Studies have shown that in places where porn is blocked, rape occurs at higher frequencies than in places where that is not the case, possibly due to higher levels of feelings of frustration and repression. This may be only one website now, but if others likewise follow the trend out of fear of litigation... then Texas may become a much more dangerous state to live in in the very near future, even compared to what it already is now.
Here's a couple. Not a regional porn ban = more rape like previous poster said, but this is the most relevant data I could find. ...and this data isn't great. My main takeaway from this search is that we need to direct some actual research into what access to porn does vs doesn't do. Also specific categories of porn - I wouldn't be surprised to learn that sexual violence increases with consumption of porn that glorifies rape; but then if porn made a point to model good practices around things like obtaining consent, I'd wager sexual violence probably decrease.
TLDR, it's a complicated question, so take these with a grain of salt, but among the most credible sources I found, they trended toward porn and rape NOT being positively correlated.
"Victimization rates for rape in the United States demonstrate an inverse relationship between pornography consumption and rape rates."
"The results showed that in none of the countries did rape increase more than nonsexual violent crimes [during a period of increased access to porn]. This finding in itself would seem sufficient to discard the hypothesis that pornography causes rape."
Sounds like it works right into their plans for controlling the population by forcing people to give birth then. What a hellscape. I'm so sorry for the good humans that live there.
That's... not just a Texas thing, and yeah, bc saturation may have long been passed on that one, so this is newer territory to expand authoritarianism into.
As in, it was dangerous, but a look at its next door neighbor Mississippi should convince anyone that it can always become more so.
While I disagree wholeheartedly with the relevant law, this is an incredibly dangerous argument to make against it. It insinuates an innate propensity towards sexual aggression and ignores many other factors that might occur alongside such laws.
There might be a misunderstanding. I was talking about a correlation between areas where where porn is blocked i.e. repressive regimes and rape. Not necessarily a casual effect from one directly to the other, although that might not be able to be ruled out either.
Either way it is a question of fact, so not up to either of our mere opinions. Though I find that it is darn near impossible to find such things these days using Google - it refuses to show "relevant" results and instead tries to show only "recent" ones that it wants to promote, and DuckDuckGo is far too narrow to make that easy. So finding the full unvarnished truth is a research project that I do not want to undertake, though in case it helps to share my remembrance of having read such a thing once I thought I would offer. This is nowhere near my area of expertise so was only a comment not an authoritative statement of definitive fact.
Also there could be other factors involved - e.g. higher incidents of rape in neighborhoods that tend towards being poorer and more heavily religious in nature, e.g. within the United States that would be Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Florida, Texas, etc. I don't recall if the study checked for similar levels of poverty but with different religious leanings - if suitably comparable places could even be found.
So my statement was saying how sad it is that Texas is choosing to become more like e.g. Florida rather than more like e.g. California, or to remain more of its own separate thing as it has done in the past. Becoming "repressive" does not sound conducive to good health (especially women's health).
If you find it, let us all here on Lemmy know - it looks like people are very interested (I know I would be to see a refresher). The sad part is how this stuff has been known for decades, but people just ignore it - e.g. "just grab 'em by the p$#&y". There are some, like John Oliver and Innuendo Studios, who are doing fantastic work to spread awareness of matters that need attention (and Jon Stewart is back, sort of:-), but ofc that won't reach the ears of people who refuse to listen, and instead choose to highly regard those who spread fear and chaos, most likely purely for profit reasons.
Studies have shown that in places where porn is blocked, rape occurs at higher frequencies than in places where that is not the case, possibly due to higher levels of feelings of frustration and repression. This may be only one website now, but if others likewise follow the trend out of fear of litigation... then Texas may become a much more dangerous state to live in in the very near future, even compared to what it already is now.
Studies have shown that in places where porn is blocked, ~~rape~~ freedom occurs at higher frequencies than in other places *
*FTFY
(/s obv)
Yeah! Personal rights! Personal choice! We shouldn't have government telling us what to do.
Okay I guess they know what's best for me yes papa gubberment
So long as the libterds get pwnd. Which they definitely did. By blocking my porn. You see the way it works is uh...
[citation needed]
Here's a couple. Not a regional porn ban = more rape like previous poster said, but this is the most relevant data I could find. ...and this data isn't great. My main takeaway from this search is that we need to direct some actual research into what access to porn does vs doesn't do. Also specific categories of porn - I wouldn't be surprised to learn that sexual violence increases with consumption of porn that glorifies rape; but then if porn made a point to model good practices around things like obtaining consent, I'd wager sexual violence probably decrease.
TLDR, it's a complicated question, so take these with a grain of salt, but among the most credible sources I found, they trended toward porn and rape NOT being positively correlated.
"Victimization rates for rape in the United States demonstrate an inverse relationship between pornography consumption and rape rates."
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222552404_The_pleasure_is_momentarythe_expense_damnable_The_influence_of_pornography_on_rape_and_sexual_assault
"The results showed that in none of the countries did rape increase more than nonsexual violent crimes [during a period of increased access to porn]. This finding in itself would seem sufficient to discard the hypothesis that pornography causes rape."
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2032762/
Not really a good block of text to quote, but the gist is: "Porn doesn't cause rape, but there's more going on than just direct cause and effect"
https://vawnet.org/sites/default/files/materials/files/2016-09/AR_PornAndSV.pdf
You can use Google. Oh wait...
"Trust me bro"
I'm sure you preemptively provide citations for every claim you make.
Plus when you consider Texas' abortion policies...
Might as well rename the state the Republic of Gilead.
Sounds like it works right into their plans for controlling the population by forcing people to give birth then. What a hellscape. I'm so sorry for the good humans that live there.
Why do you think they're doing it? Republicans don't get born out of consent.
More dangerous? You mean the amount of firearms littered throughout the damn state aren’t bad enough?
That's... not just a Texas thing, and yeah, bc saturation may have long been passed on that one, so this is newer territory to expand authoritarianism into.
As in, it was dangerous, but a look at its next door neighbor Mississippi should convince anyone that it can always become more so.
While I disagree wholeheartedly with the relevant law, this is an incredibly dangerous argument to make against it. It insinuates an innate propensity towards sexual aggression and ignores many other factors that might occur alongside such laws.
There might be a misunderstanding. I was talking about a correlation between areas where where porn is blocked i.e. repressive regimes and rape. Not necessarily a casual effect from one directly to the other, although that might not be able to be ruled out either.
Either way it is a question of fact, so not up to either of our mere opinions. Though I find that it is darn near impossible to find such things these days using Google - it refuses to show "relevant" results and instead tries to show only "recent" ones that it wants to promote, and DuckDuckGo is far too narrow to make that easy. So finding the full unvarnished truth is a research project that I do not want to undertake, though in case it helps to share my remembrance of having read such a thing once I thought I would offer. This is nowhere near my area of expertise so was only a comment not an authoritative statement of definitive fact.
Also there could be other factors involved - e.g. higher incidents of rape in neighborhoods that tend towards being poorer and more heavily religious in nature, e.g. within the United States that would be Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Florida, Texas, etc. I don't recall if the study checked for similar levels of poverty but with different religious leanings - if suitably comparable places could even be found.
So my statement was saying how sad it is that Texas is choosing to become more like e.g. Florida rather than more like e.g. California, or to remain more of its own separate thing as it has done in the past. Becoming "repressive" does not sound conducive to good health (especially women's health).
Sorry, I mistook you as indicating a casual relationship between the two. I do hope to find some data on the issue once I have time.
If you find it, let us all here on Lemmy know - it looks like people are very interested (I know I would be to see a refresher). The sad part is how this stuff has been known for decades, but people just ignore it - e.g. "just grab 'em by the p$#&y". There are some, like John Oliver and Innuendo Studios, who are doing fantastic work to spread awareness of matters that need attention (and Jon Stewart is back, sort of:-), but ofc that won't reach the ears of people who refuse to listen, and instead choose to highly regard those who spread fear and chaos, most likely purely for profit reasons.