But in this specific case they went after a porn game, not featuring real people. There’s basically no real harm here.
Just to make sure, this is the game you are defending and think there is no harm to people being exposed or reinforcing this view of women:
In this game, you’ll either become every woman’s worst nightmare… or rather: the best dick they’ll ever have. Your goal is simple: leave no pussy non-fucked, since that’s the only thing they all want. Never take ‘no’ for an answer.
Fuck your mom, fuck your auntie, and even fuck your friend’s mom. Why not?
Take what’s yours and show No Mercy.
Could you please be realy clear: You don’t see any problem with this?
I can think it’s a messed up fantasy, but that doesn’t mean it should immediately be banned by a payment processor.
Regardless, there are tons of studies showing that consuming this kind of porn actually helps prevent people from acting on these fantasies. The net result is likely less sexual abuse, not more. Because it’s fantasy media, it likely is able to keep the fantasy a fantasy, it gives people an outlet.
Show me a meta study that supports this claim, please. Not a single study, but something that looks at those alleged thousands of studies and comes to the conclusion you are implying here.
More studies with improved practices and preregistration would be welcome.
Next sentence
Also:
Whether pornography contributes to sexual aggression in real life has been the subject of dozens of studies over multiple decades. Nevertheless, scholars have not come to a consensus about whether effects are real.
Also also this study has nothing to do with your claim. Its not about porn preventing violent behaviour, it’s about whether porn causes it or not.
Meanwhile the population study seems to suggest porn usage reduces sexual aggression, or is at least correlated with it.
The last sentence of the abstract (More studies with improved practices and preregistration would be welcome.) seems to be adressing this. In the study itself they say:
A third group of studies considers relationships between pornography consumption and sexual violence at the population level (e.g., Diamond et al., 2011; Gentry, 1991). In such studies, changes in the population rate of sexual crimes are associated with changes in the availability of pornography, often due to changes in the law. Cross-nationally, most (though not all) such studies suggest that pornography consumption is correlated with reductions in sexual violence. However, such data are correlational in nature, and third variables at the societal level may also be responsible for these patterns.
You said, at the start of our dialog, that:
Regardless, there are tons of studies showing that consuming this kind of porn actually helps prevent people from acting on these fantasies
“This kind” refers to violent porn, i suppose? Because the study states that:
Our meta-analytic results reveal no relationship between exposure to nonviolent pornography and sexual aggression.
So they are not talking about “this kind” of porn.
The meta analysis addresses porn in general. That includes fetishized content like violent or “taboo” pornography. It states there’s no evidence that it makes sexual aggression more prevalent, and that population studies show that it’s at least correlated with a reduction instead.
We can nitpick the wording all day long, but ultimately I think the takeaway is that there’s no evidence that it has negative effects, and there’s at least some evidence that suggests it has positive effects.
Violent pornography was weakly correlated with sexual aggression, although
the current evidence was unable to distinguish between a selection effect as compared to a socialization effect.
If anything, this points towards the opposite conclusion. And that is with zero nitpicking.
Just to make sure, this is the game you are defending and think there is no harm to people being exposed or reinforcing this view of women:
Could you please be realy clear: You don’t see any problem with this?
I can think it’s a messed up fantasy, but that doesn’t mean it should immediately be banned by a payment processor.
Regardless, there are tons of studies showing that consuming this kind of porn actually helps prevent people from acting on these fantasies. The net result is likely less sexual abuse, not more. Because it’s fantasy media, it likely is able to keep the fantasy a fantasy, it gives people an outlet.
Show me a meta study that supports this claim, please. Not a single study, but something that looks at those alleged thousands of studies and comes to the conclusion you are implying here.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32691692/
Next sentence
Also:
Also also this study has nothing to do with your claim. Its not about porn preventing violent behaviour, it’s about whether porn causes it or not.
This is not contradictory.
The meta-study says that pornography contributing to sexual aggression is not proven. Meaning, it doesn’t make it worse.
Meanwhile the population study seems to suggest porn usage reduces sexual aggression, or is at least correlated with it.
The last sentence of the abstract (More studies with improved practices and preregistration would be welcome.) seems to be adressing this. In the study itself they say:
You said, at the start of our dialog, that:
“This kind” refers to violent porn, i suppose? Because the study states that:
So they are not talking about “this kind” of porn.
The meta analysis addresses porn in general. That includes fetishized content like violent or “taboo” pornography. It states there’s no evidence that it makes sexual aggression more prevalent, and that population studies show that it’s at least correlated with a reduction instead.
We can nitpick the wording all day long, but ultimately I think the takeaway is that there’s no evidence that it has negative effects, and there’s at least some evidence that suggests it has positive effects.
If anything, this points towards the opposite conclusion. And that is with zero nitpicking.
deleted by creator