Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
None taken. I do agree that we do the best we can to "mitigate risk" to children via regulation.If one can't legislate in an effort to limit risk. Then tell me why does a society even have regulations, laws and rules in a society that people must live by? I mean surely if we cannot limit risk through legislation every should be allowed to dump their own trash as they see fit, right? I mean if we are going to have a loose society where everyone decides what's best for themselves regardless of how it may effect another why not just let everyone make all their own choices? Why should I have to abide in the speed limit when I have never had an accident speeding?
Of course you can mitigate risk with regulations, etc. I never said anything to the contrary. I said you cannot eliminate risk. Big difference. The rest is just strawman bullshit, no offense.
What are your definitions of what effective parenting is?None taken. I do agree that we do the best we can to "mitigate risk" to children via regulation.
What regulation do you propose that effective parenting wouldn't make irrelevant?
We'd actually agree on, "best means striking the appropiate balance between risk mitigation and preserving individual liberty" with adults only in that scheme.None taken. I do agree that we do the best we can to "mitigate risk" to children via regulation.Of course you can mitigate risk with regulations, etc. I never said anything to the contrary. I said you cannot eliminate risk. Big difference. The rest is just strawman bullshit, no offense.
But I think we might differ in our definition of "best," but I could be wrong. I assume that to you, best means mitigate as much as possible regardless of the cost. If so, we disagree. To me, best means striking the appropriate balance between risk mitigation and preserving individual liberty.
I did not know a girl going steady with a boy for several years was "risk-taking behavior". Leave it to you to presume that though.That is funny since you have not read the whole poem Catz. You do manage to jump to conclusions on people you have a desire to be against though don't you. The poem actually tells me how much she loves me, yet you have not read it have you. Like I said, I'll post it when I come across it. Until then spew on.
I'm sure she does love you, Rodishi. That doesn't remove the correlations between these types of discipline and later sexual victimization/risk-taking behavior.
I did not know a girl going steady with a boy for several years was "risk-taking behavior". Leave it to you to presume that though.
You're the one who stated that she was in an abusive relationship. And then, attempted to correlate it to porn.
Social and psychological damage....
On one hand, psychological experiments conducted in the 1980s suggested that repeated exposure to porn gave the male subjects more and more extreme tastes, caused them to be desensitised to the sufferings of rape and child abuse victims, and gave them inaccurate ideas of the commonness of extreme sexual practices.[5]
On the other hand, country studies of porn legalisation from Japan to Scandinavia have suggested that legalisation leads to a reduction in sex crimes, often explained by the idea that porn offers sexually repressed men a means of expressing desires which might otherwise be dangerously bottled up.[6]
I did not know a girl going steady with a boy for several years was "risk-taking behavior". Leave it to you to presume that though.
You're the one who stated that she was in an abusive relationship. And then, attempted to correlate it to porn.
I was talking about how difficult it is to protect your children. I stated at 16 she had a regular boyfriend who put her against the wall and she broke it off with him. She did not tell us why she ended the relationship until she was twenty. You obviously assumed something different. I'll repeat. "As much as you think you may have a line on what is up in your childrens lives, you could learn different one day down the road. No matter how close you try to keep tabs on their safety."
Yet if you do want to relate anything to porn (soft or hard core) go for it. Society promotes acceptability for the abuse of females by males in many films the same as it does for extreme violence with films. That relates back to learned behavior.
You're the one who stated that she was in an abusive relationship. And then, attempted to correlate it to porn.
I was talking about how difficult it is to protect your children. I stated at 16 she had a regular boyfriend who put her against the wall and she broke it off with him. She did not tell us why she ended the relationship until she was twenty. You obviously assumed something different. I'll repeat. "As much as you think you may have a line on what is up in your childrens lives, you could learn different one day down the road. No matter how close you try to keep tabs on their safety."
Yet if you do want to relate anything to porn (soft or hard core) go for it. Society promotes acceptability for the abuse of females by males in many films the same as it does for extreme violence with films. That relates back to learned behavior.
Those films you speak of are not mainstream and are no 'promoted by society' unless you go by the premise that not banning something is the same as promoting it.
To each their own... Someone who needs porn on a regular bases is someone who has issues. If a man watches it to spice up thier sex with a spouse...perhaps you should question why you need that spice...did you lose your love and attraction for said spouse?
Like I stated, to each thier own.
I don't see the logic to your statement. For one, love and attraction for your spouse are NOT mutually inclusive. Either can exist without the other.
Or, both can be just fine and one, the other or both STILL be bored with the SOS.
Yet they are out there and all over the Internet. Someones supporting them.Those films you speak of are not mainstream and are no 'promoted by society' unless you go by the premise that not banning something is the same as promoting it.
I don't see the logic to your statement. For one, love and attraction for your spouse are NOT mutually inclusive. Either can exist without the other.
Or, both can be just fine and one, the other or both STILL be bored with the SOS.
I think that, in general, women tend to view pornography as much more threatening to the relationship than men do.
I don't see the logic to your statement. For one, love and attraction for your spouse are NOT mutually inclusive. Either can exist without the other.
Or, both can be just fine and one, the other or both STILL be bored with the SOS.
I think that, in general, women tend to view pornography as much more threatening to the relationship than men do.
I suppose. They were talking about it on the radio the other day and it certainly appeared to be that way.
The biggest question the women kept asking was: "Why does he want to look at them instead of me? What's wrong with me?"
And being true to our knuckledragging nature, the guys would answer with the usual, intellectual response: "What's the big deal?"
I suppose. They were talking about it on the radio the other day and it certainly appeared to be that way.
The biggest question the women kept asking was: "Why does he want to look at them instead of me? What's wrong with me?"
And being true to our knuckledragging nature, the guys would answer with the usual, intellectual response: "What's the big deal?"
