269 posted on 12/09/2004 3:02:00 PM PST by Politicalities (http://www.politicalities.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 249 | View Replies]

To: Politicalities
You have the right to make your own choices...even if it imposes harm on them.

Well, I just have to say that I strongly disagree with you there. Interesting to see that the "I am an island" gang is alive and well.

270 posted on 12/09/2004 3:05:31 PM PST by TChris (You keep using that word. I don't think it means what yHello, I'm a TAGLINE vir)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 269 | View Replies]

To: MarkL

I've already skewered this idea--see above. I have no more time for this fascinating discussion.


271 posted on 12/09/2004 3:05:53 PM PST by Innisfree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 268 | View Replies]

To: AreaMan
BTW why do you impose your morality on me by saying the other person has to consent.

So, AreaMan, am I safe in assuming that consent isn't part of your moral compass ... you must have watch a train load of porn to get to that point ..

Or, am I safe in assuming that you've constructed yet another strawman

272 posted on 12/09/2004 3:06:18 PM PST by tx_eggman ("All I need to know about Islam I learned on 09/11/01" - Crawdad)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 251 | View Replies]

To: TChris
Well, I just have to say that I strongly disagree with you there

Then where do you draw the line? Do we have the moral authority to prohibit alcohol? Tobacco? Cheeseburgers? Bungie jumping? Is your right to cross the street limited by the harm your family will suffer if this risky act results in you being struck by a car and crippled?

273 posted on 12/09/2004 3:11:42 PM PST by Politicalities (http://www.politicalities.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 270 | View Replies]

To: TChris
Pornography contributes to real harm to real people. Pornography increases likelihood of divorce => Kids harmed.

Divorce rates have fallen since 1990-- see post #265.

Pornography contributes to both the perversion and number of pedophiles => Kids harmed. Pornography excites and emboldens sexual predators => Women and children harmed.

Sex crimes have fallen by half since 1993, coinciding with the explosion of porn:

post #138

274 posted on 12/09/2004 3:16:13 PM PST by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 249 | View Replies]

To: tx_eggman
So, AreaMan, am I safe in assuming that consent isn't part of your moral compass ... you must have watch a train load of porn to get to that point ..

No, I was trying to get to the point of where the libertines get the authority to tell anyone that consent is the final arbiter of morality.

Libertines don't get it. They object to some moral standards but yet have their own moral standard, i.e. ONLY private activity by consenting adults, that all others must be beholden to.

275 posted on 12/09/2004 3:17:52 PM PST by AreaMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 272 | View Replies]

To: Moleman

snip....Fortunately however, it is protected....


So is the killing of babies......but not for long.


276 posted on 12/09/2004 3:23:33 PM PST by Lindykim (")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: AreaMan
No, I was trying to get to the point of where the libertines get the authority to tell anyone that consent is the final arbiter of morality

You're not there yet, not even close.

277 posted on 12/09/2004 3:24:23 PM PST by tx_eggman ("All I need to know about Islam I learned on 09/11/01" - Crawdad)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 275 | View Replies]

To: fr_freak
"Neither of those two amendments protect the use of pornography."

They protect it from the ignorant folks who claim that we have no rights which are not enumerated in the Constitution. They also protect it from the Federal government, which is precisely what some want to use to enact their anti-pornography agenda into law. Most of the 'pornography should be illegal' people want to work on the Federal level so that they don't have to shove their agenda down peoples' throats 50+ times in different places.

"Unfortunately, in recent practice, particularly with the Texas sodomy laws, the Supreme Court has decided that somehow, inexplicably, the Constitution does indeed limit the power of the States in this regard."

While I agree with the sentiment expressed by the SCOTUS in that decision - that the private sexual acts between consenting adults in their own homes ought not be legislated - I also agree with you that the Federal government has no business sticking its nose in that fight. As it was, a lot of state supreme courts had already overturned those laws. It was simply a case of the SCOTUS extending the arm of the Federal government while once again shortchanging the rights of states.

If someone wants to ban pornography in the state of New Jersey, I'll fight that fight while recognizing the right of the state to do it (depending on the state constitution). However, whenever people get into a discussion about banning it, jurisdiction is virtually never discussed. States rights and the US Constitution are merely irrelevant details in their jihad to rid the country of something they don't like.
278 posted on 12/09/2004 3:26:07 PM PST by NJ_gent (Conservatism begins at home. Security begins at the border. Please, someone, secure our borders.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: Chad Fairbanks

All users of porn are peeping toms by virtue of the fact that they are "looking through the cyber bedroom window" at other people having sex. There's nothing hard to understand about that.
Peeping tomism is peeping tomism.


279 posted on 12/09/2004 3:27:35 PM PST by Lindykim (")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: AreaMan
Libertines don't get it. They object to some moral standards but yet have their own moral standard, i.e. ONLY private activity by consenting adults, that all others must be beholden to.

Oh, I get it all right, although I must point out that your use of the derogatory term "libertine" is yet another ad hominem. I do not deny that I want to enforce my morality on others, as you want to enforce yours. The difference is that my morality is better than yours. My morality has a name; it's called "freedom". Yours has a name too... "authoritarianism". In my morality, individuals own their own bodies and make their own choices. In yours, the government dares to presume that it has the right to dictate the behavior of its citizens "for their own good", and that people are not permitted to choose their own good for themselves.

I say without hesitation that my ethics are far superior to yours.

280 posted on 12/09/2004 3:27:53 PM PST by Politicalities (http://www.politicalities.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 275 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 241-260261-280281-300 ... 641-651 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson