Hardcore pornography is significantly harmful to society

http://www.youtube.com...http://www.youtube.com...I’m not asking the readers to judge if porn is a net negative. All I’m saying is that I must show porn is significantly harmful, and that whether or not porn is net negative is irrelevant and up to the readers.I. Porn and aggression Ted Bundy clearly states that porn caused him to become more aggressive. In porn studies, there are two divisions: those on the individual level and those on the aggregate level (looking at the rape rate over the country as a whole) 1. Individual level studies There are two subcategories here. Experimental and non-experimental. Experimental studies deal with control groups and groups exposed to porn and then use a scientific model to determine attitudes towards women. Non-experimental studies are simply surveys and show correlations within the data. Experimental studies show causation Non-experimental studies show correlation For studies on the individual level, the answer is inevitable. I cite several meta-analyses[1|2|3|6|23] which each examine vast amounts of both experimental and non-experimental studies, and they all come to the conclusion that exposure to hardcore pornography causes increased aggression/negative attitudes towards women, including acceptance of the rape myth (the view that only bad/sexually promiscuous women get raped). I also cite individual studies [4|5|7|8|9|10|11|12|13|14|15|16|24] In an experimental study [17] control groups were compared to those exposed to porn over a period of time, and showed the group exposed to porn developed a more negative view of women, believing that women were naturally more sexually promiscuous, and expected less faithfulness between partners. Rape proclivity was also higher in the porn group: As expected, those with higher levels of psychosis were more influenced by exposure to porn: Also, the group exposed to porn thought the punishment for rape should be significantly less than the control Another study also found that those exposed to porn thought rapists should receive 300-350 less months in prison as compared to the control group [18] Thus, the studies on the individual level show porn increases negative attitudes and sexual aggression towards women, including trivialization of rape.2. Aggregate level studies As my opponent points out, there are several studies which correlate porn availability with decreased sex crimes, however experts have criticized these studies as over simplifying a complex issue [23]. Second, studies at the aggregate level are notorious for misleading mistakes. Dr Robinson illustrates this in a famous example [19] where he used stats at the aggregate level and showed that as the amount of immigrants increased in America, the literacy also increased. This is absurd! We know that immigrants are less literate, since statistics show this on the individual level. This is an example of an ecological fallacy, and it is a huge problem with my opponent’s studies. Dr. Robinson concludes “The relation between ecological and individual correlations…provides a definite answer as to whether ecological correlations can validly be used as substitutes for individual correlations. They cannot”[19] Thus, the very methodology of my opponent’s studies aren’t reliable when applied to interpersonal behaviors, especially since they contradict what the studies on the individual levels show. Thirdly, my opponent’s studies rely upon reported rape values, but only 15% of rapes are reported to authorities [20]. Some of the main reasons why women do not report rape is because they don’t want others to know (63%) and fear shame/mistreatment (44%). But wait…according to the individual research, pornography increases the rape acceptance myth, and thus fosters the social atmosphere in which women would not report rape. Thus, as pornography use increases, women will be less likely to report rape. So an increase in pornography would make it seem as if there is less rape, since less women will be open about their abuse. My opponent’s study takes place in the Czech republic during the middle of a rebellion, a change from communism to capitalism, the national Separation of Slovakia [22] and many other social and political changes. There’s so many factors here, it’s ridiculous to say porn caused the reduced rape rate. In addition to this, immediately after the change from communism to democracy (when pornography became available, the year 1989) the amount of rape actually increased at first [22]. In addition to this, the lesser sex-related crimes and child abuse had already began decreasing before the legalization of porn. Furthermore, they did not continue declining. Also, while the overall crime rate increased, the sexual crime rate remained the same despite women being less likely to report their abuse [26] Furthermore, in the Denmark study, the police admitted that they would sometimes not report rape cases, and in a public survey, it was found that the people were less likely to report physical violence against women [25] after the availability of porn, to such a degree it could significantly alter the rape rate. Historians and sociologists attribute the declining crime rate in the 1990s to various cultural causes including immigration, improved housing for low income, anti-drug campaigns etc[21]. My opponent is using shaky methodology, oversimplifying complicated historical time periods, and contradicting all the evidence on the individual level. Thus, the studies that porn causes lower sex crime rates are inconclusive and do not prove the null hypothesis.II. Porn harms relationships My opponent’s logic simply doesn’t work. Through his logic, we could come to the conclusion that infidelity doesn’t cause divorce, and that it’s just an outlet. While there may be a more fundamental and underlying problem with that relationship, the unfaithfulness of a spouse can obviously contribute to and thus cause a divorce. So why can’t we say that pornography (which is habit forming, and women don’t like when their spouse use it) also causes divorces? Especially considering it contributes to about half of divorces [27]. Also, the marriage rate has been declining dangerously [28]: While the divorce rate has sky-rocketed[29]. This is an important issue. Some recent studies suggest that porn may even be used as a substitute for marriage [30]. There are also many studies that claim the hurt due to porn can be even worse [31|32|33|34]. Therefore, since a significant amount of women (30%) think their partner has failed them by using porn, the effects of porn upon relationships are significant [35]. 23% of them claim their partner lies to them about his porn use. Trust is the basis of every relationship. Furthermore, my opponent accuses this study of methodological problems, but the study clearly does not use experimental exposure to porn.III. Porn is habit forming My opponent doesn’t do much. I’ve provided numerous sources which show that internet addiction and pornography are seriously habit forming (See the big list above). All he does is point out that internet addiction is not listed in the DSM. However, considering how new the internet is, this isn’t surprising. IV. Porn causes warped views of sex Let’s say I go mudding in my truck. I screw up my suspension. But don’t worry, I know how to work on front end suspension pretty well, and I change the ball joints in no time. This means that mudding must not be bad for my truck, right? Obviously not. But this is what my opponent is saying. His entire argument in response to mine is that we should teach more sex ed (fix the ball joints). This implicitly admits that pornography warps views of sex (is bad for my truck’s suspension). If porn isn’t harmful to children, why does Con say parents should set up safety nets to keep their children from finding it? Porn is a poor sex educator and causes people to think that sexual promiscuity is more widespread [17]: Considering porn is now affecting children, it will change the way they perceive sexuality in the world and in themselves. Con has ignored this. The quality of sexual education is irrelevant. Regardless of whether or not I am a good mechanic, mudding is bad for my truck’s suspension. Likewise, porn warps views of sex. Also, considering how porn is discovered at the age of 11 [36], it seems difficult to educate them before damage has already occurred. My opponent still ignores the argument that pornography contributes to genital insecurity. Ask yourself: do you want your impressionable 11 year old wondering “What’s sex?” so he jumps on Google, and his first exposure… double penetration? cool truck btw V. Porn causes STDs My opponent admits that porn-stars get STDs. This is due to the sex they have. Likewise, if porn causes adolescents to engage in the same sort of sex (shown above) it will cause an increase of STDs in the world. Therefore, my opponent has conceded one premise and not refuted the other and the argument stands. The point is simple. Porn causes people to be more acceptant of promiscuity [17]: It also causes them to be more sexually promiscuous (I showed this in earlier rounds). And being sexually promiscuous causes more STDs. So watching porn causes more STDs. Furthermore, considering how every second you spend reading this, there are 30,000 people watching porn [37] and 40,000,000 Americans regularly view porn, I believe the effects will be significant. Conclusion In conclusion, I have upheld every one of my arguments. I’ve shown that porn causes negative attitudes and sexual aggression, that it is habit forming, warps views of sex, harms relationships, and causes an increase in deadly STDs. Therefore the resolution is upheld, and I urge you to vote Pro! I’d like to end this debate with a final quote. “the problem with pornography is not that it shows too much of the person, but that it shows far too little.” [38] Thanks to Bennett for this great debate! Sourceshttp://tinyurl.com...