I'm just saying that's what the difference is, not whether it's good or not. Personally, I wouldn't be so repulsed by 2 girls 1 cup if I knew that was chocolate whipped cream that was being squirted out. But then again, people wouldn't find it erotic if it was fake, right?

Also, I think that western society, in general, has a problem with violence if it is real. Not to the degree that sex would, of course. I know that some TV Cops-type programs have had public fallout because they showed someone actually getting shot and killed. Also, the Faces of Death (is that what it's called) series has had generated some negative feedback for the same reason. The fact that they do show it to begin with obviously agrees with your point, however, as sex won't get put up at all, real or fake.

But what you said brings up a good point (if it's fake does that make it any better or worse?). But I think that can get into the video game debate, something I don't know what to think of because the evidence is so convoluted. Obviously, common sense should prevail in any case, but I read somewhere that common sense died.

I couldn't agree more.

Yeah, that's some pretty disturbing stuff. A blogger on the linked site said...

I guess Bill_H forgot that the defense forced the jurors to watch it.

Never said it should be illegal, just that is where my line is. I am just not entertained by people being hurt, willing or otherwise. I also think it speaks to a certain lack of feeling when someone needs such levels of stimulation. Each iteration gets progressively more intense as they become immune to things that would even make Mengele vomit.

Well, thats not exactly true. The Romans really enjoyed watching people fight lions. We are not reinventing the wheel here, its all just relative to how conservative the previous generation was. It all goes in cycles, the porn in these videos is probably a lot more tame than a lot of sex throughout the ages. The only difference is the fact it is mass produced so people who would normally avoid it are forced to react to it.

I just don't understand this argument. Many people would call me "desensitized" to violence. I play violent video games, I watch violent movies, and I occasionally see very violent pictures on the internet and don't really bat an eye. (Though, with the pictures, I don't actively look for them.)

According to all of this, I should love violence and look for it wherever I go. That's not true. I don't particularly have a hankering for, nor enjoy, real life violence. I don't like boxing, American football, wrestling, etc. (I will admit that Rugby and real football (what some would call "soccer") are interesting to me.)

This holds true for nearly everyone I know that I would call as "desensitized" as me. Whether it be from violent pornography, violent movies, or violent video games, this "desensitizing" doesn't seem to make people more prone to real life violence. I believe you are making an assumption that turns out to be, for the most part, incredibly wrong.

The reason I enjoy violence in movies and video games is that it is entertaining. It also has a big potential to be hilarious, as anyone that has ever free-roamed on a GTA game will know. This is all because it isn't real. No one is actually getting hurt.

I think it is ridiculous that American Law still holds people responsible for distributing things considered obscene to consenting adults. Obscene is such a relative and loaded term, that seems to merely be an excuse to punish people for making things considered undesirable by most people.

I myself would find the described video disgusting, and would not watch it, but I would not try to stop people from being able to.

That wasn't intended to sound like it was 'as a whole', just on a case-by-case basis. I am aware that some pretty sick stuff was going on long before today. I was pointing to the idea that people have to work their way toward that level before they find it enjoyable.

If you were to take the average person today and teleport them to a Roman arena just before they fed people to the lions, I doubt that person would find it entertaining.

Especially if that person was teleported into the ring.

Wow. To steal a Katie (Tundramonkey) line here, you've just won yourself a:

Gold Medal in Jumping to Conclusions!!


Not once in that comment did I say or imply that someone who enjoyed violence would be more prone to violence! I just said that in my opinion, people who find violence entertaining may find themselves progressively entertained by more and more violent things. Most people I know have a tolerance limit for violence, regardless of whether it is real or not, and based on my observations and experiences, those who enjoy violence in movies/games/books etc seem to enjoy progressively more violent movies/games/books etc.

I believe that YOU are making an assumption that turns out to be, for the most part, incredibly wrong. I've told you this before; please stop trying to read between my lines because clearly you aren't very good at it.

I'm so damn sorry that I forgot a word in one of those many sentences. That should have read "...more prone to enjoying real life violence." Changing that one word has no effect on the rest of my argument. I hate to sound rude, but you have jumped ahead and became rude yourself.

I also meant to add that someone enjoying fake violence doesn't exactly change the world for the worse. If someone is at home killing someone in a video game, it isn't hurting society in the least.

If all you mean is that you don't like these types of things, then okay, but you are implying that this somehow has a negative impact on society.

That must mean that you somehow think that the enjoyment of violence in movies, video games, etc. somehow has some effect on the real world. Thus also implying that you think these people will somehow seek out real violence or not care if real violence is occurring.

I hate Max Hardcore. I don't mind porn, but I hate his. I can't imagine how uncomfortable that would be to watch with an entire courtroom.

No, it does not make me rude. I responded to your comment. Even without the word "enjoying" the sentence fit in with the rest of your statement.

What does video games have to do with porn? Where in any of my above comments did I say someone who is entertained by violence is harming society?



All I said was that some people have a high tolerance for violence and find more and more violent acts entertaining. Where did I imply this has a negative impact on society? Please learn how to read what is written and not what you want to see.

Once again, you are jumping to conclusions. Please stop trying to read between the lines of what I write, because clearly you aren't very good at it.

Where the hell did I say that people who are entertained by violence will not care if "real violence is occuring"? Oh, that's right, I DIDN'T! You are trolling for an arguement here, but I'd prefer to debate something solid instead of things you poorly and wrongly infer from my comments.

The stupid...it burns! Doh

Yep, Bylaws, way to expose the fact I didn't properly think before I typed. What happened to British solidarity, eh? *eye roll*