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
Funny, now you're the one sounding like a DUer.
The Vision Of The Anointed.
Actually - the only ones making associations between the 'religious right' and Islam are those that have a secual agenda and fear religion of any kind.
Leaders that have a 'Vision' of responsibility, reason and courage, you twit.
Taking a stand against insidious and undermining slime and having the guts to call it like it is.
No doubt, rusty ideas to an avid user of the tawdry stuff.
Maybe. There are serious enforcement problems for all of this, of course.
When's the last time anyone forced you to watch a porn video?
The Vision Of The Anointed.
If you represent 'modernman', with so little regard for the well being of our society---coming down on the side of something so vile in it's insult to humanity in general and women in particular--we are in terrible, dire straits.
The Vision of the Bored (me...by you).
Bye forever tinman.
I come down in favor of consenting adults being able to engage in any activity they desire, so long as their actions do not harm the person or property of another.
You seem to be coming from the Hillary Clinton "It Takes A Village" school of thought.
True..their choice--but I'm telling you, this stuff is ALL OVER the schools and it is seeping into lives...we CANNOT get way from it. It is coloring perceptions, attitudes and value systems--it is cancerous.
Face it people...it is NOT just about turning off the TV or not visiting certain websites--it is in the water these days.
Tt has become a terible part of our fabric, via slick rationalizations like the ones spouted with such primitive vehemence here.
What is it with you guys?
Perhaps we do not like being accused of being pedophiles because we like Playboy magazine.
Get over yourselves and at least have the decency to disavow this terrible, degrading stuff.
Actually, I have, but we seem to have a difference of definitions.
NOBODY here is talking about nudity and sexuality that carries innate respect/appreciation for the subject--and it goes without saying NOBODY is talking about sexuality expressed in a loving relationship--so stop the stupid so 'I shouldn't have those feelings for my wife' stories.
The impression I have is that you and others are saying "all displays of nudity and/or sexuality outside marriage are pornography." I did not mention any 'feelings for my wife' stories, that was someone else.
You're blowing smoke to keep from rising to a standard that is more decent.
If attempting to have a logical discussion on facts rather than raw emotion is "blowing smoke," then I guess I will just have to plead guilty.
We KNOW men like to look at the female form...pretty hard-wired natural impulse, I'd say.
We women also like to look at guys--although not as impersonally.
So where do you draw the line?
Wer'e talking about the sewage that has become what is pornography today--the miserable dehumanzing fare that is catching on like wildfire and ruining lives and relationships.
OK. Again, we have a bit of a definition issue here.
It is damaging to US--our place in this world, our ability to connect--you seem to be very disinterested in all that.
This goes back to the 'bikinis versus burkas' comment I made earlier.
I will not disagree with you that there is some real filth out there that I do not want in my home and have been forced to block via Internet filtering. My point is that it is extremely difficult to maintain a logical argument against consenting adults being able to do what they want as long as it does not harm others that is consistent with Constitutional freedoms.
Do unsolicited internet pictures and pop-ups count in your mind?
I'd say no, since you can get rid of them with a click of the button.
But we've already agreed that such things can be made illegal.
>>so long as their actions do not harm the person or property of another>>
And you, in your wisdom, KNOW that none of this harms anyone, eh?
Try walking in the shoes of female, pal..(not literally please, not a pretty picture..:[)
Little girls that live in houses with porn addicted males --school girls that are pressured by porn addicted boys--females like me that have to endure in the in-your-face insult and power grab of some angry male flaunting a graphic gynecological centerfold right next to me (and the other decent women)--on the train--you're so out to lunch it is terrifying.
Males like you have abandoned the concept of grace and dignity--and any molecule of consideration for us, your gender complement. You treat us like we are the enemy--to be denigrated and objectified for your enjoyment in the worst possible ways.
It is so heartbreaking that you do not have the empathy to see this.
It harms us PLENTY.
Get out of your narcisstic single-view and maybe you can experience some enlightenmen.
So your implying that women are weak, easily led and of course not to blame for anything cause it's the wicked white male made'em do it. Talk about a simpleton!
No comment --you are, and remain a Simpleton. Capital S.
Adults watching porn in private, in of itself, does not harm any third parties. I challenge you to provide evidence to the contrary.
Little girls that live in houses with porn addicted males
If they're showing porn to kids, that's a crime. Prosecute them.
school girls that are pressured by porn addicted boys
If someone forces another to have sex, that is a crime. Prosecute them.
females like me that have to endure in the in-your-face insult and power grab of some angry male flaunting a graphic gynecological centerfold right next to me (and the other decent women)--on the train
Forcing others to view porn against their consent is a crime. Prosecute the offenders.
You are throwing out strawmen so fast it's amazing. None of these activities you've described fall into my definition of what type of porn use is acceptable, i.e. use of porn by consenting adults in the privacy of their own home or in an a location where all the other people involved also consent (such as a party or nigthclub).
Males like you have abandoned the concept of grace and dignity--and any molecule of consideration for us, your gender complement. You treat us like we are the enemy--to be denigrated and objectified for your enjoyment in the worst possible ways.
You combine an ad hominem attack with quasi-feminist notions that the women involved in porn are incapable of making their own decisions.
And, I have never said that forcing porn on anyone is acceptable or legal. Quite the opposite, actually.
It harms us PLENTY.
You must be pretty delicate to be harmed by other adults' consenting private activities.
Amen, sister! I almost get the feeling that some guys are so stridently defending smut because they are avid consumers of said smut.
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.