Debate:On underage persons viewing pornographic material

This is a Debate page. Feel free to add your own spin on the story. Please keep it civil! This debate was created by Cal McCallum.

Proposition

Basically, the subject of this debate is whether it should be considered acceptable for people under the age of 18 (such as myself) to watch porn. This includes in the eye of the law (currently, to my understanding, it is not illegal if the kid chooses to watch it themselves; however, it is still a risky kind of area), in the eyes of parents and guardians (should they discourage or punish the kids for it, or should they "let it slide", or even talk freely about it?), in th eyes of society as a whole (should we view these kids as perverts, or just as normal sexual beings?), and whether you personally think whether it is "right", "wrong", beneficial, dangerous, harmless, disgusting, or anywhere in between. As a 14 year old who is into this kind of stuff, I believe that is usually harmless, and should generally should not be illegal, punished, or discouraged- however, one needs to consider many factors, such as age, and content (e.g. A 10 year old watching hardcore BDSM vs. a 16 year old watching standard vanilla porn). So, anyway, I'd love to hear anybody's opinion on this. Trapped inside this octavarium 11:53, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Interesing point! I honestly don't see a problem with underage people watching pornography (I was a teenager once as well) but I feel that if it gives them unrealistic expectations about sexual intercourse than it may not be the best thing. Also, parents should discuss the difference between porn and real life with their kids Batcavewifi (talk) 12:08, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Edit: My personal opinion is backed up by facts(I am not the person who posted this) Porn does promote rape often, thus why Law Enforcement calls it Illegal. It's not due to age solely, but mostly because of what it can(And normally does) promote. 80% of Pornography promotes either girls or guys as sex-objects and changes peoples view on such things, leading them towards a psychological down-spiral into rape.^{— Unsigned, by: some bon / talk / contribs}

Cites pls. FuzzyCatPotato!™ (talk/stalk) 04:18, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Here ya go. Weaseloid^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 23:21, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Also, like desensitizing towards things like violence, people have shown to need more and more 'hardcore' porn to get off. I myself have been a victim to this, I would be easily aroused by images of sexy women then youtube videos of women in bikinis and other things like that. Soon I needed them to be toppless then having acctual uncensured sex, and so on. What used to arouse me became 'old' and uninteresting. You might want to consider this, especialy if you are thinking of entering a relationship (hopefully when you are of appropiate age). you might even develop problems with arousal down the road. (Kyle, 16)

In theory, I have no problem with a kid my age viewing porn. However. When reality factors in it makes me unsure. Most porn portrays women as sex objects. Due to the lack of decent sex ed (or often any), children often use it to learn about sex. But, how the hell are you supposed to properly verify age? Someone can just lie and who is going to catch them without infringing on basic privacy? And also, how can you prove that it was the kid and not the parents who watched/read/looked at it. I think we should just give people decent sex ed which covers porn rather than implement a unenforceable law. Bazer63 (talk) 07:31, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Let's be honest here

Who did not wank off to porn, when s/he was a teenager, huh?!--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ 09:03, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

*raises hand* Wanking's not really my thing. (And the idea that almost everyone secretly uses their hands in that fashion regularly kind of frightens me—given the social expectation to shake said hands. >.>) 141.134.75.236 (talk) 11:10, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

There's only two kinda people: Those who wank and those who deny it.

And talking about using your hands for nice and relaxing stuff, could you sign up here already?!--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ 11:12, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Oh, 141, why so scared of a little jism? Methinks you have some issues in that department. Doxys Midnight Runner (talk) 11:26, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, "jizz-o-phobia" XD, despite the fact that it's the beginning of us all or are you, 141, one of these Taliban, who think, that Every Sperm Is Sacred?!--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ 11:39, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

No, no, I just think that sperm is gross. (Is this really such a non-conventional opinion? >.>) And I also have a general lack of faith when it comes to human cleansing rituals. You do the math. Not that if those rituals were actually straightforwardly effective it'd necessarily help all that much, since grossness isn't something physical. It's subjective, and often pretty arbitrary. Not that knowing that actually makes the feeling go away, though.

Additionally, my personal experience with sexual pleasure is that it's far from what it's made out to be. Kind of makes me wonder why society makes such a big deal out of it. 141.134.75.236 (talk) 12:23, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

No, that's "just" being goddamn childish!!--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ 12:25, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Huh? 141.134.75.236 (talk) 12:32, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Also: Asexual erasure, discrimination of people with phobias and now ageism! For good measure. ;) 141.134.75.236 (talk) 12:38, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

So RW has one non-wanker, teenage and/or otherwise. I think sperm is kinda cool. --TheroadtoWiganPier (talk) 12:55, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Nah, I've been pretty adult-ish for a bit now. I cried out "ageism" because of his use of "childish". Of course, I don't think my sentiment should be taken as any less valid had I expressed it a decade ago, in my youthful years. 141.134.75.236 (talk) 13:03, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

The BoN is entitled to his/ her opinion. But I don't share it. However, thinking of semen as "gross" is surprisingly common. Especially among straight men. Probably an internalized homophobia thing... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 15:08, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

I don't think homophobia is necessarilly relevant in this case. There's plenty of non-sex-related bodily excretions that we're grossed out by as well, especially when it's viscous and sticky. 141.134.75.236 (talk) 16:50, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Non binary

There are two apparent binaries here, neither of which exist in reality. The first is the "underage" thing - the OP puts this as 18 which, for a Brit, is a joke as, over here, the age of consent is 16. Are we saying that someone can be married with children and yet unable to view porn? But, even then, as a parent, I carefully didn't look under my fifteen-year-old's bed because... well, my father didn't look under mine at the same age. However I was far more careful about what was available when he was younger. So, for me, the age thing is non-binary.

The second non-binary is one that plagues the whole porn debate. Is

this

porn? And, if not, why not? How about (excuse the page layout)

TITIAN - Venus Anadyomene (National Galleries of Scotland, c. 1520. Oil on canvas, 75.8 x 57.6 cm)

.

Full frontal nudity - must be.

So, yeah, as a parent, there is some porn that would be part of a normal, healthy, sexual awakening and some that would disturb me.

And no, I don't know how to frame a legal distinction. Doxys Midnight Runner (talk) 10:27, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

How about we don't? Any law that would try to prohibit any type of access to the (impossible to define) concept of porn to people under any age limit is by its very nature impossible to enforce. After all, porn was illegal everywhere in the 1950s and still there is 50s porn around. And that was in an era where cameras where huge and expensive things and even VHS was decades in the future... And a law that can't be enforced does more harm than good. Besides: whom will you punish and how? Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 15:13, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Obviously you punish the masochists. They're into that. ikanreed ^{You probably didn't deserve that} 15:21, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

@AotB - so you have no problems with unlimited snuff/kiddie/animal porn being freely distributed to the under tens? Doxys Midnight Runner (talk) 15:27, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

If they're even minimally proficient in the use of the computer and the net, they'll be pissing themselves about these laws and jacking off to anything they want.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ 15:48, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Well obviously in the case of snuff and kiddie porn (and in most countries also animal porn) the very production is illegal already, so there is a point to enhance enforcement. Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 15:58, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

But why not make them legal. After all - it is, by it's very nature, impossible to enforce and a law that can't be enforced does more harm than good. Or maybe we do have to have limits and, maybe, one of those limits is "supplying porn to juveniles" which is where we came in. Except that you have the problem of defining juveniles and porn which was my point exactly. Doxys Midnight Runner (talk) 16:06, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Well there is a way to enforce laws against child pornography and murder. It is illegal everywhere and under all circumstances because the production of such material requires criminal acts (namely rape and murder). And do you know, why a law that can't be enforced is dangerous? Because in the rare cases when it is enforced it often targets specific groups more than others. See American drug laws... Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 16:32, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

The basic Bolex H16 was was within the reach of many amateur cine-photographers in the fifties, and comparable to the bulk of a two-slice toaster, or a bit slimmer. Don't ask me where I saw B&W 16mm silent porn in a small hot room, with the operator standing by with a toothpick to manage the action of the projector's shutter. Not dispositive of anything in particular, just saying. Flux gate gamma (talk) 15:55, 3 August 2015 (UTC)