And I think you have a misunderstanding of how isolated teenagers were from sexual content before the internet, magazines weren’t exactly hard to get. Even before then, we’ve literally been making porn in every form of media since we were painting on cave walls.
The ease of access of it now, and the extreme shock value of a lot of what even shows up on homepages of major porn sites is unique compared to the pre-internet days.
we’ve literally been making porn in every form of media since we were painting on cave walls.
Porn ≠ erotic art or even sexually explicit material. Children should not have their first exposure to genitalia through media made with the express purpose of sexual gratification.
Part of allowing people to develop, evolve, and mature their sexuality on their own should involve preventing formative experiences from being based on fantasy.
homepages of major porn sites is unique compared to the pre-internet days.
It’s really not. You just weren’t exposed to it and think it’s new. The only change is the quantity, not the depravity. Marquis de Sade, the origin of the word sadist produced a significant amount of incredibly depraved erotic works back in the 1700’s, and he was not unique.
To your second point, should their first exposure be to porn? Of course not, but developing, evolving and maturing is done by exploring, not by sitting in a cave and generating knowledge from scratch, even if you have an equally amateur friend. That’s how people get hurt because they have no idea what they’re doing. If they want to see what’s out there, let them. Trying to ban everyone from sexual content until 18 is a uniquely modern take.
Not to mention, we’re far too uncomfortable with the topic to have their first exposure be anything but porn, since sex ed is all drawings and awkward anatomy. And childbirth videos. Since I was a kid myself, all I’ve seen is moral panic that wants nothing more than to simply shut the blinds and pretend that there’s nothing there.
It’s been a while, but I’m confused. I never said anything like that, but that is essentially the government’s point of view. Erotica requires one to be 18 to see, whether written, drawn, or photographed. Depictions of sex and nudity either ban everyone under 17 ( or 17 and under for NC-17 ratings), or expect parents to restrict those under 17 in the case of television as it can’t be moderated (for now).
At any rate, I just wanted to respond and clarify despite the better part of a month passing.
I mean, why? What is the unprecedented threat?
And I think you have a misunderstanding of how isolated teenagers were from sexual content before the internet, magazines weren’t exactly hard to get. Even before then, we’ve literally been making porn in every form of media since we were painting on cave walls.
The ease of access of it now, and the extreme shock value of a lot of what even shows up on homepages of major porn sites is unique compared to the pre-internet days.
Part of allowing people to develop, evolve, and mature their sexuality on their own should involve preventing formative experiences from being based on fantasy.
It’s really not. You just weren’t exposed to it and think it’s new. The only change is the quantity, not the depravity. Marquis de Sade, the origin of the word sadist produced a significant amount of incredibly depraved erotic works back in the 1700’s, and he was not unique.
To your second point, should their first exposure be to porn? Of course not, but developing, evolving and maturing is done by exploring, not by sitting in a cave and generating knowledge from scratch, even if you have an equally amateur friend. That’s how people get hurt because they have no idea what they’re doing. If they want to see what’s out there, let them. Trying to ban everyone from sexual content until 18 is a uniquely modern take.
Not to mention, we’re far too uncomfortable with the topic to have their first exposure be anything but porn, since sex ed is all drawings and awkward anatomy. And childbirth videos. Since I was a kid myself, all I’ve seen is moral panic that wants nothing more than to simply shut the blinds and pretend that there’s nothing there.
You keep equating all forms of media that might depict sex, nakedness, or even erotica as porn.
It’s been a while, but I’m confused. I never said anything like that, but that is essentially the government’s point of view. Erotica requires one to be 18 to see, whether written, drawn, or photographed. Depictions of sex and nudity either ban everyone under 17 ( or 17 and under for NC-17 ratings), or expect parents to restrict those under 17 in the case of television as it can’t be moderated (for now).
At any rate, I just wanted to respond and clarify despite the better part of a month passing.