Does 'rape culture' accurately describe (many) societies?

That word "culture" in constant use here in the thread needs some defining. The least ambiguous meaning would, I think, be anthropologist E. B. Tylor's: "that complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, custom and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society."

If you use that definition, then of course you'll always be able to find "rape cultures," since the deed occurs wherever there are humans -- if you choose to see sexual violence and nothing else.

And boy howdy, that's what prudes, New or Old, always and exclusively do, because to their sex-saturated minds it's all A Bad Thing.

And they always try to pass and enforce laws against their fetishized Bad Thing. Anthony Comstock comes to mind. He managed to engineer laws against (ew!) Sex that dirty the waters to this day. I think most of us will agree that he did a lot of evil.

And I will call today's comstockers, and anybody else who threatens my freedom of speech, a bunch of evil bastards.

He did - according to Britannic:
Personally vindictive toward “libertines,” he is said to have boasted of the number of persons he had driven to suicide.

Not sure that citing such a man is making a good case for the freedom of speech that has led to where we are now.
 
That doesn't support your claim, it refers to underage children, not teenagers.

To remind you, 'teenager' includes 18- and 19-year-olds.

Right - I wasn't totally careful with my language...I think the context of that previous conversation was about porn actors made to look underage. To be clear, porn that is suggestive of sexual activity with children is rife on the net and is illegal in the UK.
 
Right - I wasn't totally careful with my language...I think the context of that previous conversation was about porn actors made to look underage. To be clear, porn that is suggestive of sexual activity with children is rife on the net and is illegal in the UK.

What age is underage there? And does "underage" mean below the legal age to be an adult entertainer, or below the age of consent?
 
What age is underage there? And does "underage" mean below the legal age to be an adult entertainer, or below the age of consent?

In the UK, the age of consent is 16, but the legal age to appear in porn is 18 - so 'porn actors made to look underage' are 18s or over looking under 18.
 
Women and Equalities Committee: Pornography and its impact on violence against women and girls, 11 May 2022. (The same but on video).

Witness(es): Professor Clare McGlynn, Professor of Law, Durham University; Vanessa Morse, CEO, CEASE (Centre to End All Sexual Exploitation); Hannah Ruschen, Senior Policy and Public Affairs Officer, NSPCC; Gabriela De Oliveira, Head of Policy Research Campaigns, Glitch.

Professor McGlynn
It is particularly the prevalence of harmful, violent pornography online which normalises and minimises sexual violence.There is some evidence to suggest that those who frequently view pornography are less likely to intervene in situations where there is harassment or violence taking place, which then translates into everyday life, whether it be individuals in the workplace, individuals on a jury, et cetera—they have been normalised into cultures of sexual violence. In that sense, it is thinking about pornography being the cultural wallpaper in all of our lives, but the kind of wallpaper we would really rather take down and change because it is so predominantly abusive and violent material.

Vanessa Morse
Part of the reason why porn has become normalised is because of the way that these porn websites are designed—it is basically addiction by design. Not that I recommend this, but if you do go to a porn site and scroll, you will find it is infinite scroll—you never get to the bottom of the page. There are many boxes; it is a wall-to-wall style pornography where one act just flows seamlessly into another. The point that I am making is that, particularly with young people, we cannot underestimate the kind of neurological impact of pornography. Young people's brains are wired to novelty, and their brains get a massive dopamine hit when they watch pornography. This overstimulates the reward centres of the brain, which then means that they cannot be satiated—they do not register satisfaction—so they have to keep coming back for more. When looking at why has porn become so popular, we must not neglect to look at the very intentionality in creating the sites, they have been designed to get people to come back more and more often and to stay on the site for longer.

Edited by jimbob: 


Cut for rule 4

]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Is watching and thus fuelling porn harmless? Clearly not - Hannah Ruschen speaking at the Women and Equalities Committee (Pornography and its impact on violence against women and girls, 11th May 2022):

We should not underestimate the impact that unrestricted access to porn, as identified by Vanessa, has normalised that idea of user-generated sexual content online. Following on logically from that, this has resulted in the normalisation of requesting and setting of self-generated imagery among peers, as has been highlighted by the Ofsted review and Everyone's Invited. From that, we also know that this has clearly impacted the nature of child sexual abuse online. The IWF— the Internet Watch Foundation—has shown almost half of all child sexual abuse content online is self-generated material, and that really has a gendered impact here, because we know that the majority of self-generated sexual abuse content is of 11 to 13-year old girls. When we think about the links between exposure and early access to pornography and its impact on children's online behaviour, we clearly see the link to the creation and sending of user-generated material, the normalisation of that, and the way that this might be linked to child sexual abuse material online.
 
Did you notice the difference between McGlynn and the two others, Vanessa Morse and Hannah Ruschen?

Professor McGlynn
It is particularly the prevalence of harmful, violent pornography online which normalises and minimises sexual violence.There is some evidence to suggest that those who frequently view pornography are less likely to intervene in situations where there is harassment or violence taking place, which then translates into everyday life, whether it be individuals in the workplace, individuals on a jury, et cetera—they have been normalised into cultures of sexual violence. In that sense, it is thinking about pornography being the cultural wallpaper in all of our lives, but the kind of wallpaper we would really rather take down and change because it is so predominantly abusive and violent material.


It's different from Vanessa Morse, who seems to think that the danger lies in what porn sites have in common with almost all other commercial sites "designed to get people to come back more and more often and to stay on the site for longer."
And it's also different from Hannah Ruschen, who points to another thing porn sites have in common with Instagram or TikTok and similar social media sites for (mainly) young people: the "creation and sending of user-generated material, the normalisation of that."

I tend to agree with the professor. Adolescents who don't yet have any idea what sex is like may start to think that choking and slapping the people they have sex with is a normal and enjoyable form of sex, which may contribute to normalizing sexual violence. So may all the examples of sexual coercion, extortion etc. that seem to prevail in the world of porn.

Sex ed might help teenagers understand that most people really don't enjoy being coerced into having sex and that they shouldn't expect their partners to be turned on by coercion and extortion if only they are sufficiently persistent.

Ruschen, on the other hand, may imagine that "we clearly (!) see the link to the creation and sending of user-generated material, the normalisation of that, and the way that this might be linked to child sexual abuse material online."
At least in your quotation, she doesn't make any connection clear, and I doubt that teenagers (or normal adults, for that matter) will come across "child sexual abuse material online" or find it appealing if they do.

Morse may claim that "young people's brains are wired to novelty," but it's not as if young people's brains find anything new interesting: 'See, kids, this is the math book that we will be working with for the rest of this school year, and it's brand new!!! Isn't it exciting?!'[/I]

'Wired for novelty!'
 
Did you notice the difference between McGlynn and the two others, Vanessa Morse and Hannah Ruschen?

It's different from Vanessa Morse, who seems to think that the danger lies in what porn sites have in common with almost all other commercial sites "designed to get people to come back more and more often and to stay on the site for longer."
And it's also different from Hannah Ruschen, who points to another thing porn sites have in common with Instagram or TikTok and similar social media sites for (mainly) young people: the "creation and sending of user-generated material, the normalisation of that."

Yes, different, but no one is disagreeing. If you read the document further, Morse says:

We know from a growing body of evidence, particularly
reports from clinical practitioners who are working with sex offenders—for example the Lucy Faithfull Foundation—who have catalogued how hardcore pornography depictions of rape or depictions of activity with a child are a gateway to people moving on to seek out the real thing. In fact, convicted sex offenders have reported that they were surprised at how easy that journey was for them. There is a large body of clinical evidence that this is happening, and it is being seen by police and psychologists.



I tend to agree with the professor. Adolescents who don't yet have any idea what sex is like may start to think that choking and slapping the people they have sex with is a normal and enjoyable form of sex, which may contribute to normalizing sexual violence. So may all the examples of sexual coercion, extortion etc. that seem to prevail in the world of porn.

It isn't just about adolescence btw.
Also, I think you'll find that 'choking' has been normalized...even though it's pretty risky.

Ruschen, on the other hand, may imagine that "we clearly (!) see the link to the creation and sending of user-generated material, the normalisation of that, and the way that this might be linked to child sexual abuse material online."
At least in your quotation, she doesn't make any connection clear, and I doubt that teenagers (or normal adults, for that matter) will come across "child sexual abuse material online" or find it appealing if they do.

The link is crystal clear - young children are watching porn and noticing the normalization of self-generated explicit pictures and doing it themselves. There has been a 4 fold increase in CSAM online over the last decade. In the UK at any moment between 600,000 and 800,000 (mostly men) are online looking at it.

In the UK most child sex abuse is carried out by children - up from a third in 10 years ago.

Morse may claim that "young people's brains are wired to novelty," but it's not as if young people's brains find anything new interesting: 'See, kids, this is the math book that we will be working with for the rest of this school year, and it's brand new!!! Isn't it exciting?!'[/I]

'Wired for novelty!'

I'm not sure that is a good comparison - the context here is the addictive nature of porn.
 
Last edited:
Yes, different, but no one is disagreeing. If you read the document further, Morse says:

We know from a growing body of evidence, particularly reports from clinical practitioners who are working with sex offenders—for example the Lucy Faithfull Foundation—who have catalogued how hardcore pornography depictions of rape or depictions of activity with a child are a gateway to people moving on to seek out the real thing. In fact, convicted sex offenders have reported that they were surprised at how easy that journey was for them. There is a large body of clinical evidence that this is happening, and it is being seen by police and psychologists.


As a 'gateway drug', it doesn't really work because "hardcore pornography depictions of rape or depictions of activity with a child" isn't something that people will come across unless they are specifically searching for those things. (And I think that normal people would report it if something like that suddenly popped up on their screens.)
I have no doubt that people who abuse children sexually will have started with watching porn, but why would they start watching hardcore depictions of rape or depictions of activity with a child if that stuff didn't already appeal to them in the first place? (See parenthesis above.)

It isn't just about adolescence btw.
Also, I think you'll find that 'choking' has been normalized...even though it's pretty risky.


That is not something that I will find. It's what I just wrote: "Adolescents who don't yet have any idea what sex is like may start to think that choking and slapping the people they have sex with is a normal and enjoyable form of sex, which may contribute to normalizing sexual violence. So may all the examples of sexual coercion, extortion etc. that seem to prevail in the world of porn."

I doubt that a 50-year-old will suddenly begin to slap and choke his wife. As I wrote: Adolescents who are only just starting to get interested in sex may see examples of choking and slapping in otherwise normal porn, which may make them think that this is what sex is supposed to be like. Adults probably already know that it's not.

The link is crystal clear - young children are watching porn and noticing the normalization of self-generated explicit pictures and doing it themselves. There has been a 4 fold increase in CSAM online over the last decade. In the UK at any moment between 600,000 and 800,000 (mostly men) are online looking at it.


I doubt it. I can believe that "in the UK at any moment between 600,000 and 800,000 (mostly men) are online looking at" porn, but I don't believe that so many people are looking at children being sexually abused. Link to statistics?

In the UK most child sex abuse is carried out by children - up from a third in 10 years ago.


Like I said: Children are easily influenced because they don't know much about anything, so I would expect them to be influenced by depictions of sexual coercion and extortion in porn.

I'm not sure that is a good comparison - the context here is the addictive nature of porn.


Sex is a primal urge. If people don't have access to the real thing, they will resort to fantasy sex, e.g. porn. That doesn't make porn (or sex) an addiction even though some people may develop an addiction-like attitude to porn.

The only solution to the problem is proper sex education about more than reproduction and STDs. Many years Annette Westrup, a Danish school teacher, had her students bring their parents' porn magazines (it was that long ago!) to school so they could discuss them. It appeared to work - even though I can imagine how embarrassed it may have made some parents. And it would be a great opportunity to point out to students that slapping, choking, coercing and extortion aren't elements of most people's sex life.
 
As a 'gateway drug', it doesn't really work because "hardcore pornography depictions of rape or depictions of activity with a child" isn't something that people will come across unless they are specifically searching for those things. (And I think that normal people would report it if something like that suddenly popped up on their screens.)
I have no doubt that people who abuse children sexually will have started with watching porn, but why would they start watching hardcore depictions of rape or depictions of activity with a child if that stuff didn't already appeal to them in the first place? (See parenthesis above.)

As CEASE have reported:
The problem is that videos of rape, image-based sexual abuse (‘revenge porn’) and content involving victims of sex trafficking is camouflaged alongside material that is legal, but harmful. It is often impossible to tell whether someone has consented to be in a video, or how ‘real’ portrayals of sexual violence are.

Barnardo's state that material that is suggestive of sexual activity with a child is rife on mainstream sites.

See #895 for more about violence in porn.

That is not something that I will find. It's what I just wrote: "Adolescents who don't yet have any idea what sex is like may start to think that choking and slapping the people they have sex with is a normal and enjoyable form of sex, which may contribute to normalizing sexual violence. So may all the examples of sexual coercion, extortion etc. that seem to prevail in the world of porn."

I doubt that a 50-year-old will suddenly begin to slap and choke his wife. As I wrote: Adolescents who are only just starting to get interested in sex may see examples of choking and slapping in otherwise normal porn, which may make them think that this is what sex is supposed to be like. Adults probably already know that it's not.

I think the issue is it's not just adolescents but young adult men as well.

I doubt it. I can believe that "in the UK at any moment between 600,000 and 800,000 (mostly men) are online looking at" porn, but I don't believe that so many people are looking at children being sexually abused. Link to statistics?

James Treadwell, criminologist and author: https://youtu.be/fR1PxS9ZSLs?t=185 (Cued)

Sex is a primal urge. If people don't have access to the real thing, they will resort to fantasy sex, e.g. porn. That doesn't make porn (or sex) an addiction even though some people may develop an addiction-like attitude to porn.

Does it matter whether it's addiction defined by the DSM or just 'addiction-like'?

The only solution to the problem is proper sex education about more than reproduction and STDs. Many years Annette Westrup, a Danish school teacher, had her students bring their parents' porn magazines (it was that long ago!) to school so they could discuss them. It appeared to work - even though I can imagine how embarrassed it may have made some parents. And it would be a great opportunity to point out to students that slapping, choking, coercing and extortion aren't elements of most people's sex life.

Education, sure - but showing porn to children is illegal in many countries for good reason.
 
Last edited:
A report by France’s high council for equality between women and men (the government-nominated equality watchdog) is perhaps the most damning indictment yet of the porn industry. According to The Guardian:

As much as 90% of pornographic content online features verbal, physical and sexual violence towards women, and a significant amount of violence shown is punishable under existing laws in France.

...in millions of videos, “women, caricatured with the worst sexist and racist stereotypes, are humiliated, objectified, dehumanised, assaulted, tortured, subjected to treatment that is contrary both to human dignity and French law”

The report also cites the French state prosecutor’s own view that the vast majority of pornography contained verbal and physical violence that contravened French law.

“The massive consumption [of pornography] from a young age reinforces rape culture,” the report said.


Arcom, the audiovisual regulator in France, say that just over half of 12-year-old boys in France view pornography every month.

CEASE (The Centre To End All Sexual Exploitation) state that:

The problem is that videos of rape, image-based sexual abuse (‘revenge porn’) and content involving victims of sex trafficking is camouflaged alongside material that is legal, but harmful. It is often impossible to tell whether someone has consented to be in a video, or how ‘real’ portrayals of sexual violence are.
 
PARIS (Associated Press) — A French government-nominated watchdog body on sexual equality says an online deluge of violent and degrading pornography is sowing the seeds for real-world rapes and femicides and that the porn industry “chews up women.”
 
Here's a quote from Le Monde on the report:

The advisory body, tasked with guiding government policy on equality issues, endorsed comments made by Laure Beccuau, the Paris public prosecutor. At a senate hearing in September 2022 on the first parliamentary report on the topic entitled "Behind the Scenes" ("L'envers du décor"), the judge said that "90% of pornographic content contains physical or verbal violence, and is therefore criminally reprehensible."
 
Well hell, Poem. If you're convinced that porn is bad for everybody everywhere (you're not convinced of that? tell us who you think isn't harmed by porn), what's the next step? What do you propose to solve that gigantic problem? What would you like to see, e.g., the French government do, seeing as how one of their judges seems to agree with you?
 
Well hell, Poem. If you're convinced that porn is bad for everybody everywhere (you're not convinced of that? tell us who you think isn't harmed by porn), what's the next step? What do you propose to solve that gigantic problem? What would you like to see, e.g., the French government do, seeing as how one of their judges seems to agree with you?

Civilized countries don't tolerate criminals and the means by which they make their money.
 
I'm not saying that the porn industry is without problems - it is.

I am saying that this anti-porn crusade is irrational and reactionary.

You will never be able to ban porn. There are always going to be people who want to make it, and they will. And there will always be people who want to consume it, and they will. What you can and should try to ban is sexual slavery, which is what Poem is really against, and rightly so.

Safe, consensual porn is harmless, except, as I said, inasmuch as it presents an unrealistic picture of what real-life sex is.

You know the difference between consent and slavery when you see it?

The report warned that any kind of so-called contract was void in legal terms, because a person could not consent to torture and sexual exploitation and trafficking.

CEASE:
It is often impossible to tell whether someone has consented to be in a video, or how ‘real’ portrayals of sexual violence are.

The Guardian:
...the report said that in millions of videos, “women, caricatured with the worst sexist and racist stereotypes, are humiliated, objectified, dehumanised, assaulted, tortured, subjected to treatment that is contrary both to human dignity and French law”.

“The women are real, the sexual acts and the violence is real, the suffering is often perfectly visible and at the same time eroticised.”

I think you are refusing to accept the true nature of today's porn industry or you would be explicitly calling for these criminals to be put away and their websites taken down. 90% of porn is described by the Paris public prosecutor as 'criminally reprehensible.'
 

Back
Top Bottom