Olives @olives@qoto.org

Ugh... There's more puritanical nonsense, so it looks like I have to debunk that again...

First off, even if online porn "might" be "problematic" to someone out there, it would still not be anywhere remotely near proportionate to engage in censorship, or privacy intrusive measures. Especially, as it can be important free expression to someone.

Secondly, a typical recommendation is sex education, not censorship (which is harmful in it's own ways).

Thirdly, the science isn't really showing that porn is this awful thing:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00224499.2015.1023427
https://psyarxiv.com/ehqgv/
Two studies showing porn is not associated with sexism. One carried out by German scientists, another carried out by Canadians.

https://qoto.org/@olives/110462274531891870
American scientists carried out a meta analysis of 59 studies. They found porn isn't associated with crime. A meta analysis is a study where someone studies studies.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31432547/
Nor does it seem this is the case among adolescents (the meta analysis also points to that). Here, the minors who used more porn engaged in less sexual aggression.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/all-about-sex/201601/evidence-mounts-more-porn-less-sexual-assault
https://qoto.org/@olives/110400288665794817
There are even studies (across the United States, Japan, Finland, and more) showing that porn is associated with less crime, even among criminals.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31042055/
While an older Dutch study showed there might be worse levels of "sexual satisfaction" among adolescents using porn, a Croatian lab failed to replicate that.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0747563222001637
This is a meta analysis on sexualization in video games. It finds that studies tend to pick cut-offs where it's difficult to distinguish signal from noise. This increases the number of false positives.

There are also results which contradict the theory of sexualization being harmful. In the end, it fails to find a link between this and sexism, and this and mental well-being.

I'm also usually sceptical of apparent links, as the "scientific pile on effect" (as one described it) drives people to go looking for "links" between porn and "something bad" however tenuous it might be, or methodologically flawed an approach it might be (and later, that something is debunked, or the "link" is a phantom due to methodological limitations).

I could add it doesn't matter if they're "child-like" or "fictional children", (this is far, far more likely to hit someone good than someone bad who don't need it, and a bad actor could still do bad things). If it was actual real children, I'd oppose that on ethical grounds (though, I still wouldn't want to burn down the Internet / sites, because of unwanted bad actors). This is covered above but it is also kind of common internet sense.

Fourthly, while I'm not making a point about anything in particular, to inoculate you against potential problematic arguments, it's worth mentioning the basic precept that correlation does not imply causation.

Let's use ice cream as an example. Everyone loves ice cream, right? Well, I like ice cream.

Anyway, ice cream is correlated with crime. No one would say ice cream causes people to go out and commit crimes though. Just because there is a "correlation" doesn't mean it is meaningful (curiously, both are apparently also correlated with warmer weather, some think that is the real culprit here). And that's not the only way in which correlation might not imply causation. That might come in useful somewhere...

Fifthly, here's one just for #auspol: https://reason.com/2015/07/23/despite-all-the-panic-millennial-teens-h/ Basically, U.S. data shows teens having less sex with each other (in a world with more porn).

https://themessenger.com/news/ireland-hate-speech-law-conor-mcgregor-memes Very questionable...

Wait. What. Uhura?

For instance, when it comes to the wording on one QAnon-like talking point, it might need a reference to the concept of "othering" (which definitely seems to be a problem).

"othering" tends to be very them and us. Those people. Almost like a faceless amorphous blob which someone is chastising. One someone might attach negative stereotypes to (and whose rights / human value get devalued).

Ah, okay, on closer examination, the bank surveillance stuff in the U.K. is more for welfare payments, than something more general (so it might not be that related, although this isn't suggesting that that is a good idea).

Probably still a troublesome precedent though.

Another reminder that false positives in sensitive situations can have severe consequences.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41443-023-00780-8

"Purposefully reducing the frequency of ejaculation, coined “semen retention”, and the similar practice of “NoFap”, have been popularized on social media. They are frequently accompanied by unsubstantiated claims of health benefits."

"Despite no scientific evidence, these courses claim to improve various aspects of men’s health and can be potentially damaging financially, physically, and mentally to participants."

This looks interesting.

https://ny1.com/nyc/queens/politics/2023/11/30/new-york-punished-2-000-prisoners-over-false-positive-drug-tests--report-finds

"New York’s prison system unfairly punished more than 2,000 prisoners after tests of suspected contraband substances falsely tested positive for drugs, according to a report released Thursday. In hundreds of cases, the prisoners had committed no offense, but the flawed results were used to put them in solitary confinement, halt family visits, or cancel parole hearings."

"The Sirchie NARK II contraband screening tests are used to detect synthetic cannabinoids and other types of drugs by putting substances into testing pouches. They sometimes cross-react with commonly used over-the-counter medications, as well as tea or protein powders sold within some state facilities, the report detailed."

"In one case, officers used pen caps and pocketknives to place suspected contraband into the drug test kits, instead of using a clean loading device. That could have led to contamination of the test sample, leading to a false positive."

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/sharon-stone-basic-instinct-lost-custody-of-child-because-of-scene/

"Actor Sharon Stone lost custody of her child in 2004 because of her brief nudity scene in "Basic Instinct," she revealed in a podcast interview on Tuesday.

While discussing the impact of the iconic film on her life, Stone told the Table for Two podcast that her controversial role in the psychological thriller as Catherine Tramell — a serial killer and the protagonist's love interest — led people, and the legal system, to make assumptions about her actual personality and parenting ability."

Urmm... But... The character she played in a film was... Not real? Fictional? This is ridiculous...

It's not really lewd (if that is what you're looking for), but if you're looking for a loli themed magical girl fighting #anime, then there's always Genei wo Kakeru Taiyou / Day Break Illusion.

"slapping therapy"

You appear to be sick. I'm gonna punch you in the face and see if that makes you feel better.

In that one, it was somehow supposed to "treat" diabetes.

Since someone brought it up, lol, Yurucamp is a pretty cute and warm and fuzzy anime.

https://abcnews.go.com/amp/Health/wireStory/alternative-healer-faces-manslaughter-charge-womans-death-uk-105277442

"An alternative healer who advocates a technique known as “slapping therapy” was charged Thursday over the death of a woman at one of his workshops in England seven years ago."

Slapping therapy? What is this nonsense...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_book_burnings I see people have rediscovered this article. It's a good one.

I can understand even being sceptical (although, it's a dumb position to have, lol), or being for something, but what is really annoying are people who do something, then they turn around and they criticize other people for doing something they themselves do.

What the U.K. needs is a stronger mechanism for holding the government accountable for violating their right to free expression or privacy or whatever.

Not one where someone relies on some nice guy over in Westminister to prioritize their rights.

There is one where some intelligence agency just outright ignores the law. I can't find it at this time but it's out there.

The government also goes on every now and then about how they want to rip up the "Human Rights Act" (even though it hardly holds them to account as it stands).

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/may/25/gchqs-mass-data-sharing-violated-right-to-privacy-court-rules Someone posted this from 2021. I mean, it's better than nothing, but it is also fairly toothless.

Like, I don't really particularly give a damn about what anime porn game someone likes, but can you stop making so much noise?

Or they kept, I've largely started treating them as noise.