- This topic has 35 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 22 years, 5 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
by popular request;
quote:
——————————————————————————–
Originally posted by Flamegrape:
Sex-fearing puritanical values are fading away…
——————————————————————————–Aagh! That’s bad.
——————–
Lee P. Sherman, code name DalekTek790
Whovian, Froudian, Lexxian, etc.——————————————————————————–
Posts: 605 | From: Davenport, IA, United States | Registered: Dec 2000 | IP: LoggedAleck
Committed SadGeezer
Member # 285
posted 21-10-2001 05:46 AM
——————————————————————————–quote:
——————————————————————————–
Originally posted by DalekTek790:
Aagh! That’s bad.
——————————————————————————–Yes, that’s right. Sex-fearing Puritanical values disappearing is bad…I know it’s keeping *me* up at night. Oh, that’s right, I don’t buy into those values…it must be my guilt at violating these Puritanical values that keeps me up…
So you agree that Puritanical values emphasize a fear of sex, DT? And you’ve said before that the roots of your philosophical stance is, in fact, Puritanical. So, are you then saying that you fear sex? That’s interesting. Especially in light of the dreams you’ve posted. And the success rate you’ve acknowledged you’ve had with members of the opposite sex…Very interesting indeed.
–Aleck
[ 21-10-2001: Message edited by: Aleck ]
——————————————————————————–
Posts: 157 | From: Silver Spring, MD | Registered: Aug 2001 | IP: LoggedFlamegrape
Committed SadGeezer
Member # 289
posted 21-10-2001 03:02 PM
——————————————————————————–quote:
——————————————————————————–
Originally posted by Aleck:
…the people who *can’t* get laid are always the ones yelling loudest that those who *do* get laid are immoral?
——————————————————————————–I would accept this statement as an axiom.
DT, if you have Puritanical values, how can it be that you are a fan of Lexx? It seems to be a contradiction. I somehow doubt that your values are entirely Puritanical as Aleck said above.
(This ought to be continued on another thread…)
——————–
“It befuddled my dam* fool cracker mind!”– MST3K episode Giant Spider Invasion
——————————————————————————–
Posts: 162 | From: Southern United States | Registered: Aug 2001 | IP: LoggedAll times are GMT
You touched me! Did you see that? He touched me! You all saw it, didn’t you?
[throws rocks at anyone]
Ah-ha-ha-ha!
Whoa what was that all about FX? Not that I am agreeing or not but what was that all about?
-SM
quote:
Originally posted by Slopmaster:
Whoa what was that all about FX? Not that I am agreeing or not but what was that all about?-SM
oops sorry; the ‘puritan’ controversy has been coming up now and again since about nine months ago,usually in conjunction with ‘lexx has too much immorality in it’… it’s just one of those recurring themes here at the sadboard…should have just labelled it ‘puritanical values’or the lack of morality in lexx…hmmm
quote:
Originally posted by Aleck:
Yes, that’s right. Sex-fearing Puritanical values disappearing is bad…I know it’s keeping *me* up at night.
Moral degradation is the biggest problem facing America today. People are becoming less and less concerned with morality and the consequences of their actions.
quote:
Originally posted by Aleck:
So you agree that Puritanical values emphasize a fear of sex, DT? And you’ve said before that the roots of your philosophical stance is, in fact, Puritanical.
I don’t really agree with Flamegrape’s opinion that Puritanical views emphasize a fear of sex.
I never said the roots of my philosophical stance were Puritanical. When I talk about my philosophy I’m referring to a much more recent philosophical camp, which I won’t name since it’s unpopular. And in that context I mean mostly cosmology, not ethics.
My ethical stance is similar to the Puritan wiew (although a lot of people talk about a “Puritan” value system without really knowing what it stands for), but it’s not like I decided one day to follow a certain value system. I just had good parents who instilled in me a traditional sense of morality.
quote:
Originally posted by Aleck:
So, are you then saying that you fear sex? That’s interesting. Especially in light of the dreams you’ve posted. And the success rate you’ve acknowledged you’ve had with members of the opposite sex…Very interesting indeed.
I don’t fear sex, I just put it in its place. My “success rate” with the opposite sex is zero. Besides, I am not interested in sex, I am interested in a meaningful relationship. I don’t really know what you’re talking about. And my dream is not relevant since it was just a dream, not something I had any control over. I also don’t see it as sexual, let alone indicative of unchecked lascivious behavior. I don’t quite understand what you’re saying/implying.
quote:
Originally posted by Flamegrape:
DT, if you have Puritanical values, how can it be that you are a fan of Lexx? It seems to be a contradiction.
I enjoy Lexx for the same reason I enjoy Star Trek and Doctor Who, because it’s an imaginative space adventure.
quote:
Originally posted by DalekTek790:
Moral degradation is the biggest problem facing America today. People are becoming less and less concerned with morality and the consequences of their actions.
Pshaw. This has always been said by prudes and moralists, and the country hasn’t been brought down as of yet. People said it in the 1920s and 30s, with the rise of Jazz and moving pictures. People said it in the post-WWII era. People said it in the 50s with the rising popularity of comic books and rock and roll. People said it in the 1960s with the rise of the counter-culture. It goes on and on, and it’s a lie. It’s a lie said to instill fear in those who would question otherwise. It’s a lie to discourage independent thinking. It’s a lie, period. People aren’t concerned with the consequences of their actions? What would those consequences *be*, pray tell? Are you referring to the “AIDS is visited upon those who deserve it, and we invited the horrors of 9/11 on ourselves because we’ve offended JHVH” school of thought, or to the “You’re going to pay for this in the afterlife” school of thought? Because these are the only two schools of thought that would actually support your little hypothesis (if you use crime statistics, violent crime is not nearly what it was in the Prohibition era…which, strangely, was initiated by Puritanical thinking…you’d think that they’d learn their lesson by now), and both arguments are based on nothing but supposition and a healthy dose of pie-in-the-sky thinking.
And I don’t think that I need to point out the similarities between this kind of reasoning and certain interpretations of TV shows…
I think that it was the late Doktor LaVey who said, “Good is what you like. Evil is what you don’t like.” And this is the case here. People who claim that America (or the world in general) is going down the tubes, morally speaking, are those who see a shift away from something that they personally like to something that they don’t personally like. And as long as the people complaining are those who support repression of sexuality, denial of basic human instinct, the subordination of common sense and logic to dogma and suppression of those whose sexuality is too “different” in the eyes of the Moral Majority (an oxymoron if there ever was one, as it is neither…and BTW, I’m not implying that DT has ever said anyting homophobic or has said anything at all against homosexuality, though I’d *love* to hear his views on the topic…), then I’m a happy camper because I know that society is moving in the right direction as far as I’m concerned.–Aleck
I recommend the viewing of D. W. Griffith’s silent movie, Intolerance, to anyone who is interested.
For now, I’m sticking to the axiom, “The people who *can’t* get laid are always the ones yelling loudest that those who *do* get laid are immoral.” Thanxx, Aleck!
quote:
Originally posted by Flamegrape:
I recommend the viewing of D. W. Griffith’s silent movie, Intolerance, to anyone who is interested.
I agree. Fine film, made as an act of atonement to those who he had offended with Birth of a Nation, and a beautiful spectacle. Shame that the sets still remain buried somewhere in the California deserts.
And, for the record, the only people I’m truly and consistently intolerant of are those who are intolerant. And I fully embrace the contradiction inherent in that statement.
quote:
For now, I’m sticking to the axiom, “The people who *can’t* get laid are always the ones yelling loudest that those who *do* get laid are immoral.” Thanxx, Aleck!
I aims to please.
–Aleck
I am intolerant only of ignorance and sin.
In recent times there has been an exponential increase in sexual promiscuity, divorce, rape, prostitution, pornography, substance abuse, violent crime, de facto segregation, anti-intellectualism, and pseudo-religious cultism among other things. The result has been a breakdown of the family unit and a drastic increase in deviant behavior. Few deny this. People thought things were bad in the 70s. The state of the world now makes that look like a picnic. And this isn’t going to reverse itself any time soon, either. We can just hope and pray this gets worked out before it causes the collapse of civilization as we know it. The sociological degradation in the last half century is probably unparalleled by anything since the Fall of Rome. Western civilization is crumbling beneath our feet. Ignoring the problem won’t make it go away.
There is statistical proof available. In 1940 and before in the United States 1% of all births were out of wedlock. In 1950 it was 2%,. In 1960 it was 5%. 1970=12%, 1980-=8%, 1990=27%, and 2000=34%. Britain and Canada have been experiencing similar growth. On the other hand, in Japan, a sociologically stable country, the rate has been a consistent 1% over all this time. This is indicative of the dramatic shift in Western values beginning in the mid to late 40s.
That “axiom” is completely wrong, and certainly does not apply to me. I have never sought a sexual relationship because I have always known it would be wrong to do so. I am a good person.
What is good is what is good. What is evil is what is evil. There are moral constants hard-wired into the cells of all forms of life. You talk about me like I’m some crazy fringer. Where I come from these values are the norm.
quote:
Originally posted by DalekTek790:
I am intolerant only of ignorance and sin.
“Sin” is a relative term, depending on your personal belief system. What is a sin to one, is innocuous to another. Divorce is a sin, according to Catholicism. Protestantism sees it another way. There are strict dietary laws that must be adhered to in Judaism, and a violation of these laws is considered a sin. The Christian faith does not neccessarily see this as a sin. It’s all relative.
quote
In recent times there has been an exponential increase in sexual promiscuity, divorce, rape, prostitution, pornography, substance abuse, violent crime, de facto segregation, anti-intellectualism, and pseudo-religious cultism among other things. The result has been a breakdown of the family unit and a drastic increase in deviant behavior.
Other than what you list above which falls under the category of “assault on another person,” everything you list is of questionable moral detriment, and some are just plain wrong. What categorizes “sexual promiscuity?” What defines that loose term? Is it merely sex outside of the bonds of matrimony, or what? I could argue that there may be more *reported* incidents of what you may consider “sexual promiscuity” these days, but I would consider that due to the fact that there is more open communication of this. NOT that it occurs more frequently. It’s not surreptitious, it’s in the open. I also would question this increase in “anti-intellectualism.” That has *always* been a constant. And it’s ridiculous that you can even put divorce and rape in the same list of “offenses.” Divorce rates are up simply because people who were once forced by society’s rules to stay in marriages that were miserable are no longer forced to do so. I’d think that forcing someone to live their lives with a person that they don’t love is a worse offense than allowing this partnership be broken. Also this “de facto segregation” you speak of. Would you say that segregation is worse today, than say, the 1950’s? How? In what way? I could go on and on about every point you brought up, but it would be pointless. “Changing ideas is easy. Changing beliefs is hard.”
quote
We can just hope and pray this gets worked out before it causes the collapse of civilization as we know it. The sociological degradation in the last half century is probably unparalleled by anything since the Fall of Rome. Western civilization is crumbling beneath our feet. Ignoring the problem won’t make it go away.
That is, if you want to believe that there is a problem. Rome did not fall, as has been oftentimes stated, because of moral degredation (this falls into the “God punished them because they were bad people” category, and is pure speculation with no basis in real fact). Rome fell because of several factors, among them being that the Empire simply became too large and unwieldy; that invasions of Barbarians took their toll on the military and defense of the empire; that poor decisions in political thinking led to the military becoming disorganized and ineffective; that their monetary system was failing; that the Christian religion and its adaption as the official religion of the empire, along with the emphasis on people serving God rather than the State, led to the empire’s neglect and mismanagement; that the rise of Islam divided the empire; and lastly, that all empires must end at some time. No one blames the end of the glory days of the British Empire on moral and spiritual corruption. Western civilization is not crumbling. It is merely shifting in value away from what you might think is “acceptable.”
quote
There is statistical proof available. In 1940 and before in the United States 1% of all births were out of wedlock.
So what? Where is it written, besides in religious texts, that a child must be born in wedlock? A child born out of wedlock does not indicate that this child is doomed to a life of deviant behavior or warped values, any more than a child born in an unhappy home, having to deal with the fact that his or her parents loathe each other and are trapped in a loveless relationship just for “the kids’ sake.”
quote
What is good is what is good. What is evil is what is evil. There are moral constants hard-wired into the cells of all forms of life.
…And you have the gall to speak of “good science” and “bad science.” Morality is an intellectual and societal construct enforced upon a person from the time that they are born. No one is born knowing the difference between right and wrong. That must be taught. The human animal instinctively knows only pleasure and pain, and knows to gravitate toward one and flee the other. Also the constants you speak of vary from society to society. What is considered “good” in one group of people can be considered “evil” in the next. I daresay that what I consider “good” is definitely not what you would consider to be the case, and I have yet to feel guilt because I’ve violated what you consider to be “moral constants.”
–Aleck
Well, we could have a morality police force like they do in some muslim countries. I used to think it was just a joke from a Monty Python sketch (“the Church Police”). But it turns out the some countries like Saudi Arabia have morality policemen patrol public place, looking out for deviant behaviour. The Taliban has taken it to extremes, as you may have seen in the news lately. They use football stadiums for public executions. Offences include adultery, promiscuity, and homosexuality.
Is this what we want? Hell, no! Institutions of morality must not have legal enforcement powers. Church and State do not mix. The Taliban represents the most extreme form of this mixture.
So we can’t force morality on people. What do you suggest we do?
quote:
Originally posted by Flamegrape:
So we can’t force morality on people. What do you suggest we do?
well put, and whose morality would we allow imposed upon us? it is obviously different things to different people and while there are certain commonly accepted extremes of behavior that are not tolerable by anyone except a sociopath, the ‘hump’ on the gaussian curve still encompasses a wide range
of mores…good discussion guys; thank you, especially dalek tek, for pursuing it in such cogent fashion despite my clumsy attempt at humor…fxquote:
Originally posted by FX:
well put, and whose morality would we allow imposed upon us? fx
Where is the divine order when you really need it???
All our petty squabbles would come to an end, in the face of a ‘real’ enemy, don’t ya think? I like to think so.quote:
Originally posted by BlackCloud:
Where is the divine order when you really need it???
All our petty squabbles would come to an end, in the face of a ‘real’ enemy, don’t ya think? I like to think so.
Agreed. There needs to be a strict adherance to Lex, the rule of law! I worship his divine shadow! And may his shadow fall upon you!
Good lord! A puritanical Lexxian! (ducking to avoid flying pigs)
“The sociological degradation in the last half century is probably unparalleled by anything since the Fall of Rome. Western civilization is crumbling beneath our feet. Ignoring the problem won’t make it go away.”
Umm, evidence please?
“There is statistical proof available. In 1940 and before in the United States 1% of all births were out of wedlock. In 1950 it was 2%,. In 1960 it was 5%. 1970=12%, 1980-=8%, 1990=27%, and 2000=34%. Britain and Canada have been experiencing similar growth. On the other hand, in Japan, a sociologically stable country, the rate has been a consistent 1% over all this time. This is indicative of the dramatic shift in Western values beginning in the mid to late 40s.”
Aaand this proves what, exactly? That people aren’t waiting till marriage to ****?
“In recent times there has been an exponential increase in sexual promiscuity, divorce, rape, prostitution, pornography, substance abuse, violent crime, de facto segregation, anti-intellectualism, and pseudo-religious cultism among other things.”
Umm, no, we’ve been keeping statistics better as for rape, violent crime (I thought they were the same thing?).
What’s wrong with promiscuity anyway? How does it even belong in the same sentance as rape and anti-intellectualism?
Blackcloud: (and on a serious note) We do.
Yo-way-o, hmm vaa ray (not to jinx things)
quote:
Originally posted by Hypatia of B3K:
Umm, no, we’ve been keeping statistics better as for rape, violent crime (I thought they were the same thing?).
Actually, the crime rate right now is fairly consistent with the way it usually is. There was a trough in violent crime cases (reported, anyway) in the 1950s, but we’re actually staying fairly close to the average, and the statistics show that violent crime cases are on average as low as they’ve been in 20+ years. And I contend that people are safer today than they were during the days of Prohibition in the 20s to mid 30s. I also contend that if the US was not under the throes of another form of prohibition right now, that violent crime rates would drop once again (a lesson that should have been learned in 1933, if not for those crusading for “morality”).
quote
What’s wrong with promiscuity anyway? How does it even belong in the same sentance as rape and anti-intellectualism?
I don’t even want to hazard a guess as to why this is. Equating “promiscuity” (whatever the definition of *that* is) with rape is like equating knitting a sweater with shooting puppies. They have nothing to do with each other, and should only be mentioned in a sentence together in order to point out the idiocy of mentioning promiscuity and rape in the same sentence.
–Aleck
Funny, my poly-sci teacher was going on today: “Politicans don’t lie, they don’t have to. They just use creative statistics”
Now, the *rate* of crime has dropped, but the number of crimes is going up because there are more people now (violent crimes, that is)
And absolutly right about Prohibition ALECK
The increase in sexual promiscuity, rape, prostitution, and pornography are all because of increasing sexual appetites, which are now more voracious than ever before due to numerous factors.
My good man, rape is rarely sexually motivated, more often the desire is for power over the victim. Pick up a psychology textbook with a chapter on the subject, most cite the studies.
quote:
Originally posted by Hypatia of B3K:
My good man, rape is rarely sexually motivated, more often the desire is for power over the victim. Pick up a psychology textbook with a chapter on the subject, most cite the studies.
Amen. Rape is practically *never* sexually motivated. It is nearly *always* fueled by a desire to hold power over someone else.
And, as evidence to counter your theory, the US Justice Department reported that reported cases of rape declined 33 percent between 1999 and 2000 (while the actual number of rape cases is unknown, as many cases go unreported, awareness of rape and the need to report the crime is up). The Justice department also said that violent crime in general dropped 15 percent in 2000, the largest drop since 1973.
–Aleck
quote:
Originally posted by DalekTek790:
…are all because of increasing sexual appetites, which are now more voracious than ever before due to numerous factors.
Horsefeathers! Sexual appetites have neither increased or decreased! You might beleive otherwise, but it’s just not true.
As I asked you before, what do you suggest we do about it all?
Overpopulation is a more likely cause of increased violence, etc. Critters get too crowded for the environment and they start to squabble.
quote:
Originally posted by Flamegrape:
Horsefeathers! Sexual appetites have neither increased or decreased! You might beleive otherwise, but it’s just not true.
Oh, you’re wrong on that one, FG. Sexual appetites have been steadily increasing since the 1880’s. People before then didn’t have sexual appetites at all. They saw sexual relations for what they were: dirty and sinful, but unfortunately neccessary for the propagation of the species.
(note: irony used above)
quote
As I asked you before, what do you suggest we do about it all?
Watch more Doctor Who. The presence of Turlough in one’s field of vision is enough to turn *anyone* off.
(NB: A big “thumbs-up” to Flamegrape for utilizing the term “horsefeathers,” which is among my favorite antiquated expressions)
–Aleck
[ 25-10-2001: Message edited by: Aleck ]
quote:
Originally posted by Hypatia:
My good man, rape is rarely sexually motivated, more often the desire is for power over the victim.
I’ve never heard that. I know the most common form of sexual assault is date rape (which has increased dramatically in the last 20 years), and that is caused by sexual desires that the partner refuses to fulfill but are acted upon anyway. These desires are triggered by social pressures.
Most repeat sex criminals (Bundy et al) had a long infatuation with pornography, which probably caused or amplified their violent sexual tendancies.
In other words, sexual crimes are generally triggered by social factors and the media.
quote:
Originally posted by DalekTek790:
In other words, sexual crimes are generally triggered by social factors and the media.
Hogwash! If that were true, then violent crime would be a daily occurance for everyone.
What do you suggest we do about all this? Still wondering…
quote:
Originally posted by DalekTek790:
I’ve never heard that.
Then you have not read any studies on rape, as nearly all studies show that rape occurs as an attempt to enforce power over another.
quote
I know the most common form of sexual assault is date rape (which has increased dramatically in the last 20 years), and that is caused by sexual desires that the partner refuses to fulfill but are acted upon anyway.
You are drastically oversimplifying things and obscuring the root cause. Date rape occurs because one person steals control and power away from the other by denying sex. The other person, the rapist, attempts to regain that power and control by forcing sex on that person. It has nothing to do with sex at that point other than the means by which this power-grabbing is achieved. For the agressor, the same results could possibly be achieved by beating the victim severely; as sex is the subject at hand, forcing this upon the person is the most literal and direct way of taking this power.
quote
These desires are triggered by social pressures.
Not at all. Sexual desires are triggered by natural human instinct. They have not been amplified or increased over the past number of years. Sexual desires are essentially the same today as they always have been. However, the cause of sexual assault is a psychological problem, and the causes of the problem are complex and cannot be reduced to something like “it’s the media” or “it’s society.” It’s brain chemistry. It’s a history of being on the receiving end of sexual abuse. It’s the way in which they were raised. It’s a complex combination of things that vary from individual to individual, and cannot be applied in a blanket condemnation of one.
quote
Most repeat sex criminals (Bundy et al) had a long infatuation with pornography, which probably caused or amplified their violent sexual tendancies.
Most repeat sexual offenders are also sexually dysfunctional. An obsession with pornography is, quite likely, a manifestation of that. It’s not the cause. It’s a symptom. Take away the symptom and it will manifest in another way.
quote
In other words, sexual crimes are generally triggered by social factors and the media.
Not true. Sexual crimes are triggered by dysfunctional individuals, whose actions are triggered by their own malfunctioning brains. *No* study has ever conclusively shown a connection between media and crime. Any criminal inspired by media to commit said crime would find something else to justify their action. Charles Manson was allegedly inspired to mastermind the Tate/LaBianca killings by the Beatles and the Bible (specifically the Book of Revelations). Should these two be censored? Ed Gein was a God-fearing Christian, whose acts of necrophilia (not to mention any number of unspeakable acts) were triggered by the Biblically-inspired fear of sex instilled in him by his equally God-fearing mother. Should we restrict access to the Bible? Shall the numerous unspeakable acts “inspired” by the Bible and church doctrine be ennumerated?
The kind of criminals you speak of will find their inspiration wherever they look. Be it in a Playboy, The Texas Chain Saw Massacre, or the Book of Revelations.
–Aleck
As for sexual appetites increasing,
“My sexual needs have not increased, they are in fact beyond measurment.”
I can’t remember the rest.Aleck pointed out one of the causes of date rape, I’ll point out that if sex were all the perpetrators were after, they would leave and try to get in somone else’s pants, or hire a hooker.
Hey I just downloaded some porn!
Take a look:
I think German women are hot, but this Austrian girl takes the cake (which I left in the rain)! I think this chick is more sexy than Xev Bellringer! What was I thinking all this time?!? [ 25-10-2001: Message edited by: Flamegrape ]
quote:
Originally posted by DalekTek790:
Most repeat sex criminals (Bundy et al) had a long infatuation with pornography, which probably caused or amplified their violent sexual tendancies.
First of all, ted bundy was a serial murderer, not a serial rapist or ‘repeat sex criminal’…the rape was incidental to the murder and torture, which was what bundy was getting off on, as well as the entire ‘foreplay’ of tricking the women into believing he was a helpless and harmless ‘nice’ guy…may i remind you also that ted bundy in particular, was quite functional; he maintained long term ‘normal’ relationships with girlfriends, held real jobs, and went to college…and just in the spirit of hubris, what qualifies you to state unequivocally what motivated bundy, when teams of forensic psychiatrists and fbi profilers don’t know what motivates any serial murderer or rapist, and they have much more training and education about it then you do? musing about motivations is one thing, but building a whole house of cards theory on a small bit of information, and a lot of supposition, is exactly what everyone keeps pinging on you about
quote:
Originally posted by Flamegrape:
Hogwash!
Okay, FG, follow this up with “Balderdash!”, “Baloney!” or “Malarkey!” and I’m *yours*!
–Aleck
Genes do to some extent shape people’s personalities. For example, I believe I am genetically predisposed to being unpopular, no matter how hard I try I can never “fit in” socially. That’s my destiny. And many criminals have genetic conditions that predispose them to sinful acts. However a considerable amount of their behavior’s causes are environment, and of course their own choice. Most schizophrenics don’t hurt people, most manic depressives don’t try to kill themselves, etc. Something, bad parenting, too much porno, subliminal messages, whatever causes these people to “snap” and channel their psychotic energy to a certain destructive practice based on their experience. Still others are genetically and mentally fit but are willed into doing sinful things by environmental elements. Then there are people who are basically good but will commit serious sins because all their friends are doing it or they saw it on T.V. or they were somehow convinced that in order to be popular or to be accepted they have to do it. We all have the potential to be serial killers or sex predators or drug addicts. In the words of Marshall Mathers:
“Every single person is a Slim Shady lurkin’.
He could be workin’ at Burger King spittin’ on your onion rings;
Or in the parking lot circlin’ screamin’ ‘I don’t give a ****’
with his windows down and system up;
So will the real Shady please stand up?”I know about Bundy from this thing on television. A behavioral psychologist said (approximate quote) “Ted Bundy’s violent attitudes toward women were probably triggered by his obsession with pornography. In fact, all the major sex criminals were known to read pornography in excess. That is why it is important that pornography be made illegal.”
I read the section in my psychology textbook on rape after Hypatia’s claim, and it essentially confirmed what I already believed. It says the media is the primary factor for erotomania. It also states that there is a definite link between pornography and sex crimes. One of my sociology books says that pornography was invented in the late 19th century by an unbalanced English “gentleman.”
By the way, can I have the name of the psychologist who proposed the theory of rape that you mentioned?
Organic erotomania is caused by an overactive pituitary gland and/or a dysfunction in the viscinity of the protemporal cortex. But psychological erotomania, which is probably much more common (there have apparently been few studies in this area), is caused by environmental/social factors. If we lived in a different society (such as Terrestria, a futuristic utopia I designed a while back) people would have no sex drive. There is no inborn instinct that causes it. None of man’s animal ancestors mate out of season (that is, for pleasure instead of procreation).
The reason the collective sexual appetite of man (in Western society) has increased dramatically after centuries of stability is changing attitudes toward sex in society and the media. There may be other factors, too. My friend tells me that it’s because of sex hormones in beef and orgasmic psychotropins in Coca-Cola as part of a government plot to shorten the human generation and increase reproductive output for the purpose of alien genetic experimantation. I will not pass judgment on that theory until I hear the evidence.
quote:
Originally posted by DalekTek790:
Genes do to some extent shape people’s personalities.okay, that one phrase appears to be correct
And many criminals have genetic conditions that predispose them to sinful acts.
mixing religious terms with the pseudo science?
We all have the potential to be serial killers or sex predators or drug addicts. In the words of Marshall Mathers:
no dt, not everyone has the potential to be serial killers, sex predators or drug addicts; as you said before, genetics does play a role in it, and ‘nurture’ potentiates ‘nature’, or mitigates it
I know about Bundy from this thing on television.
you got your information from television? and a television psychologist? QED
Organic erotomania is caused by an overactive pituitary gland and/or a dysfunction in the viscinity of the protemporal cortex.
do you know what a pituitary gland is? and what,pray tell, is a protemporal cortex? there is a pretemporal cortex, that ‘s just a vague anatomic term based on pet scans of metabolic activity measured on experimental subjects while they were reading playboy…the pituitary gland is located above the optic chiasm, and is the control center for homeostasis as regulated by the hormonal axis…in other words it stimulates end organs to either produce or stop producing their hormones…what controls the pituitary? not completely known…in cases of steroid hormone excess particularly , one may develop emotional lability…’steroid psychosis’ however is from exogenous steroid administration, frequently seen in body builders using anabolic steroids…in any case, the increased activity of hormones, or metabolic activity in the pretemporal cortex, are merely symptoms or indicators; they are not the cause of the aberrant behavior…that is why psychotropic drugs come in so many forms; no one drug works for every person with the same symptoms…and that, my dear dt, is because current understanding of the brain is way beyond what you see on television or in sociology or psychology texts, but still woefully inadequate to explain why people behave the way they do
None of man’s animal ancestors mate out of season (that is, for pleasure instead of procreation).
how about you read some serious anthropology texts and get back to us on that; i’ll give you a hint, homo sapiens and his various ancestors,is the only animal without true estrus, and who’s breasts do not involute after weaning…for whatever reason man has evolved to have 12-14 fertile periods per year, and to remain sexually attractive regardless of pregnancy or fertility; this is thought to promote diversity of the gene pool, but these are theoretical issues
and finally dt, if you are going to misquote the hard biological sciences, you will only make a fool of yourself, and since you are warned, you cannot blame your genes for it
[ 26-10-2001: Message edited by: FX ]
I worship his Aleck, long may he reign.
Here we go now:
Delin 1978
Burgess and Holmstrom 1974I quoted (not to commit the ‘appeal to authority’ fallacy) what I had assumed was standard theory. I’m sorry the studies are old but I had to resell my textbooks.
quote:
Originally posted by :
I worship his Aleck, long may he reign.I’m sorry the studies are old but I had to resell my textbooks.
lol, been there, done that…and isn’t it amazing how little those 160$ textbooks are worth when you turn around to sell them?
I will now repost this masterpiece, the original having been swallowed up by the server.
Before I say anything else, I will explain the philosophy that governs my thoughts and actions. I will not refer to it by name since it is a minority philosophy that is widely despised in this country.
My philosophy holds that the most logical and straightforward interpretation of observed data is the most valid. All things have to be evaluated based entirely on evidence and not influenced by preconceptions, mindsets, or bias. The conclusion arrived at through the process, however unappealing, is to be accepted. I assume nothing and doubt everything. Holding one idea as true because it is emotionally appealing is called dogma. My philosophy holds that most (if not all) of the problems in the history of society are caused by dogma. I work by a pragmatic view of the Universe, evaluating things logically based entirely on evidence free of mindset, bias, and blind faith. Another cornerstone of my philosophy is that when anything is examined closely enough it is shown to be neither proven or disproven. Thus in this universe we can never be truly certain of anything besides our own uncertainty. Existence, as far as we as limited beings can perceive it, is just a bunch of theories existing in relative probabilities. All knowledge is tentative. I am always willing to logically consider any possibility. If you don’t agree with my philosophy that’s fine, just it doesn’t give you the right to attack me every chance you get.
quote:
Originally posted by Aleck:
So you’re willing to buy this until you hear something convincing otherwise, yet *any* internet search for data on rape will bring up thousands of sites, and roughly 95% of them will state that studies show that rape is a crime of control and power, and is *not* about sex, and you will discount all of the evidence?
You do not understand. Part of this philosophy is accepting that there are certain claims that one cannot tell if they are true or false and have to be listed as intermediate. I never pass judgment upon anything without enough relevant data to logically evaluate it.
quote:
Originally posted by Aleck:
As FX has stated, this is mixing pseudoscience with religion, and when one does this, it discredits the entire approach.
I was agreeing with you! You said that criminal tendencies are sometimes based on hereditary psychological conditions and I was acknowledging that that is indeed a factor. I meant “sinful acts” in the sense of murder, rape, and the like, in case you didn’t realize that. And I can most certainly tell the difference between science and pseudoscience, having thoroughly investigated both.
And a couple people have asked me for a source. I don’t remember the title, but it was a documentary on Ted Bundy on (I think) A&E. As for the other facts, here are my written sources:
Psychology, sixth edition; David G. Myers, 2001 (textbook for elementary psychology)
Are Criminals Made or Born? from Crime and Human Nature; Richard J. Herrnstein & James Q. Wilson, 1985 (required reading for accelerated rhetoric)
Let’s Put Pornography Back in the Closet; Susan Brownmiller, 1975 (required reading for accelerated rhetoric)
Brain Lock; Jeffrey M. Schwartz, 1996 (recommended by the on-campus psychologist)And the lecturer for my psychology course has informed me that sexual predation is caused by the desire to elevate arousal beyond the level attainable through ethical behavior.
quote:
Originally posted by Aleck:
This, however, is what is known as “reaching for excuses.” I don’t suppose that your relative charm and wit have been taken into account here, have they?
You were the one who first brought up genetic predisposition! Even when I agree with your statements you argue with me. I am unpopular because I am shy, introverted, and awkward in social situations, symptoms of my obsessive-compulsive disorder.
quote:
Originally posted by Aleck:
And as for subliminal messages? Puh-leeze. Studies have shown, time and time again, that subliminals do not work.
You do realize I wasn’t serious…right?
quote:
Originally posted by Aleck:
Okay, hold up, hold up. You take the high-n-mighty approach that media warps minds, and because of this you have adamantly stated that you “do not listen to Howard Stern.” Yet you can rattle off entire verses of Eminem tracks?
Oh come on! I’m only human. I can’t be 100% serious and unemotional all the time. Your attacks are getting sillier and sillier. My roommate was playing that song as I was typing and I thought that line was relevant to discussion.
quote:
Originally posted by Aleck:
You have said that you do not fear sex, you simply put it in its place. In this “futuristic utopia” as you call it (is this the one where this season of LEXX takes place?), you have completely erased the sex drive. You have removed sex from what it *is* in the human species to something completely other and alien to the human species. This evidences *such* a fear and loathing of sex as it exists, and *such* a high level of disgust at ones own instincts and desires, that I find it staggering.
Now you’re just being insulting again. I don’t fear sex and I have no sexual desires to be disgusted with.
quote:
Originally posted by Aleck:
To argue otherwise is to fly in the face of logic and good sense.
I am the personification of logic and good sense.
quote:
Originally posted by FX:
your expertise in human anatomy( as well as physiology,psychopathology, and molecular biology) is conspicuous by its absence
I’ll have you know I am quite knowledgeable in anatomy. I just don’t try to impress others by constantly using obscure scientific terms, unlike some people.
quote:
Originally posted by Flamegrape:
Institutions of morality must not have legal enforcement powers.
Than what is the law? The more seriously immoral acts like murder and rape are already punishable by law.
quote:
Originally posted by Flamegrape:
What do you suggest we do?
I think the banning or restricting of the publication of pornography, a change in what is permissible on television, and better sex education in schools is a good start.
quote:
Originally posted by Flamegrape:
Venus of Wilendorf
This statuette was found near Wilendorf, Austria. It is pornography from 20,000 B.C.E.
I am, of course, familiar with that. I also know from Discover magazine that most archeologists believe that it was a talisman to protect against complications during childbirth.
Perhaps it was wrong of me to believe you could comprehend let alone appreciate the depth of my wisdom and insight.
so much for this being a never OT, 100% friendly BB utopia! :oP i don’t hate it here, or hate any of you peeps… i mainly stopped reading this BB because i wound up with a headache from the colors. i love the reviews here and will always come back to read them… i’ll just have to bring my tylonol, lol ;o)
i feel sooo sorry for dalektek! LoL! but “EGADS” you’re a pushy one, honey. LoL ;o)
take care
elfie (getting out her tylonol as she prepares to push “add reply” heh)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.