The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewE. Michael Jones Archive
Pornography and Political Control
The Hexenhammer Debate
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

At 4:30 pm on March 30, 2002, Israeli military forces took over Palestinian TV stations when they occupied Ramallah in the West Bank. Shortly after occupying the Al-Watan TV station, the Israeli forces began broadcasting pornography over its transmitter. The Palestinians were outraged and bewildered. “Why in the world,” one woman wondered, “should one do such a thing?” The answer is simple. The Israelis broadcast pornography because pornography is a weapon in the arsenal of psychological warfare.

We are told that “Sexual freedom goes hand in hand with freedom of speech” and that “The issue of pornographic images is intrinsically linked to the issue of freedom of speech,”[1]https://www.numero.com/en/art/art-and-porn-aros-muse...land#_ but in reality pornography is a form of control. Pornography has nothing to do with freedom. Pornography is a weapon because, as St. Thomas Aquinas pointed out, lust “darkens the mind.” Lust makes you blind. A blind opponent is easily defeated. Pornography is the weaponization of Lust.

The best symbol of the military use of lust is Samson and Delilah. After Samson’s reason lost control of his passions, he ended up “eyeless in Gaza, grinding at the mill with slaves.” The Israelis unleashed the same weapon at the same place 3,000 years later because they wanted to make the Palestinians “eyeless in Gaza” as well. The Israelis wanted to enslave the Palestinians. They did not want to liberate them.

St. Augustine brought the biblical story of Samson up to date in his day shortly after the fall of the Roman Empire when he wrote, “It is clear that sin is the primary cause of servitude.” That means, he continued in another passage from the same book, that “a good man, though a slave, is free; but a wicked man, though a king, is a slave. For he serves, not one man alone, but, what is worse, as many masters as he has vices.”[2]St. Augustine, City of God (New York: Doubleday, 1958), p. 88.

Man was free as long as he was moral, which is to say as long as he acted according to the dictates of practical reason. Man is not free to be irrational. Man can use his freedom to give into passion, but at that point he becomes a slave. Pornography was a part of Roman culture as the mosaics in whorehouses at Pompei made clear. After the fall of Rome, pornography disappeared because Christian Europe based its culture on Augustine’s principle that a man had as many masters as he had vices.

Roughly 1,300 years later, the world got turned upside down. The word for that sort of political change is revolution. Pornography re-entered western culture as a weapon in the 18th century. I’m referring to the illustrated versions of the Marquis de Sade’s pornographic opus Justine, which appeared at the Palais Royale before the French Revolution and were instrumental in bringing about that revolution as well. In case you forgot, the Marquis de Sade started the French Revolution from his cell in the Bastille. The Marquis de Sade wrote that “The state of the moral man is one of tranquility and peace, the state of an immoral man is one of perpetual unrest.” That sounds like something St. Augustine could have written. St. Augustine would say, if you want to be free be moral. But, turning the idea upside down, the Marquis de Sade was telling the tyrants who emerged during the course of the French Revolution that if you want to enslave a population, promote vice.

The Marquis de Sade is simply Augustine turned upside down. He understood that in order to create a revolution you have to subvert the morals of the people first. To bring this about the Marquis de Sade proposed exhibiting women naked in the theaters. This created a problem because in a big theater it’s difficult to see the girls, but in a small theater where the girls are visible, the crowd is small.

Technology solved that problem. Pornography is always a function of technology. What followed was 200 years of more and more refined methods of control based on more and more advance technology. One major technological breakthrough was the motion picture, an invention which created cultural civil war between America’s three main ethnic groups—Protestants, Catholics, and Jews—during the 1920s. Hollywood was a Jewish creation, and within a decade of its founding the Jews, like the Israelis who invaded Ramallah, were using the motion picture industry as a weapon against the people of the United States of America, who were outraged at their promotion of obscenity and demanded that the government take action. When the Protestants under Will Hays failed to rein in Jewish obscenity, the Catholics instituted a boycott which threatened to bankrupt Hollywood, and the Jews backed down and instituted the Production Code in 1934.

Pornography got weaponized again in Germany. In the period following Germany’s defeat in 1919, Jews like Magnus Hirschfeld brought Hitler to power by his flagrant attempts to promote homosexuality through his Institute for Sexual Science.

In 1947 the United States scrapped the Jewish Morgenthau plan to starve the conquered German people to death and put Marshall plan in its place, to restore Germany as a Bulwark against Soviet communism. That meant pumping money into the economy and to ensure that the Germans had something to buy the Allies imported 150 tons of obscene material into Germany.[3]Cf. my e-book “Werner Heisenberg and Jewish Science,” available on Amazon Kindle. Pornography was weaponized once again, this time to destroy the moral fiber of the German people, which was the Jewish way to ensure that there was no resurgence of National Socialism. The Catholic Church mounted a campaign against “Schmutz und Schund,” but it was no match for that country’s illustrated magazines, all of which had to get a license from a Jewish psychiatrist by the name of David Mardachi Levy.

ORDER IT NOW

For 31 years, the Catholics protected the American people against the weaponization of human sexuality, but in 1965, in the wake of the Second Vatican Council, the Catholics lost their nerve and the Jews broke the code with their Holocaust porn film The Pawnbroker. Within seven years, hard core pornography—Deep Throat, The Devil and Miss Jones, and Behind the Green Door—was being shown in first-run movie houses. In 2004, Professor Nathan Abrams wrote:

Jewish involvement in porn…is the result of an atavistic hatred of Christian authority: they are trying to weaken the dominant culture in America by moral subversion…Pornography thus becomes a way of defiling Christian culture and, as it penetrates to the very heart of the American mainstream (and is no doubt consumed by those very same WASPs), its subversive character becomes more charged.[4]Nathan Abrams, “Triple-exthnics,” Jewish Quarterly, Winter 2004.

Which is one more way of saying that pornography is a weapon which Jews wielded to destroy the Christian culture of the countries which allowed them the rights they granted to their citizens.

In 1978 Jimmy Carter appointed Paul Volcker as head of the Federal Reserve System as a way of placating the creditor class, which felt that inflation had gotten out of control. Volcker’s “cure” for inflation was raising interest rates to unheard of levels. By 1980 T-bills were paying 20 percent interest. In order to lend money at these rates, banks had to persuade legislators to abolish state usury laws. The result was the collapse of America’s manufacturing base, low wages, and the rise of vulture capitalism. The sexual liberation of the ‘70s along with the de-criminalization of usury distracted workers from the fact that their wages had stagnated. As the compound interest which drives usurious loans kicked in and more and more money got concentrated into the hands of fewer and fewer people, the children of the baby boomers who cheered the sexual liberation of the ‘70s woke up to find themselves enslaved to unrepayable student loan debt and addicted to pornography.

As Andrew Joyce pointed out in the Unz review, “Vulture capitalism is Jewish capitalism.”[5]https://www.unz.com/article/vulture-capitalism-is-je...alism/ Vulture capitalists like Paul Singer now control the Republican Party. The rise in vulture capitalism was closely paralleled by the rise of pornography. Both phenomena were Jewish. The enormous amount of money which ended up in the hands of Jewish usurers was used to fund think tanks, non-profit corporations, and NGOs which then promoted sodomy and pornography as a way of distracting men who should have been forming families from their economic misery.

The best example of this confluence of Jewish money and ideas is the Cato Institute, which was founded in 1977 by Charles Koch and Murray Rothbard and received its funding from the Koch brothers foundations and the Bradley Foundation, which ended up under the control of neoconservative godfather Irving Kristol through his proxy Michael Joyce. Capitalism is state-sponsored usury. After Paul Volker, who died on December 8, allowed the creditors whose interests he served to strike down every usury law in this country, the Cato Institute used the money which accrued from the usurious take-over of the economy to undermine the moral basis of the social order, taking political power out of the hands of the people and placing it in hands of the oligarchs.

When pornographer John Stagliano, also a member of the Cato Institute, was charged with producing obscene material in 2010, the Cato Foundation rushed to his defense. A series of articles in Reason Magazine, also funded by the Koch brothers,[6]https://reason.com/2019/08/23/rip-david-koch/ portrayed Stagliano as a martyr to the cause of free speech, trotting out libertarian “principles” to defend him. In an article defending Ira Isaacs, who had produced videos “of a female engaging in sex acts involving human bodily waste and a video . . .of a female engaged in sex acts with animals,” Reason referred to pornography as “America’s liberty.”[7]https://reason.com/2013/01/16/fillmmaker-gets-four-y...n-for/

Like the vulture capitalism which is its main source of funding, Libertarianism is a Jewish ideology confected by people like Ayn Rand, Milton Friedman, and Murray Rothbard, who was also a member of the Cato Institute, to defend oligarchic interests. Jewish Libertarians believe in free speech, but only when it serves their interests. A good case in point is Alan Dershowitz, who used the free speech ploy to defend Deep Throat in 1972, when Jews had not yet completed their take-over of American culture, but then abandoned it and promoted hate speech legislation after that take-over was complete. In a breathtaking expression of Jewish hypocrisy, the same Dershowitz who defended pornography as free speech in 1972 stood next to Donald Trump in December 2019 when he signed an executive order using Title VI to ban criticism of Israel and “anti-Semitism” on college campuses.

Over the course of the 1980s, Americans witnessed the simultaneous de-criminalization of usury and pornography. Usury and pornography go hand in hand. The ultimate result of the moral deregulation which took place beginning in the 1970s was massive student loan debt and massive addiction to pornography, which the Cato Institute justified to distract newly enslaved college graduates from the fact that they will never pay off their debts.

In 1986, the Meese Commission made significant inroads in trying to stop pornography, but government could not keep up with the combination of technological innovation and libertarian ideology which used free speech to justify pornography. In 1989, the Jew Reuben Sturman ended up going to jail after setting up a series of pornographic film houses, but the film loop he pioneered became obsolete with the invention of the VCR, and VHS tapes became obsolete with the opening up of the Internet. At that point Hollywood produced two pro-porn propaganda films—Boogie Nights and The People vs. Larry Flynt—and the government under the direction of Bill Clinton, a man who had difficulty controlling his passions, passed the misnamed Communications Decency Act, which effectively ended government efforts to prosecute obscenity.

ORDER IT NOW

Contrary to the freedom which Larry Flynt and the libertarians promised, the result of the de facto decriminalization of pornography was, as St. Augustine could have predicted, an exponential increase in addiction, which is the modern term for slavery to sin. Predictably, the media outlets under oligarchic control said that addiction to pornography was a myth. Reporting on “Fascinating, rigorous new research,” Psychology Today announced that there is no scientific evidence to support the claim that “sex addiction is real.”[8]https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/women-who-st...ictive That claim flies in the face of the fact that a Google search of the terms “porn” and “addiction” yields 67,000,000 results.

In November 2019, the young men who were the main victims of this campaign of covert psychological warfare announced a boycott of pornography and the masturbation which was its invariable companion in something they called No-Nut-November. The reaction of the oligarchs who created sexual revolution to distract this cohort from the fact that they were hopelessly enslaved to their own passions and student loan debt was swift in coming when Rolling Stone magazine denounced anyone who objected to pornography as anti-Semitic. As its authority on the matter, Rolling Stone cited David Ley, PhD, author of The Myth of Sexual Addiction and “a clinical psychologist and sex therapist who studies pornography and mental health.” Ley dismissed No Nut November as “a creepy little smorgasbord of insecurity-driven hate with anti-Semitism, misogyny, and homophobia all rolled up in one.”[9]https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-feature...08676/ Ley goes on to say that “anti-masturbation ideology has historically been used as a tool by fascist figures to gain social control,”[10]https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-feature...08676/ when what he really meant to say is that Wilhelm Reich saw masturbation as a way of fighting “fascism,” which was his term for the authoritarian personality, which was synonymous with Catholicism and intact families.

If the libertarians are interested in promoting freedom, why are they promoting pornography? Everyone now knows that pornography leads to addiction, but now we also know that nobody pays for it, eliminating the economic incentive which got used to justify it as a business. Ten years ago, people like John Stagliano could get rich from producing pornography. Now porn is free, and no one is making money by producing it.[11]https://fightthenewdrug.org/how-does-the-porn-indust...today/ According to one pornographer, “Getting people to pay for porn is a very difficult thing to do,” he says. “We’re literally fighting and clawing for every dollar. Ten years ago, it didn’t matter. If one customer left, there’d be another to take his place. But every customer matters now.”[12]https://www.menshealth.com/sex-women/a19538746/pays-...-porn/

So porn isn’t really about money after all. It’s about control. The libertarians who loudly proclaim their support of freedom are really interested in promoting addiction because addiction is a form of control which is congenial to the Jewish oligarchs who fund think tanks like the Cato Institute. The moral is clear: anyone who defends pornography is either what Lenin called a “useful idiot” or what I call a Kochsucker, which is to say, a “conservative” agent of the oligarchs, like Charlie Kirk, whose mission is to control and destroy the very people he claims to liberate. Logos is rising. We now know that sexual liberation is a form of control. Consciousness is not reversible. We now have empirical proof that St. Augustine was right when he pointed out that a man has as many masters as he has vices.

E. Michael Jones is the editor of Culture Wars magazine and the author of Libido Dominandi: Sexual Liberation and Political Control . Both are available at culturewars.com.

Notes

[1] https://www.numero.com/en/art/art-and-porn-aros-museum-copenhague-danemark-sex-erotic-pornography-jeff-koons-cindy-sherman-betty-tompkins-sarah-lucas-tom-of-finland#_

[2] St. Augustine, City of God (New York: Doubleday, 1958), p. 88.

[3] Cf. my e-book “Werner Heisenberg and Jewish Science,” available on Amazon Kindle.

[4] Nathan Abrams, “Triple-exthnics,” Jewish Quarterly, Winter 2004.

[5] https://www.unz.com/article/vulture-capitalism-is-jewish-capitalism/

[6] https://reason.com/2019/08/23/rip-david-koch/

[7] https://reason.com/2013/01/16/fillmmaker-gets-four-years-in-prison-for/

[8] https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/women-who-stray/201307/your-brain-porn-its-not-addictive

[9] https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/coomer-meme-no-nut-november-nofap-908676/

[10] https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/coomer-meme-no-nut-november-nofap-908676/

[11] https://fightthenewdrug.org/how-does-the-porn-industry-actually-make-money-today/

[12] https://www.menshealth.com/sex-women/a19538746/pays-for-porn/

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: American Media, Libertarianism, Pornography 
Hide 295 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []

  1. The only reason that Jews are in pornography is that we think that Christ sucks. Catholicism sucks. We don’t believe in authoritarianism.

    For me, the Church is the enemy.

    – Al Goldstein.

    Yet people still launder the ‘Judeo-Christian’ fallacy.

  2. Dumbo says:

    Ten years ago, people like John Stagliano could get rich from producing pornography. Now porn is free, and no one is making money by producing it.

    What if the State (or Deep State) is paying for it? It takes money to produce these things, and technicians don’t work for free.

    Boogie Nights and The People vs. Larry Flynt

    Larry Flint was a terrible film, starting with the poster equating that obnoxious pornographer to Christ, and portraying this freak as a supposed hero of “American freedom”. Too bad that an otherwise talented director such as Milos Forman agreed to do that.

    • Replies: @Bad Dog
  3. Another brilliant article by Jones. Only issue is that the article doesn’t mention the debate with Styxhexenhammer alluded to in the title, though why bother with that anti-social Asperger’s, other than to wonder if he enjoy any oligarchic largess for his efforts.

    Looking on wikipedia, it’s interesting to see that the famous forensic psychiatrist Park Dietz was on the Meese commission. It appears that the serial killer phenomenon of the 70’s-00’s which saw Dietz lend his expertise in high profile trials has a Jewish connection, both in their over-representation as murderers and, in their capacity as Brahmins who control culture, to the phenomenon of the “empty self” that must contribute to the pathologies of at least some of the killers, in as much as its a result of the Jews gutting the identity of the West and making it impossible for troubled people to get any real help, spiraling into madness. Bundy claimed porn made him do it. Dahmer was obsessed with sex. Hard to prove, but who knows? Oh and a Jewish actor played the serial killer in the “silence of the lambs” film. Coincidence or fate?

    • Replies: @follyofwar
    , @VICB3
  4. Jake says:

    I know many devout Evangelicals who would read Jones’s opening paragraph and wonder why he would repeat such an absurd lie about Israelis.

    “God’s Chosen People are not perfect, but they are God’s. and they would not act that way. Maybe against terrorists but not against mothers and children.”

    “Unless God wanted them to.”

    “All that certainly makes Jones an anti-Semite. And that is very helpful in showing why God sent men like Luther and Calvin, and especially the Anglo-Saxon Puritans, to fight anti-Semitism.”

    “It is good,” they would conclude, “to see that Vatican II joined the Catholic side in the war against anti-Semitism. It was surely the Council that steered the Catholics back toward Bible truth, Judeo-Christian truth.”

  5. (((porn))) goes far, far beyond “control”.

    It and the rest of the Kosher Culture of Death –

    abortion, sexperv, miscegnation, and Judeo-“feminism” –

    are full frontal attacks on White family formation and birthrate.

    Judeo-porn is part and parcel of an ongoing, accelerating, and so far

    successful (((plan))) to exterminate the world’s remnant White population.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  6. anon[178] • Disclaimer says:

    The Styx character was more than I could handle.
    just a jerk.

    It looks like Jones will appear anywhere, with anyone who will give him air time and exposure. That’s probably necessary when the (((adversary))) is loaded with cash and controls most media.

    But still — just looking at that Styx mug gives me the creeps.

    otoh, learned about One America News Network OANN and heard Liz Wheeler the other day — another sign of hope.

    She’s young, Catholic, very attractive, pretty smart, but talks too fast.
    Maybe Jones can get on OANN & have a conversation w/ Liz Wheeler.
    https://www.oann.com

    • Replies: @Jack Fortin
    , @Ignatius
  7. Pornography got weaponized again in Germany. In the period following Germany’s defeat in 1919

    Rabbi Yosef Tzvi ben Porat states at the 3:45 mark that, “[t]hey destroyed all the values, poisoned literature and theatre.”

    Rabbi Yosef Mizrachi discusses this as well.

  8. How do Jews themselves protect themselves from pornography? I mean their kids don’t have a special Gentile Mind Corruption Only button on the computer or television. Presumably, Jewish women can go to the site BLACKED and watch the same stuff that Gentile women do, but you don’t see as many Jewish women down at the Country Welfare office with an abandoned child of a black thug as working-class white women.

    Jewish porn stars themselves seem fairly well balanced. I recall an interview with TT BOY where he claimed that he himself did not watch porn-despised it in fact-and only did it for the money.

    What makes Gentiles more susceptible than Jews?

    Jeff Goldblum and other Jewish actors appeared as muggers in the DEATH WISH films-Charles Bronson would later state he insisted on Jewish actors in order to avoid the NAACP-and I doubt any Jewish person living in NYC believed they would be mugged or raped by a Jew. Yet whites watch some crap like LETHAL WEAPON II obviously made to bolster Mandela and actually believe that the South African Ambassador would sell heroin in Los Angeles and kill policemen.

    So why are Gentiles more susceptible than Jews themselves?

  9. I believe much pornography these days is funded by governments. Why? For the same reason Israel broadcast it to Palestinians: to keep angry young men at home masturbating rather than rebelling or demanding change to a broken system.

    If you don’t think China is funding pornography, just imagine if every single male in China without a female partner –for they’ve been aborted away— suddenly rose up in anger.

    No, pornography is social control—for the governments.

    • Agree: Morton's toes
  10. “Capitalism is state-sponsored usury.”

    Aww, now, you can’t say that!

    Because the clowns on here just love Capitalism. Or is it usury. Or Capitalism. Or usury.

    Oh, I give up.

  11. Intelligence agencies recruit pornographers to lead their disinformation operations, apparently because porn purveyors are so lacking in ethics they will tell public lies about anything

    The alleged ‘founder’ of Wikipedia is the arch-Zionist Jimmy ‘Jimbo’ Wales, who attends intimate birthday parties of Presidents of Israel

    Wales was ‘selected’ for this role after being in the pornography-selling business

    EU police agencies and the European Commission, have a detailed report on how Wikipedia is a criminally-involved tool for intelligence agencies, using ‘Twenty major techniques of CIA – Wikipedia deception’

    EU Police Agency and Prosecutor Report on Wikipedia, an Intel Agency Fraud
    http://pastebin.com/BeppgiMJ

    Another famous ex-pornographer recruited as a CIA propagandist is Glenn Greenwald. When the intel agencies began running the hoax of ‘Edward Snowden’, he first ‘leaked’ to the biographer of Bush Vice President Dick Cheney at the CIA’s Washington Post

    After realising this was too stupid to hold up, the intel agencies switched the front-man role to Rothschild employee & gay ex-pornography-seller Glenn Greenwald of ‘hairystuds’, Greenwald now funded by CIA billionaire Pierre Omidyar

    For those who don’t know, even Putin in Russia has hinted out loud he knows Snowden is fake, Putin just playing along in the long string of mutual Russia-USA back-door favours to each other
    http://www.veteranstoday.com/2016/09/21/russia-govt-report-snowden-greenwald-are-cia-frauds/
    https://www.henrymakow.com/2018/11/assange-snowden-rat-traps.html

  12. @Jake

    Evangelicals are the Judeo-Christians They think they need the jews in the middle east to usher in the End Time or return of Christ. Evangelicals not only support Zionism in Israel or the West but simply will not look at Jewish Power critically or even acknowledge it . You cannot criticise Jews to Evangelicals. they are unreachable. They will just wave their metaphysical wand over anything Jews do and excuse it even though as Jones points out Jews are key to the decline of conservative Christian morality. Evangelicals are very well organized and vote. They will vote for Trump because he is Israel’s man

    • Agree: RVBlake, Trinity
  13. Anonymous[392] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jeff Stryker

    Gentiles are more susceptible to vices like porn and drugs because gentiles have a lower IQ.

    Once you correct for white IQ to exclude Jews, which artificially raises white IQ, gentile whites can be shown to be closer to Mexicans in their disposition.

  14. Anonymous[392] • Disclaimer says:

    This Michael Jones is a clown.

    He makes it seem like Gentile Whites were choir boys before Jews corrupted them. History shows that Gentile Whites are as degenerate as their middling IQ would reflect.

    Jews only accelerated the process for Gentiles, they did not cause the problem. Gentile whites have no problem spreading liberal sexual values to other countries like Mexico, the Phillipines, or Thailand to benefit themselves. So why should Gentile Whites complain when these values hurt American values at home?

    • Replies: @Fuerchtegott
    , @afdadf
    , @Jake
  15. The libertarians who loudly proclaim their support of freedom are really interested in promoting addiction because addiction is a form of control which is congenial to the Jewish oligarchs who fund think tanks like the Cato Institute.

    LOL. Yes Michael, no one could possibly disagree with you for any other reason than out of a secret desire to enslave the population to Jewish oligarchs. There is a reasonable debate to be had about the merits of pornography. But Jones thinking is that of a narrow-minded zealot. He’s like your local Critical Race Theory professor arguing that anyone who opposes affirmative action secretly hates black people. Intellectually lazy and can’t see past the tip of his own theocratic nose.

    • Disagree: I'm Tyrone
  16. I’ve always thought it weird that promoters of Porn say it’s “protected under freedom of speech”.

    Where is the “speech” in Porn? It would be more correct to label it as Hate.

    Porn is one of the top 5 reasons why the West is dying. You don’t need to be a rocket scientist to understand how it is one of the main factors undermining male/female relations.

    You serve up your white women naked on a platter for the entire world and you kill the heart of your nation.

    • Agree: theMann
  17. niceland says:

    Bigger question is why Christianity is obsessed with sex up to the point of railing against giving out condoms to AIDS ridden populations in Africa.

    With Christianity forced on my country (Iceland) came the fantastic Christian morality, for example drowning pregnant girls after their masters had raped them and abandoning the week and poor to the elements to die. And talking about Jewish usury; by some incredible ‘miracle’ the Church owned half of the farms in Iceland few centuries later and sizable portion of the starving peasants spent their existence in slavery for the Church; threatening them fire and brimstone and eternity in hell if they didn’t obey.

    In retrospect, this barbaric system that was forced on the early Icelanders millennia ago lead to great concentration of power and made very few very rich riding the back of the rest. But I guess the upside (according to the prevailing narrative here on the Unz Review) was the infamous Christian ‘morality’. Burning the witches and so forth.

    Reading the annals back into the centuries and the wonderful part Christian morality and the Church played in the horrors endured by the (then) poorest nation in Europe enduring incredible harshness of the little ice-age and natural disasters – brings grown men to tears.

    As an atheist I appreciate the old Norse Paganism more and more. It’s benign and harmless in comparison to the Abrahamic religions, all of whom are carefully crafted propaganda tools for mass control. That’s the key behind the success. That’s why people are still peddling this nonsense in the year 2020 contrary to all evidence.

    The good news is Norse Paganism is the fastest growing religion in Iceland. Still not a sole really believes it.

  18. @Anonymous

    “…Once you correct for white IQ to exclude Jews, which artificially raises white IQ, gentile whites can be shown to be closer to Mexicans in their disposition…”

    You yourself must have a pretty low IQ to make such a stupid remark. Everywhere in the white world Jews constitute a small minority, in fact so small that their IQ – no matter how high – does not have a tangible effect on the average IQ of the total population. BTW, the average IQ of white Americans is 103, the average IQ of Mexicans is 87.

    • Agree: Alfred
  19. @Anonymous

    Yes but….. You haven’t done the figuring. Jewish numbers are small and their fertility low – apart from inbred Ultra Orthodox.

  20. @anon

    With you on your assessment of Styx. Why waste time debating with someone who is incapable of reason ? I tuned out as Styx attacked St Augustine for his faith rather than challenge the philosophical idea or premise St Augustine presented.

  21. Anon[398] • Disclaimer says:

    Consume products then consume more products. Porn, Star Wars, Faux News, Disney …. gobble gobble.

    • Agree: Autochthon
  22. gotmituns says:

    Burning the witches and so forth.
    —————————————-
    And just what’ve you got against burning of witches?

  23. @Anonymous

    It’s not as if the same wouldn’t backfire in the most ironic way possible in the Gay Capital of the world.

  24. Amon says:

    I don’t think a lot of people here understand what pornography is if they think it was not around doing the oppressive years of the Church.

    Fun fact, porn, booze and every other vice is not responsible for me turning my back on God.

    Rather it was the tendency of the church and its worshippers to engage in condensending behavior and excusing away its hand in slavery, destruction, theft and oppression.

    But let me tell, nothing cures you of Christ faster than witnessing your local priest savagely kicking a child for sleeping in class. Because it sure worked to make me see that the Church is a money making scam run by monsters.

    • LOL: Fuerchtegott
    • Replies: @RVBlake
  25. romar says:
    @Cranberries

    You’re wasting your time, Sir Troll… Facts are facts. Ad hominem attacks are useless exertions.

  26. romar says:
    @niceland

    So yours is a selective atheism: no to Christianity, yes to Norse pagan gods…

    • Replies: @niceland
  27. eugyppius says:

    (Apologies if versions of this comment already appeared. The internet has been uncooperative.)

    One point, as to this:

    Everyone now knows that pornography leads to addiction, but now we also know that nobody pays for it, eliminating the economic incentive which got used to justify it as a business. Ten years ago, people like John Stagliano could get rich from producing pornography. Now porn is free, and no one is making money by producing it.[11] According to one pornographer, “Getting people to pay for porn is a very difficult thing to do,” he says. “We’re literally fighting and clawing for every dollar. Ten years ago, it didn’t matter. If one customer left, there’d be another to take his place. But every customer matters now.”[12]

    The thesis that nobody pays for porn has been around for years and it is untrue. A minority of paying subscribers sustains the industry to the tune of billions of dollars a year, as even the articles that Jones links (notes 11 and 12 above) make clear. Among other things, consumers pay for access to new material (including new scenes with their favorite actors, exclusive videos of cam girls, etc.), and so here as elsewhere in the sex industry the male interest in novel sexual experiences seems to be an important force.

    Almost all of the apparently free porn on offer today is streamed on a collection of websites owned by the holding company MindGeek. Here is an informative article about them:

    https://qz.com/1407235/porn-sites-collect-more-user-data-than-netflix-or-hulu-this-is-what-they-do-with-it/

    There you will find that MindGeek also owns production companies and many subscription websites, and that paying subscribers provide well over half of their revenue. The free streaming services are perhaps a way to drive out competitors, but above all they are a means of collecting vast amounts of data about the habits and preferences of porn consumers, which data is then mined for the production of more effective pornographic content.

    What has happened, in other words, is the pornography industry has become vertically integrated, much like the Hollywood studio system. This has enabled the capitalists at the top to play a much more complicated game in peddling sexually explicit content. Many details about the sexual preferences of millions of porn viewers are now held by a private multinational corporation; the blackmail potential alone is enormous, to say nothing of the ever more effective and addictive content this data will help MindGeek produce. Of course nobody is going to do anything about this, let alone libertarians like Styxhexenhammer, for whom the real problem is for some reason “government regulation.”

  28. Bad Dog says:
    @Dumbo

    Production costs have gone down considerably with the advent of digital technology, just as it has for the recording industry. In fact, recording studios closed left and right after the advent of digital.

    The real money for professional porn performers these days is in the escort business. They really just use their videos as free advertisements/enticements to sell very expensive sexual services directly through their own websites.

    If it’s any indication how hard it’s gotten to make a buck in porn, Hugh Hefner’s son just said the hell with Playboy Enterprises and joined the Air Force. Way to go, kid. Now you can fight for the Jews so they can continue to pollute the world with free porn.

  29. Sean says:

    I liked the previous things I have read by Jones on the background to blockbusting and the hostility to Catholic ethnic neighbourhoods, but I found this article disappointing. Beate Uhse started the porn industry in post WW2 Germany. Back to the film business:-

    Hearst Over Hollywood: Power, Passion and Propaganda in the Movies
    Louis Pizzitola
    Columbia UP, £25, pp525 In 1906, while on the campaign trail to become governor of New York, William Randolph Hearst stopped at a ‘talking machine’ shop on Broadway. He made a gramophone recording of his voice and, as he spoke, a cameraman caught his gestures in moving pictures. Recording cylinders and film were then sent together to various parts of the state and, 21 years before the talkies were officially invented, Hearst was addressing his voters from movie screens all over New York. If people had objected to the newspaper magnate’s candidacy before, this new technology seemed to his enemies truly demonic. He was compared to alchemists and charlatans – one of the papers he did not own invoked Paracelsus and Cagliostro.

    Cecil B. DeMented was not Jewish. Nor breast man Howard Hughes or the rape-obsessed Sam Peckinpah. Hollywood has always stayed within limits because is a business and with its high costs of production it always disliked to compete with cheap thrills. (Unlike LA, where at the behest of Hollywood the Vice Squad terrorized the porn industry, child porn was being sold openly off Times Square by the mid 70’s). All this was for much the same reason as why the studio boss Jews were anti-union pals with Hearst.

    The big influential studios know the money is made by refining the essence of Gentile American culture and putting it in a film. Mayer, the most successful of Jewish producers in Hollywood kept smut out. Cost cutting Joseph P. Kennedy was a very successful Hollywood producer within the code, that is where he made most of his money. The Depression had forced failing Hollowood to become more seually explicit in search of dissapearing audiences, but as detailed in Hearst Over Hollywood , the Catholic Church and its Legion of Decency had compelled the Jews heading the major studios to obey the Hays code by 1934.

    THE FIRST-century Roman historian Tacitus wrote about the Germanic tribes: “Late comes love to the young men, and their first manhood is not enfeebled; nor for the girls is there any hot-house forcing; they pass their youth in the same way as the boys” (Tacitus Germania 20). Julius Caesar made the same observation:

    Those who have remained chaste for the longest time, receive the greatest commendation among their people: they think that by this the growth is promoted, by this the physical powers are increased and the sinews are strengthened. And to have had knowledge of a woman before the twentieth year they reckon among the most disgraceful acts; of which matter there is no concealment, because they bathe promiscuously in the rivers and [only] use skins or small cloaks of deers’ hides, a large portion of the body being in consequence naked. (Caesar De Bello Gallico 6: 21)

    The direction of causality may thus run in the other direction. The WEMP does not exist because the Western Church diverged from the Eastern Church on the issue of consanguineous marriage. Rather, this divergence arose because the Western Church was assimilating the behavioral norms of its newly converted peoples, including the WEMP. By the eighth century, those peoples were dominant within the Western Church and able to push Christian practice in certain directions

    Movie tropes about the hero rescuing a pure maiden despite extreme danger are so common because the audience require those themes. These are not derived from intellectual activity under the auspices of ‘Logos’, but are more or less instinctive feelings. People can get addicted to porn no question, but they can also be addicted other things that give a little reward such as cars, guns, and excess food consumption especially of sugar .

    The people who get addicted to things are not properly integrated into their community, and because of their unsatisfactory navigation of the social environment, they get stressed and addicted really easily. In experiments on rats it was those low in the packing order who got addicted to cocaine. I think a relationship with other people is the main factor in being content and thus less able to resist addiction to pleasure reward. Going to Church could be a big part of that. Reading Thomist philosophy is not going to stop you looking at porn.

    • Replies: @anon
    , @Haxo Angmark
  30. J.W. says:
    @Jeff Stryker

    Newsflash!

    Jews do drugs. They have random sex and suffer for it. They suffer from bi polar disorder and other mental anguishes as well.

    They watch porn and have sex with black people.

    They have all the same vices other people do.

    They are a small percentage of the population so it isn’t as visible. Nor do they run around holding up a sign saying, “I’m fucked up, please help!”

    I don’t think anybody who talks about Jews on this site knows one.

    On another note, porn is boring as hell to watch. And I don’t think anybody is running around trying be like their favorite porn star.

    • Agree: TKK
    • Replies: @tomo
    , @Achilles Wannabe
    , @TKK
    , @JWK
  31. Robjil says:
    @Anonymous

    The empathy IQ does not exist in Zionist Jews. What good is a high IQ if one does include the empathy IQ? If IQ calculations do not include the concept of compassion for their fellow humans. Then it is a nothing burger. We all have to live do together on this planet.

    Raising the empathy IQ in Zionist Jews should be the main priority for our planet. Why? In our time since 12.23.1913, this planet has been ruled by Jewish Zion Oligarchs. Climate Change is a joke compared to Jewish Zion Oligarch’s non-existent Empathy IQ.

    • Agree: druid55
  32. @Cranberries

    Mr. Jones is speaking of prominent libertarians like (((rothbard, mises and rand))) not the gullible goyim who are influenced by them.

    • Replies: @Tom Blanton
  33. @niceland

    “With Christianity forced on my country (Iceland) came the fantastic Christian morality, for example drowning pregnant girls after their masters had raped them and abandoning the week and poor to the elements to die.”

    Iceland wasn’t forced to become Christian instead they voted to convert. And one of the 1st things that changed after the conversion was the outlawing of the pagan tradition of infanticide often of baby girls. You should learn your nations history, you can start with The Last Apocalypse by James Reston Jr. and go from there.

    • Replies: @niceland
  34. @niceland

    Good comment. Christianity spread hand in hand with aristocratic feudalism. This was death for small-landholder Nordic egalitarian civilization.* Christianity only began to lose its relevancy with the rise of the age of machines. Marx is correct in saying that consciousness is a reflection of a society’s means of production. Hegel is correct in saying that a society’s means of production are an expression of its consciousness.

    *As Catholicism spread northward in Europe it needed to be modified to appeal to the small landholding, egalitarian-minded Germanic people. That modification is called Protestantism.

    On a side note, we northern people are known for being taciturn, for not expressing wild enthusiasm or for being ebullient. There’s a reason for that and it goes hand in hand with the theory presented on HBD sites that northerners defer gratification and have a longer time horizon due to the need to think ahead and make plans for Winter starvation.

    Cutting through the extraneous chaff, what binds we of the north together is our boat culture. The boat is to us what the chariot was to the people of the Steppes. The Baltic, it has been justly observed, is our Mediterranean and we are all Sea People. Along its shores, any place that could be touched by boat you will find a common culture and similar genetic fingerprint (okay, Finland is an exception).

    Anyway, people who live at or by the Sea are cognizant of her patterns. While it may be pleasant today, they know that another storm is brewing over the horizon. Weather fronts follow upon one another with clock-like regularity.

    For us, we who made our living from the Sea, the default setting is bad weather and strained gear. If we were to survive, we needed to prepare for the worst that Nature could throw at us.

    So we know not to get too excited by how well things are going at the moment. Don’t express immoderate pleasure because that’s just “asking for it”. Don’t lose yourself in the joys of the now because bad weather is just over the horizon and must be prepared for. Gear must be mended, holes patched, weak places reinforced and so on.

    The only respite we get from constant worry is through the consumption of alcohol. And even that is not an unmixed blessing. We awake with a hangover.

    In places situated nearer the equator it is quite otherwise. The default setting is pleasant weather and mild, calm conditions. And so on.

  35. How did Ashkenazi Jews (Yiddish caste) acquire their high IQ and atavistic hatred of Christian civilization? The best explanation is “boiling off” since the bottleneck in the Middle Ages. This is along the lines of Sailer/Cochran/Harpending:
    https://www.unz.com/isteve/amish-v-english/

    What other explanation is there? Thanks for good article.

  36. The Jews control the pornography business and everything else in the ZUS via their privately own FED which controls the money creation and from this flows control of America.

    The key to ending zionist control of America is to abolish the FED and return to printing debt free money as was the case prior t0 12-23-1913.

    Read The Protocols of Zion.

    • Agree: Kolya Krassotkin
  37. anon[178] • Disclaimer says:
    @Sean

    what is a WEMP?

    according to urban dictionary, it’s got something to do with someone, male, who “bitches out.”

    what does that mean?

    is it the opposite of “bitches in”?

    if WEMP is a key concept in your long comment, good idea if you let readers know WTF (what the fuck) you are talking about.

  38. afdadf says:
    @Anonymous

    Right on cue…the Hasbara troll quickly arrives to justify his subjection over the goy. You see, the goy was already bad…we just helped him take his depravity to its logical conclusion. So, in all actuality, we are liberators of the goy. Furthermore, the goy spread his depravity to other cultures because he’s sick and needs lifelong therapy to atone for his sins, because, you know, racism. The act has worn thin, Hasbara cunt.

  39. Dr. X says:

    Jones is correct in citing Augustine’s argument that people are enslaved by vice, but this idea did not originate with Christianity. It originated with the pagan Greeks, Plato and Aristotle, and Christianity stole quite a bit of its moral philosophy from them. As Nietzsche wrote, “Christianity is Platonism for the masses.” It would have been useful to point this out in the debate with Hexenhammer, who presents himself as a neo-pagan libertarian.

    We don’t really have a “Judeo-Christian tradition,” because Jesus rejected the cornerstone of the Jewish religion, namely, that they are the “Chosen People of God” entitled to kill gentiles to get their earthly Zion. More accurately, we have a Platonic-Christian tradition. Christianity spread first not among Jews, but among Greeks, and the most common terms we use in reference to it — “Christ” and “Bible” — are not derived from Hebrew, but from the Greek “Christos” and “Biblos.”

  40. Onebornfree says: • Website

    Should each individual be free to decide for themselves what is, and is not, “pornographic”,[ whether it be speech, the written word, imagery, or whatever], and then be free to eliminate it from their own life as best they can?

    Of course not!

    Thank god that there are civic minded types such as the righteous Mr. Jones to put us all on the “correct” path to salvation [as defined by himself , presumably] by enforcing his very own standards [via government decree presumably] as to exactly what/which speech, text, or image is “pornographic”, and which is not, and to then [“righteously”] protect us all from ever seeing such filth!

    What a guy! Let’s hear it for Mr Jones 😂

    “The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.” H. L. Mencken

    Regards, onebornfree

    • Replies: @Saggy
  41. niceland says:
    @Futurethirdworlder

    One of the problem with early Icelandic history is it’s written by Christians. Still it’s clear, Christianity was forced on Icelanders by one Olafur Tryggvason, then king of Norway. After trying for years to push Christianity on the stubborn Icelanders, without much luck, he resorted to taking few sons of important Icelandic families hostage in Norway.

    In Althing (parliament) 1000 AD the two factions were on the brink of civil war when a wise influential man set forth a compromise and that was it. Hardly a decision made by free will.

    I did a quick search for the book you recommended and saw this description on Amazon.

    Accomplished historical author James Reston, Jr., presents the enthralling saga of how the Christian kingdoms converted, conquered, and slaughtered their way to dominance in Europe as the year 1000 approached.

    Sounds familiar.

    • Replies: @Jake
    , @Futurethirdworlder
  42. sally says:
    @Amerimutt Golems

    One must understand the church is the enemy to ==>what?what? <=that is the question.. // Please define that what that evokes emotions from the Jew that express themselves a deep flowing inner felt hate<= what is it in the Christian and Catholic religions that conjures from the Jews who live within the Jewish culture the emotion, the chemistry, the neurology, that results in blind sighted hate?

    It is that definition of the object, thing, or event or belief that you so powerfully describe, it is that emotion that rises within the Jewish character it seems to be global, local and singular but it is common to the Jewish humanity almost it seems to rise hate emotion to its highest off the scale level of hate.. what is it? The "rest of the world" has long sought a precise definition, even a clue would help, but a definition might change the world.

    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus
  43. MBII says:

    People need to fuck off with this anti-porn bullshit. I hate Israel but showing porn to Palestinians is the least egregious thing they’ve ever done.

    • Replies: @Horsehead2020
  44. What we should really be concerned about.

    As the Second Amendment conflict heats up across the United States, here’s another “crazy conspiracy theory” that has turned out to be true.

    The United Nations is hiring in New York. What positions are they trying to fill?

    English-speaking DISARMAMENT, DEMOBILIZATION, AND REINTEGRATION OFFICERS.

    This job was posted the day after Christmas. So for all the folks who have been saying “nobody is trying to take your guns” you might want to read this job listing and reconsider your opinion.

    http://www.renegadetribune.com/the-un-is-hiring-english-speaking-disarmament-officers-in-new-york/

  45. There are more people with diminished hearing, impaired hearing, even no hearing at all, out there than some content creators realize. For us, then, the content of videos without subtitles or closed captions is lost to us. (And the You-tube “auto-generated” attempts at closed captions, at least leaves much to be desired, and occasionally gives incomprehensible word-salad.) Please, please, give us text, that we can read.

  46. Dear Mr. Jones!

    Fyi, am a life-long Eastern Catholic and I admire and respect this article which exposed the Jewish weaponization of pornography.

    One point & corresponding question.

    Is evident across America that people are imprisoned for viewing child “kiddie.”

    The You Tube faculty is banning Brother Nathanael’s Real Jew News videos and it has come to my attention that the controversial Daily Stormer web site is subject to unfriendly & unholy fire.🔥

    Do you have any thought as to how outlaw internet producers & distributors of child pornography merrily continue their demoralizing business 👺without accountabilty to both US and a measure of international justice standards?

    Cynical. am assuming some little freaks get busted, but the Moneychanger Kiddie-Porno Lowerarchy* are untouchable.

    Thanks, E. Michael, and Glory to Jesus Christ. Am hoping you can make time & respond to this comment.

    * “Lowerarchy,” a term made famous by C.S. Lewis, “The Screwtape Letters.”

  47. Trinity says:

    Skimming through the comments and I couldn’t help but notice one post talked about “Jewish porn stars” being stable and relatively normal people. ROTFLMAO on that one. The poster brought up an old porn actor from the 80’s and 90’s known in the porn industry as “TT Boy.” Admittedly like a great deal of males I went through a stage in my life where I spent time watching this trash so I am familiar with this TT Boy’s “work.” I believe the little troll known as TT Boy is Hispanic and not Jewish. Anyhow who knows or who cares. I saw an interview with this guy on YouTube and that pervert is far from “stable.” Matter of fact in the interview he tells how women didn’t like to work with him because he was so rough with them. All one has to do is do a Google search for videos about dead porn stars on YT and you will find countless videos showing the number of porn stars who committed suicide, died from AIDS, murdered, etc.

    Think about it folks. These same people that demanded that porn be protected under the First Amendment want to censor political speech that they don’t agree with or speech that inconveniently exposes historical lies. And to all you Christian Zionists out there. WAKE UP. You claim to hate porn, Hollywood “filthy movies,” but yet you all but worship Jews? What is that all about. If this were a bunch of Chinese producing porn and running Hollywood, these Christian Zionist would probably be condemning every Chinese guy from New York to San Francisco.

    Another poster asked why aren’t Jews themselves addicted to porn then. HELLO. What did they find in Epstein’s apartment? Wouldn’t pornographic pictures stored away be considered a porn addiction?

  48. Jake says:
    @Anonymous

    At best, you fail to understand what Jones says, here and elsewhere. You use the old, serpent-like Jewish straw man (the inferior, non-Chosen Race cattle-like goyim were not corrupted by Jews because they were already sinners, which proves Jewish innocence as well as Jewish Chosen Race status) to try to block truth.

    Absolutely, sins by whites are responsible for the horror story we now live. And the ones that are responsible for the most and worst of it are sins of either Judaizing/philo-Semitism or else of trying to use Jews and Jewish money against ‘other’ whites.

    WASP culture from its birth has been guilty of both as a matter of essence. Hence, Anglo-Zionist Empire.

    This is a spiritual war between Christ and Christendom, on the one hand, and anti-Christ on the other. Either you work to rebuild Christendom, or you serve the goals of Satan.

    The Reformation and its fruits serve the cause of anti-Christendom, just like Islam, just like faith in Darwin, just like Marxism and Freudianism and Libertarianism and Sexual Revolution and every other Jewish form of secular messianism.

    Vatican II steered the Catholic Church toward live and let live harmony with the anti-Christendom revolution that was the Reformation, and so Vatican II produces rotten and poisonous fruit that aligns more each year with toleration of anti-Christ evil. Vatican II and the Novus Ordo must be rejected along with rejection of the Reformation and the Judaizing that is inherent in every wing and phase of Protestant rebellion against Christendom.

    Even Mike Jones has yet to see that Road to Damascus light.

  49. The Israelis broadcast pornography because pornography is a weapon in the arsenal of psychological warfare.

    That may well be so, but in that specific case the Jews just wanted to degrade and mock the Palestinians, much as when they spray Palestinian protesters with sewage.

    Deep Throat, The Devil and Miss Jones

    There used to be a website jewdar.com that allowed you to look up Jewish involvement in the movies. When I entered these two movies, after being intrigued by all those articles about Jews being behind the porn industry, the site returned 0% Jewish involvement in these seminal pornographic films that led to greater acceptance and proliferation of the genre. The site was actually set up to celebrate Jewish involvement in Hollywood culture so I don’t know how reliable that results for these films were. And strange that the site is gone considering it wasn’t anti-Jewish and quite useful.

    I suspect that many major Hollywood personalities are involved in porn through proxies. Alex de Renzy, a big name in the golden age of porn, who later reinvented himself as Rex Borsky in 1991 to disseminate the low cost gonzo porn devoid of plot and story line so popular today, could well have fronted for the great Orson Welles and been financed by him to indulge his fantasies. The evidence is circumstantial but it’s there if you dig deep enough.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  50. nsa says:

    Porn a problem? What about a society that practices widespread genital mutilation of their male offspring to demonstrate fealty to a vile cock cutter cult? You will know you have retrieved your country when the savage talmudic practice is outlawed with severe penalties for practitioners………

  51. Jake says:
    @niceland

    Your knowledge of the time is lacking, to say the least.

    Vikings slaughtered their way across Europe and parts of north Africa. They were Germanic pagan sea pirates, just as Arabic Mohammedans were desert pirates. The wars that led to the Christianization of Scandinavian pagans were exactly like, for the same reason as, the wars by Charlemagne against the Continental Saxons and their Germanic allies: to stop endless wars of pirating and rape against Christian peoples. When Germanic pagans were militarily defeated, and only when they were militarily defeated, they converted, and then, and only then, did they begin to produce culture that was not evil.

    There is the lesson that must be relearned, which is opposite your meaning.

    So do you write from the vantage or Jew? Mohammedan? Pagan? Atheist? Protestant?

  52. @Jeff Stryker

    Jeff,

    I’d say Jewish women are over-represented as actresses in porn relative to the general population or in regular movies, media, etc. Many even pretend that they are white with the use of fake stage names.

  53. Gay porn seems becoming more mainstream, whilst normal porn is less so. Durdens seem to have an alliance with Skype’s in hostile elite.

  54. Al Liguori says: • Website
    @Jeff Stryker

    It is not that the goyim are more susceptible; it is that the Synagogue of Satan has long wallowed in the filth enshrined in their “holy” books and have no further to fall.

    http://judaism.is/perversion.html

  55. @niceland

    As the description suggests the book isn’t a jingoistic or white washed view of how Christianity came to dominate Europe. The point remains that the Icelandic people chose to become Christian and, the point you failed to address, once they did they outlawed the pagan tradition of infanticide.

    • Replies: @niceland
  56. @Jake

    That’s correct and it’s important to remember that one of the reasons they were defeated militarily is because pagans lacked the unity that Christianity created among the faithful. The same wat the native Americans were defeated. Whites dividing themselves into the faithful, atheistic and these neopagan larpers only serves to disunite us and make us weaker than our mutual non European foes.

  57. anonymous[103] • Disclaimer says:

    Not to worry, marijuana is becoming legal all over. Instead of giving people jobs, environments friendly to family formation, worthwhile schools, entertainment that isn’t pornographic, just give them drugs and more drugs. When the weed gets to be old hat then we’ll get a next generation of other drugs legalized. More stupefied people is what’s needed.

  58. @Tim Stevens

    One can agree with Mr. Jones’ argument, but still acknowledge that Styx got the better of him in their debate. I’ve observed that Jones tends to get quite belligerant when people disagree with him, and Styx, remaining calm throughout, did make Jones out to be a cantankerous old man.

    • Replies: @Cranberries
  59. Mulegino1 says:

    Obviously, vice is not confined to the Jews, nor did it begin with them.

    But it would be difficult to think of a people that has thrived, as the Jews do, when vice and corruption consume a nation. There is a reason that the Jews were and are so heavily involved in the dope trade, prostitution, pornography, subversion, criminal usury and general societal and cultural corruption. It is because the archetypal Jew has no real moral sense or transcendent world view. His chief social motivation, i.e., “what is good for the Jews”, is profit and causing as much harm to his gentile host-population as is possible without, of course, bringing down the wrath of his non-kosher neighbors. History has shown this to be a difficult juggling act, though, as even the most obtuse of the gentiles eventually become Jew wise.

    The Talmudic injunction to “kill the best of the gentiles” finds in pornography its perfect methodology, as it necessarily implies elevating the worst of them to power and celebrity. This, along with high profitability makes the diffusion of pornography an ideal Jewish weapon. (The porn industry also is ancillary to the great Hollywood white slavery operation, serving as kind of a reservoir of cheap and readily available “talent.”)

    Codreanu was right. The Jews do thrive in the swamp of our sins.

    • Replies: @Achilles Wannabe
  60. niceland says:
    @romar

    I didn’t say that, I believe none of it. I am atheist. Still religions are not equally pathetic.

    Norse paganism is at times quite funny and makes entertaining bed time stories for children. Christianity is profoundly boring and much of it is way to grotesque for children.

    I could be wrong but I don’t recall Norse paganism calling for the destruction of nonbelievers. The gods have amusing human attributes and their stories echo the human condition and provide important lessons. Contrast that to the vindictive, vengeful, hate spewing, mass murdering war king (god) of the Old Testament. The foundation for Christianity.

    Part of Norse Paganism is the old Norse philosophy seen in Havamal poems. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H%C3%A1vam%C3%A1l

    With some effort I can read the original text and much of it is timeless classic. Teaching morality and wise behavior. The founding fathers of America could have used it as guidance for the spirit of free and proud people. In my opinion it’s much better than anything Christianity has to offer, even with version 2.0 the new testament.

    But we have all read Ron Unz American Pravda series, bringing home the age old wisdom – in war, truth is the first victim, and also: The winner writes history.

    So today you guys celebrate Christian morality and truly believe it’s the foundation for civilization. I beg to differ.

  61. FvS says:
    @Anonymous

    Once you correct for white IQ to exclude Jews, which artificially raises white IQ, gentile whites can be shown to be closer to Mexicans in their disposition.

    This is bait, right?

  62. FvS says:
    @Jeff Stryker

    So why are Gentiles more susceptible than Jews themselves?

    Are they in America? I see no reason to believe this. Jews are more likely to be homosexual and date blacks than whites. Famous Jews are always getting in trouble for all kinds of sexual perversion. No, Jews walk the walk. The non-Orthodox just want the goyim to be as degenerate as they are. And as for Israel…
    https://www.timesofisrael.com/ministers-approve-bill-to-block-internet-porn/

  63. RVBlake says:
    @Amon

    Was this a Sunday School class or a regular Catholic school class?

    • Replies: @Amon
  64. Sean says:
    @Jeff Stryker

    TT Boy is not Jewish, and he is extremely reckless, enjoying hobbies like parachuting (Alex Torres was the pro porn fellow who made a porn vid while skydiving). TT Boy was sent for counselling about his Neanderthal tendencies under threat of being blacklisted. Jenna Jameson said she felt like her insides were coming out in s scene with TT Boy.

    Anyway Jews are not that common as performers in porn, nothing like the 70’s. and 80s and that was largely an illusion caused by Gotti and his minions preventing porn being made in NYC except what they commissioned. Roger Caine the Jewish seventies porn performer broke his leg skydiving. Lea De Mae the Czech porno girl was into skidiving, a head injury she suffered skydiving was supposed to be responsible for her dying of brain cancer at 27 years old. Porn people are sensation seekers. That is why they are taking drugs and drinking so often

    It would be the Jewish director Micheal Winner who made those choices, Charles Bronson was not a star before that film. Bronson’s character in Death Wish never finds the men who murdered his wife and daughter, he kills random muggers and several of them are black, a couple of blacks get shot in the back and one black kid who looks mid teens gets finished off as he lies helpless.

    • Replies: @Jeff Stryker
  65. @nsa

    And Styx (born Tarl Warwick, age 31) agrees with you. He has addressed his opposition to this disgusting ancient rite on at least a few occasions. So has Stefen Molyneaux, in several well-done videos.

    Where is Jones on this? In spite of his avowed Catholic faith (traditionally they opposed Jews on this vile practice), I haven’t heard him mention it once. On his Culture Wars Facebook page, I asked him for his opinion on male circumcision, and received no reply. Now, the Pope is fine with it, and it is performed in Catholic hospitals – don’t want to be accused of anti-Semitism, you see.

  66. niceland says:
    @Futurethirdworlder

    Facing their destruction they became Christians – is the correct description.

    And yes, they outlawed the pagan tradition of infanticide. What they got instead was upheaval to the power structure, later leading to the bloodiest era in Icelandic history leading to submission to the king of Norway in 1262. What followed was hell on earth for centuries. What little profit the economy could produce was siphoned out of the economy abroad. Extreme hunger and famine followed. Countless young girls drowned in Thingvellir for being pregnant out of wedlock. Great wealth was transferred to the church, to bishops and priests from the starving peasants who basically lived in holes in the ground.

    The ruling class in perfect harmony with the church owned and controlled everything and the rest of the population were de-facto salves – that is the 99%

    It could have been equally as bad under Norse paganism. Or worse. It’s impossible to tell. But digging into the Icelandic history it’s really difficult to see the positive side of Christianity or the benefit of it’s morality.

    Christianity is still the official ‘state religion’ in Iceland and it’s dying. This is no coincidence. Not even the priests believe or respect it. Most of us never did.

  67. @nsa

    You make a very valid point. Telling the judge sentencing you for cruelty that you mutilated your puppy’s dick because your deity commanded you to would win you, at best, confinement to a state mental hospital, instead of prison. Yet, because an act of barbarity goes back millenia, we allow it to be inflicted on infants but a few days old. That sort of genital mutilation must surely scramble an infant’s undeveloped brain in unknown ways and in time lead to mental illness.

  68. niceland says:
    @Jake

    The U.S. Empire is spreading peace, democracy and human rights across the globe.

    It’s the same story as told by the Christian victors ages ago.

    Believe what you will.

    • Replies: @Jake
    , @Post
  69. sally says:

    Chuck Orloski at 46 <= The Internet facilitates the global Jewish culture.

    Re: the article by E. Michael Jones. They [the Jews] are trying to weaken the dominant culture in America?

    This statement makes me think the Jew wakes up each morning and ask him/her self: what can I do to make Jewish "the dominate culture" in America? Each waking day reveals itself as a plot to exterminate non Jewish culture?

    I don't think so, at least not the average every day Jew. However Jewish bankers and their corporate right arms might wake to a new plot each day, that is the nature of banksterism and corporate monopoly-ism? Why because bankster wealth and monopoly power accommodate the global binary Jewish culture. The Jewish culture is administered from the wealth at the top, but its infecting corruption is endemic, taught and learned as a growing up experience <= its the environment that counts. The environment in which the culture exists is nearly always painted with the Jewish culture.

    Culture is acquired as part of the birth to death experience; the competition to control that experience is what this is all about. Subscription is not necessary, racially qualifying genetics is. Its corruptible because corruption, deceit are principles often injected into non Jewish cultures. Amorality is the pre_attack softening up process, that make amenable those from the other cultures, who happen into the Jewish way. That injected, taught and sought-after condition is to impose immorality as a condition of doing business. Its a process, always working in the background, that converts protected moral cultures into defenseless masses of amoral humanity.

    The lesser Jews are feudal servants to banksters: Lords they are to the Goya. <= this is the binary nature of the Jewish Culture. The Jewish Culture is not really culture its economic. Profits in the Jewish economy, come from wage enslavement, low cost high yield opportunity. . Yes the Jewish economy is global, transportable, mobile and nearly universally the same, yes it is often defended by those who are its victim but in contrast to the global nearly uniform Jewish culture, the other cultures operate as local economies.

    Armies of culture destructors are roving your neighborhood, seeking to force not just you, but your entire neighborhood to abandon your culture in favor of the Jewish Global Culture (JGC). It may be a better culture but unless you possess the proper genetic structure, you need not apply.

    One very good example of how foreign cultures might take control of America can be found by examining Article II, Section 1, paragraph 2.. and amendment XII of the USA Constitution; both these paragraphs sideline Democracy, because they transfer the right of the USA governed to elect their own president and vice presidentto the Electoral College.. No Voting Citizen of the USA, not actually a member of the electoral College, can caste votes that count for who shall be the next President or the Next Vice President.

    Imagine what might happen if the members of the electoral college were bankers, corporate yes men, a mafia, a criminal enterprise, a group of Christians, a group of ten year olds, a group of Russians or whatever. What could stop them from electing whomever they wished, and using those they elected to take over the government that governs Americans? I am not saying Jewish power has control of the election of the President and Vice President of the USA, I am saying the system that elects the president and VP (the electoral college) is not protected from that possibility and that the electoral college type thing is a giant security hole that could easily allow any outsider to take America by merely voting into office a taker.

  70. @follyofwar

    Jones’ performance was embarrassingly bad. This is because Jones’ conclusions, right or wrong, are unsupported by his argument. He was unable to provide any support for his central premise: that porn “addiction” is widespread and harmful. Styx made a very reasonable request: since Jones is arguing in favor of throwing people in jail for filming and distributing themselves having consensual sex, Jones should be able to make a case for why exactly porn is such a problem (what are the effects of the so-called addiction?). Are the effects of habitual porn consumption worse than those of habitual sugar consumption? If not, then why would we ban porn and not junk food? Because people like E Michael Jones are more disgusted by porn than obesity?

    Jones reaction to having his premise questioned was basically to angrily shout his emotions. His only logical point was something about 60 million google searches for “porn addiction” or something similar. OK Michael, how many Google searches are there for “Trump should be impeached”? How about “there is no God”? Jones is a classic moralistic blowhard, he’s consumed by his own sense of disgust and can’t make an objective case for those who don’t share his biases.

    • Agree: niceland, follyofwar
  71. @Sean

    Bronson was a star long before he met Winner. He was in the Great Escape with Steve McQueen. He chose directors by the time he met Winner.

    Bronson discovered Goldblum in a play he liked and he appeared as a mugger not only in Death Wish but St. Ives. Of course he is not supposed to be implicitly Jewish in Death Wish, he is playing a redneck (Whose fellow gang member sprays a swastika on the hallway wall).

    Jewish women probably are no longer as prevalent in porn now as the seventies (If you watch films like Debbie Does Dallas there are some seriously homely JAPS in them who look like Debra Winger on heroin) because Jewish women no longer have an economic incentive to appear in porn.

  72. Amon says:
    @RVBlake

    Sunday school class with a focus on the confirmation practice, it was not a Catholic church class by the way but the national protestant church in charge of it.

    Basically we had to show in the winter around 5AM to sit in total silence while the priest spoke, at some point doing the class the child fell asleep and the teacher decided to wake him up by kicking his table as hard as he could but missed and kicked the student instead. Even if he had it the table it still not the way to behave, especially not as a priest.

    He never apologized or checked if the student was okay, but just yelled that he was there to learn and not sleep before continuing his lesson. We never saw that student again, something I fully understand since that sight made me scared of returning, but I did return.

    But whatever good will I had towards the church vanished because they clearly did something that made sure the priest was never punished for his action nor was any disciplinary action taken as the classes continued with the same priest until we took our confirmation vows.

    As for why I call it a scam, the Church works hand in hand with the state to round up 5 billion in taxes per year from the taxpayers, on top of this they collect around a billion in donations from private citizens and corporations and they still claim they don’t get enough cash to pay for their churches and luxury mansions even when they enjoy the privilege of being tax exempt.

    As an added bonus, they will only give you a Christian burial if you are a member of the church and pay the church tax for your entire life. And if you find yourself so poor right before you die that you have opt out to put food on your table or pay for your medication, they will tell you that you can’t be buried by them unless you pay the full price.

    Yes, even as a life long member paying up to a million in tax and donations it still doesn’t free you from having to pay for your own funeral when the times comes.

    I kind of figured that paying your whole life at least granted you a funeral for free, but nope. Gotta keep the flow of cash into the church coffers going for as long as possible.

  73. A little porn, as any vice is ok.

    Presenting this as either porn vs absolute Catholic (or other religion) obedience does more harm as soon as one becomes aware of the Renaissance and then leaves their faith passionately.

    Much religious participation or faith is instead about tradition (food, dress, music, neighborhoods) instead of actually believing in the dogma.

    Anything can be used as a strategic tool. The way to defeat the jewish power is to 1. Don’t marry too often in the tribe. 2. Educate your offspring – multiple languages, travel, music.

  74. 4justice says:
    @Cranberries

    Jones is biased, but not more than Styx. Styx has a very anti-religious and anti-Christian perspective. There is no such thing as objective, just various degrees of dishonesty and/or self-delusion. Styx was more clever at evading questions he didn’t like, but it isn’t an honest or productive way to use a discussion to get to a better understanding. Styx’s defensiveness made him look morally and intellectually weak. At least that is my biased opinion.

    It would always be better to have published sociological research demonstrating a claim, but lesser forms of inquiry are not automatically worthless – frequency of internet searches is one such piece of lesser evidence, but Jones also pointed out people sharing their personal experiences, second hand reports of priests who would likely hear a lot more of that kind of soul searching admission since many people are ashamed of their use of porn, and the fact that a self-help movement was started by people who believe that they have been harmed by the consumption of porn and the practice of masturbation. Is this self-help movement a psyop? Are youtubers advocating liberating yourself from porn paid agents? Jones made his case on more than just internet searches. Styx was not interested in addressing this reality for many young people. He even was so cheap and hypocritical as to judge Jones for hanging out with the wrong crowd if he has people coming up to him and admitting porn addiction. Sure, Styx exudes confidence, but if you actually try to follow the logic, you see that his reasoning is very weak. Jones 1, Styx 0.

  75. So porn isn’t really about money after all. It’s about control. The libertarians who loudly proclaim their support of freedom are really interested in promoting addiction because addiction is a form of control which is congenial to the Jewish oligarchs who fund think tanks like the Cato Institute.

    The moral is clear: anyone who defends pornography is either what Lenin called a “useful idiot” or what I call a Kochsucker, which is to say, a “conservative” agent of the oligarchs, like Charlie Kirk, whose mission is to control and destroy the very people he claims to liberate. Logos is rising. We now know that sexual liberation is a form of control. Consciousness is not reversible. We now have empirical proof that St. Augustine was right when he pointed out that a man has as many masters as he has vices.

    Trump and the evil and immoral Republican Party must be electorally obliterated and their putrid rancidity must be politically removed from any and all European Christian nations.

    Trump and the Republican Party are saying nothing about DISTRACTIONARY PORNO produced by anti-White globalized Jews and anti-Christian globalized Jews in JOG — JEWS ORGANIZED GLOBALLY.

    Charlie Kirk is a mere whoreboy puppet who is paid by his Jew masters to lead young White Americans to wreck and ruin. Charlie Kirk and that disgusting and treasonous politician whore puke from Houston, Dan Crenshaw, are evil scum who sell out the USA for shekels and scraps from evil and immoral Jew billionaire scum.

    Trump is a complete and total whore for the evil nation-wreckers in JOG — JEWS ORGANIZED GLOBALLY. The Republican Party is a rancid and putrid collection of treasonous whore politicians who do the bidding of Jew billionaires such as Shelly Adelson and Paul Singer and Les Wexner and Seth Klarman and Bernie Marcus and Norman Braman and others.

    Young White Core Americans must defeat the evil and rancid Trump and they must completely and totally destroy the putrid Republican Party. EVIL is the Trump administration and EVIL is the vile scum in the Republican Party. Stop watching that damn porn and start destroying that evil group of scum in the Republican Party.

    General George Washington and Andrew Jackson were not Catholics, thank God, and they are our spiritual guides on matters of a political nature. Washington was Anglo-Norman and Jackson was Scotch-Irish and they weren’t some damn ethnic Catholic sonofabitches thinking they have re-invented the wheel like some of the TRAD CATHOLIC FRAUDS who presume to speak for the historic American nation.

    Brawls there will be and brawls there must be, to determine who is going to crush the evil and immoral JEW/WASP ruling class of the American Empire and until such time as I see Mel Gibson type Catholics sending Pope Tango straight to Hell then I ain’t listening to them no how!

    I thought a “Both Sides The Tweed” truce could prevail between the historic American nation old stockers and the Johnny-Come-Lately ethnic Catholic bastards, but these arrogant E Michael Jones types want all the glory for themselves. Bull-sheetrock! The winner of the blood brawl between the ethnic Catholic overeducated boob types such as E Michael Jones and the Anglo-Celts and Anglo-Normans and Anglo-Saxons will not be the Catholics!

    The victor of that brawl must begin mass expulsions of all members of the JEW/WASP ruling class and the immediate dislodgement of the current owners of all aspects of the mass electronic media and all other media. Jews must not be allowed to own or control any media in any European Christian nation, and the WASPs who own the rest must be financially liquidated and removed from the USA as a lesson to the others.

    The European Christian people of the historic American nation who got to this land by wooden ships under sail power and formed the nation must not lose to these Catholic ethnic types who got to a nation already formed. Who the Hell does this ranting baby boomer dope E Michael Jones think he is? I have never seen such Catholic haughty arrogance so brashly displayed as it is done by this damn Jones fellow!

    E Michael Jones has no English blood whatsoever!

    I like E Michael Jones a lot better when he is attacking the evil and immoral scum in JOG — JEWS ORGANIZED GLOBALLY — rather than making nasty cracks about the great Sam Francis!

    Give ‘Em Hell, E Michael Jones, Just Let Sam Francis Alone!

    Ban The Porno!

    Ban JOG — Jews Organized Globally!

    Dislodge The Jew JOG elements from ownership of the mass media!

    Ban Trump and the Republican Party — first challenge them to debates, and if they refuse, BAN THEM!

    Immediate Student Loan Debt Repudiation and payback of all student loan debt ever paid plus 6 percent a year in interest on all debt ever paid.

    Immediate federal funds rate to 20 percent to pop the asset bubbles in stocks, bonds and real estate!

    IMMIGRATION MORATORIUM NOW!

    DEPORT ALL ILLEGAL ALIEN INVADERS NOW!

    REMOVE ALL THE FOREIGNERS NOW!

    Financially Liquidate All Billionaires And Forcibly Exile Them Into Sub-Saharan Africa Now!

    Free Beer Monday!

    Get the Population of the USA back down to 220 million like it was in 1978 and the young White guys who give up porn and their chased down gals will be able to enjoy AFFORDABLE FAMILY FORMATION like you ain’t never seen before!

    Bring on the real estate implosion now! 20 percent federal funds rate and a massive foreigner removal policy will make housing costs go down and bring on a wonderful bit of AFFORDABLE FAMILY FORMATION.

    E Michael Jones on porn and young people and JOG — JEWS ORGANIZED GLOBALLY — and bankers and tall bankers and tall central banker shysters like Volcker and more of this Catholic blood and soil stuff. You Catholics are operating in a USA that was colonized, settled and formed by English Protestants — and don’t you Catholic twats forget it!

    God Bless E Michael Jones — especially when he isn’t picking at Sam Francis!

    • Replies: @Achilles Wannabe
  76. MFV says:

    Porn is funded through trickledown cash.

    The modern moneymaker is chatroom video, in which a man or woman sits in front of a webcam half-naked waiting to be asked into a private session. Once asked, the private session becomes video sex acts for cash, concocted by the watcher and acted out by the watched, of which the holding company takes a percentage to make typical baseline porno videos to lure you to the chatroom.

    If you want to fight porn, realize it’s just a racket for the Jews and hate it from that direction. All your fapping made a Jew laugh his balls off. You’ve been had, so hate back with impunity and TAKE THE TIME TO TELL SOMEONE ELSE TO JOIN YOUR BOYCOTT. Starve the entire industry without whipping out bibles or making pretentious little speeches. Just don’t look at it anymore.

    If you need to be degenerate, go on dates. Go to church as a counterbalance. You’ll be okay. Don’t do this without Naming The Jew or you’ll lose focus.

    I did it. It works.

  77. There are three effective ways to oppose porn. Calling it addictive isn’t one of them. Coffee is addictive. Sugar is addictive. Alcohol and tobacco are addictive. Pop music is addictive. While certain highly addictive and destructive drugs are banned — such as meth — , most addictive products are not. Some are available to all. Like soda pop and ice cream. Some are regulated, like alcohol and tobacco. But addictive-ness alone doesn’t warrant banning.

    So, what can be done about hardcore pornography?

    1. The only effective call for outright ban is to call it a form of prostitution, or electronic-prostitution. Once Jews lost control of prostitution in the streets, they regained control via electronica. After all, what is hardcore porn but sex-for-money done before the camera? As prostitution is illegal, one could argue pornography should also be illegal. But then, of course, there are libertarians who call for legalization of prostitution.

    2. If not outright ban, the other option is to force the internet to make pornography available to adults. Prior to the internet, this could be enforced as only adults could purchase pornography. But the internet made it easily available to all. Now, it is illegal to make porn available to minors, but that is precisely what the internet does. I think Israel has such a rule. So, push laws that harshly penalize any site that provides porn easily to all. If the internet can shut down pedo-stuff, this can be done with porn as well. It would only be enforcing the law. This is fair as the internet is now more ubiquitous than TV and Radio combined. If TV and Radio can be regulated, so can the internet. And this is not a free speech issue as porn is not speech. One might call it an expression, but even as such, it is a form of prostitution(in which case it should be banned) or a form of obscenity, in which case it should proscribed so that kids have no excess.

    3. The third option would be cultural and political than legal. And it is what E Michael Jones has done rather effectively. It is to shame the Jews as the main purveyors of porn. But it’s worse than that. Jews now use porn as Race War against whites. When I was working in the video shop in the 90s, one of the major transformations I noticed was that porn was getting more ‘interracial’, which is invariably negro men doing white women. And now, such has become a meme all over the internet in the age of twerk. Also, as Paglia said, pornography actually leads the way as it is most uninhibited. Following trends in porn, pop music has become all about interracism. And now, all major white actresses feel obligated and willing to do roles where their partners are black men. Look at all those BBC shows and British TV.
    Blacks are a natural threat to the white race. As black men are more muscular, stronger-voiced, and bigger-donged, they can easily destroy white manhood like when Jack Johnson beat up white guys and humped tons of white women. So, the natural response of white men should be something like Jimmy Crow. But white men have been cucked and white women have been jungle-fevered, and of course, this process was under way before ‘interracial’ porn. It was in sports and even Elvis Presley was a white guy making white women go crazy by acting like a negro. Because of the Negro threat, white men must unite and fight to keep their land, culture, and womenfolk, but they’ve been vilified and castrated. And this finally reached its apotheosis in Jewish-controlled porn that says white women exist to be sexually colonized by black men. When a people are face with a natural threat, they must unite and push back. This is why Jimmy Crow was as just as unjust. It was unjust in keeping blacks down, but it was just in keeping the stronger tougher blacks who, if allowed to run free, will reduce white men into cucky white boys and take white women. Jews understood the nature of white male resistance and sought to undermine it, and they needed black power. Without blacks, Jews can beat whites at mind-games but not at body-games. When geeks win, they win the argument and make more money but don’t necessarily win the pride of manhood. After all, who respects the manhood of Jewish nerds, geeks, and jerks? Alan Dershowitz and Woody Allen never impressed anyone as MEN. Pride of manhood goes to the tough guy. And this is where Jews found blacks useful. Blacks became proxy bodies of Jewish power. Jewish-controlled Blacks beat up white guys in sports, and now they hump white women, and white guys are reduced to cucks. This truth must be mentioned over and over.

    The final option may be for white guys to go into the porn industry and make videos about Jewish women rejecting Jewish men and getting it on with Arab, Palestinian, Iranian, and Russian men. And black men. Make these videos and drop them all over Israel. Tell Jewish women that Jewish men are gimps and that Arab men are the Real Men and that Jewish wombs must be colonized by Abdul.

    • Replies: @Trinity
    , @anonymous
  78. T-Dawg says:
    @nsa

    The kicker is that the way circumcision is done in American hospitals is not the circumcision of the Old Testament; it’s a radically different procedure. In any case, the Catholic Church is against routine circumcision;: Catholic View of Circumcision

  79. VICB3 says:
    @Tim Stevens

    Brilliant? This guy is just another in a long line of Anthony Comstock wanna-be’s with a fear of his own cravings, a “World Improver” whose rigid views render him unable to the world through anything other than his fevered obsessions.

    Not once in this screed does this aspiring ayatollah ever suggest that if one doesn’t like porn, then one need simply to not look at it. Rather, he shrilly insists, using some very tortured logic that lumps in Catholics, Jews, et al, that it be banned completely and, by extension, that you ought to be punished for even looking at it.

    What does he think somebody is going to do if they see it? This?:

    For that matter, giving him any sort of traction will probably lead us all back to something like this:

    https://picclick.com/1973-Vol-1-35-National-Lampoon-Famous-Suntan-202865110786.html#&gid=1&pid=1

    And if that’s not slavery, then I don’t know what is.

    Just a thought.

    VicB3

  80. Trinity says:

    Skimming the comments again and I keep noticing people talking about this “Styx” character. Is this the same douchebag that used to have a channel on YT talking about Charles Manson? haha. Great guy to follow there. Pfffft. GET REAL.

  81. Poco says:
    @Anonymous

    High IQ people don’t watch porn, bahahahaha. Jews aren’t as susceptible to vice, bahahahahaha. Jews aren’t also harmed by porn bahahahahahaha. Better get a check your own IQ, or is it a high jewish one? Bahahahahahahaha.

    • Replies: @Trinity
  82. Dumbo says:
    @Cranberries

    If not, then why would we ban porn and not junk food? Because people like E Michael Jones are more disgusted by porn than obesity?

    I have to say I was surprised at the amount of defense of porn here, but then again, maybe I shouldn’t be, as I suppose most people in the comment section are males and single males at that.

    Here there’s an article about the negative effects of pornography on the brain:

    https://amgreatness.com/2019/12/15/a-science-based-case-for-ending-the-porn-epidemic/

    Personally, I don’t know, it’s been a few years since I don’t watch any porn, and I really think it’s been good for me, but maybe it’s not the same for others. It seems to me that porn, even if it doesn’t cause any health problems, can be a big waste of time and energy. Junk food is also bad, all vices (lust, gluttony, etc) are bad, and porn isn’t even the worst one, but it’s not good either.

    Of course, the real problem is that currently many males do not have access to females in the form of girlfriends or wives for many reasons (economic, social, dating market, etc), so what’s left is either hook up, or porn or prostitution. Porn is the easier alternative.

    Another thing about porn is that it is the penultimate stage of decoupling sex from its natural function of procreation, which started with the pill, condom, abortion, etc. Sex became about pleasure without reproduction or even commitment with someone but then, of course it is not so easy for males to obtain sex, so porn came in as a substitute, and further separated sex from nature, because now you even separate the sexual pleasure from the actual sex, as porn is just a simulation of sex, or not even that, is watching other people have sex and getting excited by proxy.

    The cycle will be complete when sex-bots substitute women in sexual acts, and this should happen in the next decades. It’s going to be interesting to see what happens then.

    • Replies: @AnonStarter
  83. Trinity says:
    @Poco

    ROTFL as well. All those Jews and their high IQs. Oy vey. Yeah and Einstein and Sigmund Fraud were some of those high IQ Jews who more than likely were porn addicts as well. We know that both of these elite IQ frauds were perverted. I don’t know who said it but it is so true. THESE PEOPLE created the Academy Wards so they could pat each other on the back and talk about how great they are, the hubris of these people is unbelievable and downright hilarious.

    • Agree: Poco
    • Replies: @tomo
  84. @Sean

    you are mistaken:

    Cecile B. DeMille’s mother was

    Beatrice Samuels, a Jewess. Hence:

    Cecile B. was in fact a Jew.

  85. It’s sad to see people defending porn.

    Porn is degenerate shit.

    Porn destroys love, devalues women, removes male confidence.

    Porn is anti-family/anti-God.

    Porn is a form of prostitution.

    I would ban porn as it has nothing to do with “free speech.”

    Porn is yet another form of jewing, and the goal is to weaken white men.

    • Agree: Desert Fox
  86. tomo says:
    @J.W.

    Well I know at least a hundred Jews and most of the comments I see here are consistent with my experience with Jews mostly in the US but also UK and beyond

  87. tomo says:
    @Trinity

    I think you are right most of the gay people I have met in the US are Jews (and most hate or fear their selfish,totalitarian and manipulative un-motherly mothers).
    One of my jewish friends from the US (son of one of the most famous men in the world) told me the first time he ever had sex was with his cousin

    I think the quote you mention is from this book

  88. Jake says:
    @niceland

    The US Empire is the Anglo-Zionist Empire. It is the empire of the Protestantism you claim was great for Germanic peoples. It is the empire overseeing the rebirth of full blown paganism among European peoples.

    If the US Empire is evil, then it proves my point and shows you to be at best ignorant of both what you promote and what you condemn.

    Have you read Njalssaga? The moral meaning is clear: Germanic paganism meant that even in a land free from foreign raiders, life was about a serious of never-ending murders and rapes. The only answer was Christianity – that is the reason the end of the saga stresses the defeat of the last huge Viking navy in Dublin harbor. That defeat meant the Vikings could never recover.

    Until they were Christianized, Vikings were savages almost as violent as today’s blacks and Mohammedans. The author of the best Icelandic saga knew that.

    • Agree: Fuerchtegott
    • Replies: @niceland
  89. beepbeep says:
    @Jeff Stryker

    Jewish families support their children when they engage in race mixing more then White families do, that is why you won’t see Jewish women with black children at a welfare office.

    In another generation, Jewish people in America are done, completely, totally extinct. The young are fleeing the orthodox, and the more moderate/conservative/liberal Jewish people, are intermixing with blacks, hispanics and asians.

    All the poison they poured on Whites, has destroyed them utterly.

    In the area I lived in, there used to be a sizable Jewish minority(they where moderate/conservative, no orthodox or other weird sects). Now after diversity has set in? The few smart Jewish people fled(aside for those that naturally gravitated away after college), the rest? You will usually see them with a black partner, or something like that.

    • Replies: @Robert Dolan
    , @Agonistes
  90. anonymous[191] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jeff Stryker

    I think you’re living in a fantasy land if you think that Jews are immune to pornography. They’re addicted to it big time, but they don’t just consume the “free” stuff, they have the means to actually purchase the real thing and destroy countless lives in the process through white slave traffic. When you live in the world of the jews and everyone is living lives like that, you don’t think it’s abnormal, you think it’s normal. People on the outside look weird, repressed and uptight.

  91. @beepbeep

    Nonsense.

    Jewish groups spend millions to convince their young to date and marry in the group.

    If they marry outgroup they are banned from both the family and the synagogue.

    Some secular jews marry out but they are not the breeders anyway.

    The Orthodox do NOT marry out and they are the breeding arm of the Jews.

    Claims that the jews are “disappearing” have been going on for many years, and I suspect it’s just another ploy to invoke victim status so the dumb goys will let down their guard.

  92. @Jake

    Most evangelicals are located in OK, TX, TN , LA, KS and other conservative states and those states have a voracious appetite for porn for they watch that smut more than any other group in the US.

  93. Trinity says:
    @Priss Factor

    Jack Johnson was beaten by Jess Willard and Willard will never be mistaken as an all time great fighter. Sure, Johnson was 38 years old and past it, but Johnson himself also feasted on an old and retired Jim Jeffries. Jeffries had been retired for 5 years and had lost 100lbs before his fight with Jack Johnson. The elevation of Jack Johnson as some superhuman boxer is PURE MYTH. Can you imagine the heavyweight champion of today defending his title against a middleweight? Johnson won the title from little Tommy Burns, Burns was the shortest heavyweight champion of all time at 5’7 1/2″ tall. One of Johnson’s most notable opponents was the black fighter, Sam Langford, all 5’7″ 165lbs of him, while Johnson was about 6’1″ and about 200lbs give or take a couple of pounds. Back to Willard, people have been taught that Johnson threw the fight. TOTAL BS. Willard had great stamina and was strong as an ox if nothing else. An old Johnson was simply worn down by the heat and a younger, stronger and much bigger fighter. Black men more muscular, more stronger voiced, and a bigger penis?? NOPE. Another MYTH. Black men can run faster, no doubt about that one but the saying that white men can’t jump is total bs. Some of the best vertical leaps and broad jumps are done by Olympic weightlifters, many of whom are White or Asian. Some Olympic weightlifters have produced vertical leaps that would shame the average NBA or NFL player.

    • Replies: @Jake
  94. anonymous[191] • Disclaimer says:
    @Priss Factor

    “Blacks are a natural threat to the white race. As black men are more muscular, stronger-voiced, and bigger-donged, they can easily destroy white manhood like when Jack Johnson beat up white guys and humped tons of white women.”

    Looking at that quote makes me think that everything you know about black men comes from pornography and sports. As for Jack Johnson, he was a black boxer who didn’t last long and the white women who he “humped” were drug addicts and prostitutes.

    I will agree with you as to your statement saying that “blacks are a natural threat to the white race.” They are only a threat if we allow them to become a threat, they were easily controlled in the past and if we get our act together, they can easily be controlled today.

  95. @J.W.

    Hasbara. I have known PLENTY of Jews – colleagues, friends, girlfriends, even a wife. Allowing for
    the exceptions to any generalization, what I read on this site resonates. That is why I come here. and to Occidental Review. I am a recovering Semophile

  96. Exile says:

    I’ve strongly criticized EMJ regarding racial vs. religious identity here. Because I’m White, let me praise him for this piece.

    Porn is a novel, unnatural and adverse environmental stress on the human psyche – our spirituality, morality and emotions, as well as reason.

    Some of us may be resistant to the worst of its dehumanizing, materialistic and Procrustean temptations, but it makes none of us better in any way.

    Porn that does not kill us may make us stronger, but only in the same sense that taking poison might make us more resistant if it doesn’t kill us.

    We don’t need to take poison.

    Limiting your exposure to poison is a better strategy than developing immunity where the choice remains.

    We have the choice. Reject the poison, reject the poisoners. Self-mutilation is not empowering.

    Those who seek to convince us that needlessly confronting insanity makes us anything but fools should be sent back.

  97. Post says:
    @niceland

    The US is at most post-Christian.

  98. @niceland

    Bigger question is why Christianity is obsessed with sex

    That is A bigger question. This is not to say Jones hasn’t pinpointed the underside of the sexual revolution – its uses for the people who rule us and particularly The Jews. I congratulate him for that. We have for too long mistaken degeneracy for liberation. But for those of us who know we have but one life to live, a little natural distraction is in order when we are not working and raising families. Reading your comment I ask myself if all pornography has to be the swill that Jews push? Isn’t porno Greek for simply sex? Why IS Christianity so obsessed with sex?

  99. Anon[398] • Disclaimer says:

    A world free of Jews and porn?

    If you make me choose, this white nationalist chooses porn all day long, and the Jew.

    • Replies: @Robert Dolan
  100. @Dr. X

    Grace builds upon nature. The Catholic Church did not steal anything but, for instance, St Thomas Aquinas kept what was good in Aristotle and built upon it via the Divine Revelation the greeks lacked.

    Men forget that the pagans were correct when it came to the good in Fortitude, Temperance, Prudence, and Justice but that was insufficient because it lacked Faith, Hope, and Charity.

  101. Anonymous[797] • Disclaimer says:
    @Cranberries

    I have a bias against looking at close ups of feces coming out of a-holes. It disgusts me greatly. You make it sound like it’s normal not to be disgusted by some things.

    Some porno is almost as bad.

  102. I wouldn’t mind banning porn while legalizing prostitution.

    Porn is harmful on numerous levels, but prostitution (if properly regulated) could serve as a much needed sexual outlet for society’s betas. It would help them cope with female hypergamy as many women squander their 20s and 30s on the cock carousel. It would also lessen women’s power as it would diminish the power of their sole leverage over men. It would also benefit the economy as men put in more overtime to afford more sex. The average woman too might become a bit less insufferable once she realizes that her man has other options.

    • Agree: Mefobills
  103. @Dr. X

    Given the NEW Testament, what you say seems right. But as Jones has argued elsewhere Calvinists were the born again Jews. They slid right back into the Hebrew Bible with its usurious economics Ironically Christianity has become a cover for the Jews. The people of The Book get a respect – even adulation by Anglo Saxons – that no Pagan would allow them. Even post Vatican 2, I think
    the Judo philia one sees in the US strikes your average Catholic as a little nauseating. That is why Jews hate Catholicism

  104. Agonistes says:

    The inanity on this thread is epic. When the Gentile as f**k Hugh Hefner introduced Playboy in 1953, it didn’t launch a massive porn addiction epidemic. The reason being is that most men in 1953 married in their early twenties and most wives understood it as their duty to be sexually available for their husbands. It is protracted singleness and marital dissatisfaction driving the porn epidemic, not Da Joos. 

    • Agree: JackOH
    • Disagree: Robert Dolan
    • Replies: @Mefobills
    , @Robert Dolan
  105. Agonistes says:
    @beepbeep

    that is why you won’t see Jewish women with black children at a welfare office.

    That, and also Jewish women as a rule don’t get knocked up out of wedlock.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  106. dutchanarchy.com : ” Pornography as a secret weapon to neutralize the Goy ” :
    “Jewish academic Dr. Nathan Abrams …let the cat out of the bag a few years ago in his controversial essay ‘Triple Exthnics’ …this essay spelled out in detail how the world’s multi-billion porn industry was dominated by Jews …Dr.Abrams not only admitted that Jews are the world’s most successful pornographers , he celebrates the fact. Jews , he tells us , have a grudge against Christianity …and pornography is one of their ways in which they get revenge on their Christian persecutors…”

    • Agree: Desert Fox
  107. “We don’t really have a “Judeo-Christian tradition,” because Jesus rejected the cornerstone of the Jewish religion, namely, that they are the “Chosen People of God” entitled to kill gentiles to get their earthly Zion.”

    Two errors here:

    1. “choseness” is not the cornerstone of Hebraic faith

    2. Jesus did not reject that the jews had been uniquely singled out to be the light of god.

    ———————————————————-

    I am unclear what’s the most peculiar

    1. That Jews have some kind of supernatural power that forces nonjews to consume the material in question or

    2. that pornography causes:

    needless wars
    national debt
    wall street crashes
    outsourcing
    unemployment

    There are a lot of issues with watching the material, but since nude images of naked bodies and acts of intimacy have been a round since human could draw images, I think it’s safe to say that the choice to consume the material has no singular religious or cultural start point. One of the most widely supplemental texts – the Karma Sutra was not created by not distributed by jews.

    Others: I Ching, Tale of Genji, on and on and on . . .

    ———————————-

    There are some legitimate issues regarding jewish political influence, especially exaggerated support for israel, but it’s a might thin and lacking data support Hugh Hefner and others were forced by jews to start media platforms of willing women from school teachers to physicists to bare their bodies nude for public display.

  108. Hibernian says:
    @Jake

    I don’t think Christian Zionists who are predominantly Fundamentalists are fans of Vatican II, or anything else Catholic.

  109. @Achilles Wannabe

    Can you point me to twelve important sex lessons for life from the NT?
    That would really help me understand the obsession.

    • Replies: @Achilles Wannabe
  110. Mefobills says:
    @obwandiyag

    “Capitalism is state-sponsored usury.”

    If you doubt, then answer these questions:

    1) Is creditor over debtor?
    2) Is Capital over Labor?
    3) Does a private corporate bank hypothecate new credit into existence?
    4) Are debt instruments on-sold into markets?

    If you answered yes, then you are correct, and must then conclude that Finance Capitalism is state sponsored usury. (There are some forms of capitalism that fix money, but we don’t have that.)

    Does anybody doubt that the state will intervene if you are a debtor and don’t pay your pound of flesh to the creditor bank.

    Does not capital as money and capital as plant/equipment seek out low wage countries, and also import infinity brown people from the third world? In both cases, the objective is to make Capital extract and be dominant over labor. It was finance capital out of wall street and london that funded the atlantic slave trade into existence. Thanks Jews!

    Do you not supplicate yourself for a new loan, and as soon as you sign into servitude, the new bank credit is created against your signature .. a process known as hypothecation.

    Then that debt instrument is on-sold into markets, effectively make you a slave that is being bought and sold.

    Do debt instruments demand exponential interest (usury) that is pyramiding and creating oligarchy? Yes, of course.

    Are not all kinds of re-hypothecations, or gambling based on debt instruments now on-going, in the form of various paper claims like mortgage backed securities and insurance rate swaps, and other derivatives?

    You are forgiven for not knowing things, as most people in the West are caught in a reality inversion bubble and were never taught about the truth of things.

    It is and was usury flows out of finance that has funded the reality inversion. Thanks Jews.

  111. RT Murphy says:

    Mrs. Grundy will never die. An ignorant rant attempting to show that virtuous character must be enforced by law, when, in fact, it can only be built by consciously resisting frivolous temptation. This guy has the authoritarian mindset of a Calvin, and would probably be very pleased if the Spanish Inquisition were reawakened.

  112. Mefobills says:
    @Agonistes

    That, and also Jewish women as a rule don’t get knocked up out of wedlock.

    And you also don’t see Jews on the street corner begging for handouts.

    All you are proving is that Jews operate as an in-group, as is well known.

    A group will always out-perform an individual. A group of Piranhas will overcome and eat individual fish every-time.

    White people with their extreme individualism and pathological altruism are perfect petri dish for the parasite to infect, host and extract from.

    This is why Jews need to be ejected from white/christian societies, as the Jew is a harmful member just be “being,” as they cannot help themselves. The Jew is an evolutionary construct who uses his methods to self aggrandize while simultaneously improving the group. And yes, usury is the main weapon deployed by our Jewish friends. History makes this abundantly clear.

    The other way of controlling the negative aspects of Jewish presence, is to force them into narrow professions as was done by Justinian, or as is being done today in Iran. Jews cannot be in government, in banking, money counting, teaching, or even being baby-sitters for vulnerable goyims.

    To do this limiting of Jews requires a King, Fascism, or some form of very illiberal democracy or theocracy. Russia today is a form of theocracy, which is one reason why neo-cons hate it so much.

    This is why you always hear Jews shilling for democracy, as a democracy is easy to subvert and maneuver.

    • Replies: @Jeff Stryker
    , @Johan
  113. @Mulegino1

    Codreanu? 1930’s Romanian fascist. I had to google it. You should have told us a little about him. We need to hear about fascism from someone other than Hollywood and the universities. Start breaking the Great Post War Brainwash

    • Replies: @Mulegino1
  114. Mefobills says:
    @Agonistes

    Henry Makow, a fellow Jew would disagree with you.

    Henry found himself caught up and subverted by Pornography and his lust for women. He thinks it derailed his life, and is probably a factor in his being what you would call self-hating Jew.

    He now is warning young men and women, the same as Jones.

    Here is a link to read, so you can disabuse yourself of your confusion:

    https://phibetaiota.net/2019/12/henry-makow-pornography-as-political-and-spiritual-subversion/

  115. @obwandiyag

    Yes you should give up. Hasbara doesn’t really work here

  116. Backerout says:
    @Dr. X

    I would agree entirely, except for your use of the word, “stole”. “Built upon” is a more accurate description.

  117. @Charles Pewitt

    Some screed! How much of it is irony? Or is it all irony?

    Anyway I am a Johnny come lately Catholic(ex actually) and am hoping EMJ really does stick you in your Anglo Protestant ethnocentrism. You Anglo Prot’s gave this country to the Jews probably because English Protestantism is really Judaism 1.0 – the Protestant ethic as sanctified usury. At long last Jones is pointing that out in his histories. HOORAY for E. Michael Jones

  118. @Agonistes

    Organized jewry has spent the last 80 years wrecking the white family, causing marital dissatisfaction, creating incels, and ruining our women with feminism.

    Porn is simply one more act of jewing in a very long list of detrimental items financed and engineered by organized jewry.

    • Agree: Desert Fox
  119. Omegabooks [AKA "Anon"] says:
    @Anonymous

    Well if Jews are so smart then how come they can’t do the math? The Talmud says there will be, when Ha Mossiach comes, 800 gentile slaves per Jew. Assuming there will be roughly 20 million Jews on Earth when that happens, it would mean (after all true believers in Christ are decapitated Noahide style) that 16 BILLION gentiles would have to be present on Earth! BTW, there are only about 9 billion people (including about 20 million Jews) on Earth today…good luck trying to bring about 16 BILLION gentiles to be your slaves! Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah! Maybe you idiots ought to study math instead of the idiot Talmud!

  120. Onebornfree says: • Website

    “ Support Free Thought and Free Speech” is what it says on the home page of the UR.

    With that in mind, It’s pretty funny that all of the dim bulbs on this thread [ including the article’s author] calling for the banning of “porn” [however defined, and to be banned for whatever convenient reason] , are all too dumb to figure out that the very same free speech principle that protects so-called “porn” [however defined], is the exact same principle that allows them to post all the endless, mindless crap [porn?] they all get to write concerning “dajooz” Etc.etc.

    “ Support Free Thought and Free Speech” . Yeah right 😂

    And so it goes…….

    No regards, onebornfree

    • Replies: @Robjil
  121. @Amerimutt Golems

    https://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/12/nyregion/68-and-sleeping-on-floor-ex-publisher-seeks-work.html

    68 and Sleeping on Floor, Ex-Publisher Seeks Work
    By Andy Newman
    Aug. 12, 2004

    Article Excerpts:

    ”Anyone who wishes ill on me should feel vindicated because my life has turned into a total horror,” he said with characteristic restraint Tuesday evening at his in-laws’ house.

    ***

    But Mr. Goldstein is miserable unless he is in the spotlight. ”Today I went to my doctor to have my diabetes checked,” he said. ”I walked past the town house I used to live in on West 61st Street, and I kept thinking: ‘That’s who I was. I was a somebody with a chauffeur, a limo, a town house. Now I sleep on a floor.”’ He sat surrounded by what he called his few remaining possessions: a bunch of DVD’s and CD’s and several boxes of cigars.

    ***

    A large silver cross around his neck gleamed against his chest hair. He has been wearing it for a few months. ”I feel doomed as a Jew,” he said. ”I’ll try anything else.”

  122. niceland says:
    @Jake

    I am not defending Protestantism and I never claimed it is or was good for anyone.

    But since we are on the subject of Protestantism, it was forced on the Icelandic population by the King of Denmark. The final blow came when he sent a ship or two with soldiers to Iceland and they beheaded the Catholic bishop and his sons in Skalholt. The year was 1550.

    So there we go again. Christianity version 2.0 forced on us by a foreign king just like Christianity version 1.0 was forced on us 550 years prior by foreign king. In both cases Christianity was just a tool for the kings to secure power and wealth and extend their influence. I think this is the success story of Christianity in a nutshell. It is fantastic toolkit to concentrate power and flock masses of people behind one banner. Quick look at it’s relative, Islam, seems to support the theory.

    We have to be extremely careful regarding the history of European pagans and their alleged barbarism. It’s more or less written by Christians under the watchful eye of the Church and kings. These were violent times in Europe, but did it get better after Christianity got widespread and shook off the alleged pagan ‘barbarism’? I seem to recall a war or two in Europe after that. What changed was the armies got bigger and the killing, raping and pillaging was a state affair, made possible with great concentration of power under the banners of kings (and quite often Christianity)

    And no, Christianity didn’t bring civilization to Iceland. It’s clear the settlers agreed on sophisticated power structure. And they were bound by the rule of law and settled their differences in Althing once a year. (The first known parliament in the world?) There people were held responsible for their crimes and judged according to the law. Barbarism? Mind you this was Norse pagan society centuries before Magna Carta.

  123. In 1978 Jimmy Carter appointed Paul Volcker as head of the Federal Reserve System as a way of placating the creditor class, which felt that inflation had gotten out of control. Volcker’s “cure” for inflation was raising interest rates to unheard of levels. By 1980 T-bills were paying 20 percent interest. In order to lend money at these rates, banks had to persuade legislators to abolish state usury laws. The result was the collapse of America’s manufacturing base, low wages, and the rise of vulture capitalism. The sexual liberation of the ‘70s along with the de-criminalization of usury distracted workers from the fact that their wages had stagnated.

    A bit of a stretch, sir. Bread and Circuses have been with us from the beginning.

    As much as was then possible, sports, movies, modern noise-music and Talmudvision were all in full swing in the 1970s.

  124. @Mefobills

    Anglo-Saxon individualism is the problem for Anglo-Saxons. They celebrate the elitist loner like Clint Eastwood or Chuck Norris or John Wayne who is self-reliant and rides off into the sunset alone.

    In real life, the individualist loner gets nothing and usually loses.

    Italians, Jews, Asians, Muslims, Indians, Hispanics all celebrate tribalism and of course those who go along with the group get further.

    Back when WASPS and Boston Brahmin still had their Skull & Bones and Masonry etc. the US was run by families like Bush. But now that is gone and Anglo-Saxons are completely atomized.

    Jewish women don’t get knocked up because they are not stupid and have no religious qualms about either birth control or abortion.

  125. @sally

    What is it?

    Simple

    The will to power.
    The lemming-like compulsion to be in charge, to tell other people how to live their lives and hold the monopoly on violence to compel them to comply.

    Is this tendency innate in all ethnic groups?

    Not to the same degree.

    Hesiod was able to describe two kinds of strife:

    (ll. 11-24) So, after all, there was not one kind of Strife alone, but all over the earth there are two. As for the one, a man would praise her when he came to understand her; but the other is blameworthy: and they are wholly different in nature.
    For one fosters evil war and battle, being cruel: her no man loves; but perforce, through the will of the deathless gods, men pay harsh Strife her honour due.
    But the other is the elder daughter of dark Night, and the son of Cronos who sits above and dwells in the aether, set her in the roots of the earth: and she is far kinder to men. She stirs up even the shiftless to toil; for a man grows eager to work when he considers his neighbour, a rich man who hastens to plough and plant and put his house in good order; and neighbour vies with his neighbour as he hurries after wealth. This Strife is wholesome for men. And potter is angry with potter, and craftsman with craftsman, and beggar is jealous of beggar, and minstrel of minstrel.

    American leaders, and Jews are pre-eminent among them, are still drunk on the power they grabbed through the world wars, which triumphalism powered them into subsequent wars, esp. in Middle East, total dedication to “evil war and battle and being cruel.” For Jews, that drunk is even more destructive, since Jews had been free of rabbinic bonds only for about a hundred years before they got into the “evil war and battle” mode; now, they see war and killing and, as Fran pointed out, their nuclear arsenal, as their sacred totem: Jewish nukes mean Jews do not have to engage in the “strife” of competition on an equal playing field.

  126. EMJ and Styx666 are different versions of the cucked Western male. One believes in magical Christianity, the other believes in magical capitalism. One believes in government control, the other believes that people are capable of making rational decisions if they are left alone – i.e. libertarianism. Neither one will deal with IQ, its relation to race and that these two determine the morality of a person. They believe people are equal and have no problems with different races.

    EMJ submits to the authority of the RCC and believes that if people convert to the RCC and obey the priests, bishops, cardinals, and pope many of our problems will be solved. He believes that the RCC should control the government.

    Styx’s libertarian paradise is where two gay men can guard their marijuana farm with machineguns.

    They are both nuts. Here is a youtube analysis of the debate: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yu2eQGM9p9M

    Steve Franssen’s comments about porn and marijuana are very good.

    It is up to individuals to stop viewing porn and smoking weed. We are not at a point where we turn to the government for any kind of help. The government is the problem.

  127. Corvinus says:
    @Haxo Angmark

    “(((porn))) goes far, far beyond “control”.”

    So says the hypocrite whose website is dedicated to Jewish t—!

    “successful (((plan))) to exterminate the world’s remnant White population”.

    Thanks for contributing to that degeneracy.

  128. @Fuerchtegott

    I can’t point out one but then I have only read it once and that was awhile back. But then
    conservative Christians like Jones do seem to talk and worry a lot about it – not just reactive to Jewish manipulation but absolutely. Personally, as a skeptic or naturalist. I think far too much attention is paid to pronography and homosexuality in principle on the dissident right as well

  129. @Mefobills

    Yeah, most of us suffer from the illusion that an economic system has to be either capitalist or socialist or some combination which ties us forever to the beast.,. This illusion was created by systematically eliminating Usury as a concept from economic debate and analysis. I, as a long time leftist critic of capitalism, didn’t start getting this until I read E Michael Jones’s Barren Metal and also read Henry Ford 1 of Ford Motor Co actually say “I am not a capitalist. I am a maker of things and an employer of people. The bank that lends me money is the capitalist”. Of course Ford said this in “The International Jew”.

    • Agree: Mefobills
  130. @Dumbo

    https://amgreatness.com/2019/12/15/a-science-based-case-for-ending-the-porn-epidemic/

    The article you cited is occasionally discursive, but it’s got some nice links:

    1. A Meta‐Analysis of Pornography Consumption and Actual Acts of Sexual Aggression in General Population Studies

    https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jcom.12201

    Finding: Consumption was associated with sexual aggression in the United States and internationally, among males and females, and in cross‐sectional and longitudinal studies.

    2. Pornography and Satisfaction: A Meta‐Analysis

    https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/hcre.12108

    Finding: Pornography consumption was associated with lower interpersonal satisfaction outcomes in cross‐sectional surveys, longitudinal surveys, and experiments.

    3. Does Viewing Pornography Reduce Marital Quality Over Time? Evidence from Longitudinal Data.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27388511

    Findings: In general, married persons who more frequently viewed pornography in 2006 reported significantly lower levels of marital quality in 2012, net of controls for earlier marital quality and relevant correlates. Pornography’s effect was not simply a proxy for dissatisfaction with sex life or marital decision-making in 2006. In terms of substantive influence, frequency of pornography use in 2006 was the second strongest predictor of marital quality in 2012.

    4. Till Porn Do Us Part? A Longitudinal Examination of Pornography Use and Divorce

    https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00224499.2017.1317709

    Finding: We found that the probability of divorce roughly doubled for married Americans who began pornography use between survey waves (N = 2,120; odds ratio = 2.19), and that this relationship held for both women and men.

    5. Trading Later Rewards for Current Pleasure: Pornography Consumption and Delay Discounting.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26305628#

    Findings: Participants who abstained from pornography use demonstrated lower delay discounting than participants who abstained from their favorite food. The finding suggests that Internet pornography is a sexual reward that contributes to delay discounting differently than other natural rewards.

    • Replies: @jack daniels
  131. Mulegino1 says:
    @Achilles Wannabe

    You can find out a lot about Codreanu’s magnificent character by reading his book “To My Legionaries.”

    The man was a great spiritual and martial hero, who fought the malign influence of Jewry in Romania indefatigably and founded the “Order of St. Michael” otherwise known as the “Iron Guard of the National Conscience.”

    I’m not Romanian but I have a great admiration for the man.

    • Replies: @Seraphim
  132. Anonymous[113] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    That’s actually hilarious.

    I’ve seen both communities.

    Jews are so morbidly fixated on gentile pussy they write doctorates about it. They write entire books comparing Americans to a Shiksa they want to rape.

    Jews tend to be physically inferior with rat like Physiognomy and Goblin Physiology. Distended and protuberant. So they engage in cope mechanisms.

    Every Jew thinks they’re Jared Kushner when most are Jared Leto lol.

    Even with all the Jew shekels most women still don’t want to have sex with Jews.

    Jews don’t have an IQ advantage, except in Verbal sub-Wenschler and even then it’s only about 5 points at most.

    Even in a culture saturated in sex most Jews have to resort to prostitution.

    • Replies: @TKK
  133. @Futurethirdworlder

    Ayn Rand hated libertarians and Rothbard got away from her early on. When CATO moved to the east coast, Rothbard was sort of counted out, I believe. There is so much crazy stuff in this article by Jones, it is hard to even begin addressing it.

    Rothbard the anarchist is a much different animal than Rand the capitalist and the Koch brothers are pro-government libertarians that contributed way too much money to Republicans. Mises was an austrian economist that was anti-socialist. It is rather hard to say that Mises is a libertarian or an anarchist.

    Anyway, I’m getting bored with all this Jewish porn. Does anybody know of any good clean Catholic porn sites?

    • Troll: utu
    • Replies: @Sick of Orcs
  134. @Jake

    “I know many devout Evangelicals who would read Jones’s opening paragraph and wonder why he would repeat such an absurd lie about Israelis.”

    This is almost without content. Many dogs eat their own poo. It doesn’t mean it is good for them.

    Evangelicals are complete and utter morons, incapable of contemplating the contempt that Jews have for their belief system. They still, despite books and articles abound, have not clued into the Scofield Bible hoax.

    I don’t know if Jews did push pornography on the Arabs, but it sounds like something they would do. Pushing pornography on post-WW2 Germans is entirely true, as is the claim of Jewish subversion of traditional sexual mores in the USA and beyond.

    Apparently you are unaware of the Jewish role in pushing prostitution, transgenderism, sodomy, pedophilia (etc) in the Weimar republic. Or of the way in which Jews in Russia and Poland would encourage alcoholism in order to push gentiles into bankruptcy.

    Those evangelicals are complete and utter non-entities when it comes to knowledge of history, just like a dog doesn’t know enough about microbiology to recognize that poop isn’t good to ingest.

  135. TKK says:
    @J.W.

    The worst crackhead I know is Jewish.

    Here’s the difference I have observed: his very Jewish parents gave him one chance at Rehab: the best money can buy. He started having an affair with a nurse and was kicked out.

    That was it.

    The parents completely cut him off- not a dime. No phone calls. No contact. He no longer exists to anyone in the family save an aunt who occasionally puts minutes on his pre paid cell.

    None of this allowing an addict to hold the family financially & emotionally hostage.

    Correct- none of these people who fanatically hate Jews on this site have ever met any. If they had, they would grasp that their fascination and obsession with them is downright silly- cringe worthy. There are loads of poor Jewish bozos.

  136. TKK says:
    @Anonymous

    You are a gibbering fool.

    Some of the most attractive people on the planet- male and female- are Israeli. Clearly-You’ve never been. Just like these other rubes.

    The beaches makes East Coast beaches look like fat camps.

    • Replies: @Flint Clint
    , @Trinity
  137. @Jeff Stryker

    They celebrate the elitist loner like Clint Eastwood or Chuck Norris or John Wayne who is self-reliant and rides off into the sunset alone.

    In real life, the individualist loner gets nothing and usually loses.

    True. But still whites have done quite well against other races throughout much of history. When a few lone knights or gunslingers get together they can take on an army of others.

  138. One reason why Jews win is that in an open capitalist society, vice wins over virtue because vice offers more fun. As shameless Jews work in the vice industry, they play the siren song of the Pleasure Island.
    It seems ‘liberating’ and ‘cool’. Of course, one could argue that morality is liberation from animal instincts and impulses that keep us down on the bestial level, but pop culture adorns animal behavior with style, glamour, and pizzazz. It is made chic, and masses go for that. Twerk with twinkle.

    In a world where sin and vice are the center of so many lives, virtue will lose out to vice unless the whole system falls apart from excess of vice, whereupon the moralists can gain authority, like Moses did in TEN COMMANDMENT when he confronts the Golden Calfers. But then, he had God on his side to smash the Calfers. God seems to be silent and won’t strike down ‘gay pride’ parades.

    Then, the only option left is for the anti-Jews to come up with their own vice industries. For example, a white owned gambling joints. White-owned porn that bans interracial stuff. But maybe it’s too late for that as Jews control finance and get to decide who gets funding. Also, white-run industries will come under lawfare. If even Chick-Fil-A turned into Dick-Fill-Ass under Jewish-homo assault, it’s gonna be difficult for any white-run industry.
    For example, suppose some tries to start a white sports franchise. It will come
    under attack.

  139. @TKK

    You’re a puerile moron.

    He’s right.

    I have been. I’ve spent a lot of time there.

    Yes, because they interbred with Europeans. Especially the Russians and the girls in the Balkans.

    It’s really aggravating when Sephardis and sinister
    oleaginous heart defect Ashkenazi gesture to circassians and Iberian and Northern European and Slavic and every other non Jewish racial admixture and say ‘look at us’.

    Golda Meir was a good Jewish woman.

    Ayalet Zurer is the result of Jewish outbreeding.

    Jews love to degrade what they can’t possess. You’re Canaanites from the Mediterranean. Swarthy Carthaginians and Phoenecians larping as Hebrews.

    Europeans in Germany still make Jews look like Swarthy or Scrawny little dilletantes. So Jews have to flood them with 3rd world detritus. And they think it will somehow be sustained. It really won’t be.

    And yes, Israel is the Homosexual capital and child molester capital of the world. So there are a lot of twink abs on show playing Matkot on the Promenade.

    Henry Kissinger is a Jewish phenotype. Ayn Rand was a Jewish phenotype.

    Stop claiming Russian converts are ethnic Jews. You aren’t Russians.

    Israel is a tiny country full of tourists. And you still have to get Russian Instagram whores to pretend they’re Jewish for your Hasbara.

    People wouldn’t be so waspish if you guys weren’t such arseholes

    Those fat Americans are why you exist, and maybe they wouldn’t be so fat if Jews werent destroying their endocrine and hormonal systems with poisonous consumer products that didn’t exist when America was American.

    Never any thanks from Israelis. Never.

  140. None of my comments should be taken as support for the material or its use.

    Here’s a complete copy of the afformentioned study — and no it does not have evidence that said material leads to aggression or anything close ot it. Again, it is a survey style and while some participants across the studies used the material and some number of those who claimed to have addictions, or other issues self reporting or according to a therapist, the total 22,000 number is not unique to the US, but across the globe — leaving some serious questions about the studies veracity as a generalizable reference.

    In teading the noted study there are some hurdles: examples

    1. “One study at a rape crisis center interviewed 100 sexually abused women to determine if pornography played a role in any past incidences of sexual abuse. While 58 percent could not say, 28 percent stated that their abuser had in fact used pornography. Of this 28 percent (women who were aware that their abuser used pornography), 40 percent (or 11 percent of the total group) reported that pornography actually played a role in the abusive incident they experienced. In some cases, the abuser had watched pornography before abusing the woman, in one case he used pornography while committing the abuse, and in yet some other cases he forced his victim to participate in the making of a pornographic film . . .”

    This would be referred to a loaded question. The use of the material prior to or during may some relevance, but the study is not supportive to the contend that the use of the material led to the existing aggression.

    http://www.marripedia.org/effects_of_pornography

    At best you have two cases and those indicate that the material played a role — in the assault, 2 ot of 100 cases reported in rape cases —represents 2% of the cases in question. But suppose one actually examined the number of men who use pornography, But if one examines the volumes of material accessed, as noted in the next reference:

    http://www.marripedia.org/effects_of_pornography

    of the over 120,000,000 adult males every single one of them were addicted to the material, one would expect to find that some 40% involved in some aggressive sexual behavior based on the study’s reference. The reported such assaults in the US is “433,648 victims”. That represents a percentage of 0.361373, not even a half a percentage point. And being generous and lowering that abuser number further say to 10,000,000 that would weigh out to 4%, some ten times lower than one would expect. That would suggest the opposite. That while some men may be impacted by stated material the numbers indicated that the vast majority don’t engage in aggressive violence against women as a result. Note, I am being generous here with the numbers in favor of a stated impact of increased aggression or some manner of aggression. Again, it’s a loaded deck given that the population is in a rape crisis facility. And even with the load, the incidence abuse is low compared to the volume of men exposed. One would also expect to see an increase in assaults as the amount the material increases its exposure to more and more of the population, instead sexual violence is trending downward at the moment. Clearly the material impacts the psyche – no question. It does impact behavior, however on whom and how deeply is probably less than advertised.

    There is plenty of room to be hopeful.

    It is entirely possible my analysis s all wet. One is certainly invited to challenge them.

    _____________________

    • Replies: @AnonStarter
  141. Seraphim says:
    @Mulegino1

    A slight correction. Codreanu’s organization founded in 1927 was called ‘Legiunea Arhanghelul Mihail’/ The Legion the Archangel Michael’, or ‘Mișcarea Legionară/The Legionary Movement’ and its members were known as ‘legionaries’. “Garda Conștiinței Naționale” was an ephemeral organization founded in 1920 by a group of workers from Iași/Jassy. “Garda de Fier” was also a short lived organization to serve as an ‘umbrella organization’ for various organizations of the right to present a common front in elections. In 1933 the Movement created its own political party ‘Totul pentru țară’/All for the country. It obtained a resounding success in the 1937 elections, none of the parties able to obtain the majority required to form the government and new elections were announced. Instead King Carol II dissolved all parties and installed a personal dictatorship, arresting Codreanu on trump charges and having him assassinated in prison along with other leaders of the Movement.

    • Replies: @Mulegino1
  142. @Tom Blanton

    Anyway, I’m getting bored with all this Jewish porn. Does anybody know of any good clean Catholic porn sites?

    I looked for some and found nun.

  143. Robjil says:
    @Onebornfree

    Listen, the 500 BC Zion mania is real. It is no joke.

    Look at the “get Iran” mania by the 500 BC Zion zombies within the ZUS Golem and its Master Israel.

    The recent assassination of an Iranian General is upping the march to war with Iran.

    Iran is the last of seven nations to destroy for the nine eleven false flag.

    Where does this “sophisticated” idea of destroying seven nations come from?

    Deuteronomy 7 .1-2 written in 500 BC Zion.

    It is a delusion that you are not seeing. We can’t be born free if millions of masses are stuck on a delusion that it is 500 BC Zion.

    • Agree: Desert Fox
  144. Jake says:
    @Trinity

    Hasn’t Priss Factor promoted Nazis and Nazism on this site?

  145. Jake says:
    @Jeff Stryker

    “Back when WASPS and Boston Brahmin still had their Skull & Bones and Masonry etc. the US was run by families like Bush.”

    Are you so ignorant that you think Skull&Bones and Freemasonry are gone?

    So you think that when WASPs had philoSemitic, Judaizing organizations like Freemasonry, WASPs were ideal and in control that that mattered?

    Not even the average Freemason Baptist is stupid enough to put all that together and fail to start to see the obvious. Perhaps you also are not that stupid.

  146. Jones looked like the crusty, intensely bitter, senile idiot that his is during this “debate.”

    Repeatedly he insisted that the fact that he was able to search “porn addiction” and it yielded 63 million results meant, incontrovertibly, that 63 million people confessed they were addicted to porn. He is seriously that shoddy at facts.

    He also kept grilling Styxhexenhammer about why he was allegedly hiding his real name. The reply, naturally, is that his real name (Tarl Warwick) is on every one of his books and is widely known. Jones pretended he didn’t hear the answer and kept pretending this was some sort of “gotcha!” moment.

    Jones serves only one purpose: To neuter white identity and push it all toward the safe confines of religion.

    • Replies: @Dumbo
  147. Saggy says: • Website
    @Onebornfree

    Should each individual be free to decide for themselves what is, and is not, “pornographic”,[ whether it be speech, the written word, imagery, or whatever], and then be free to eliminate it from their own life as best they can?

    This is libertarian nonsense. What we are seeing now is unlike anything in history, with porn being dumped into every household in the US every day, whether you like it or not. My wife is watching ‘Witcher’ on Netflix (or Amazon) and the dialogue for a typical show contains ‘fuck’ or ‘fucking’ 10 to twenty times, e.g. ‘pass the fucking bread’, and it features graphic nude sex showing all but d’s and p’s. And the other shows produced by Netflix and Amazon are similar. And, for every white couple on a show there is at least one white/black couple, on ‘Bosch’ there is a black/asian couple, a 6’3″ black guy who looks like death and a 5’2″ pretty asian. We are being programmed, and its available mainstream and for all ages. The result is that the only way to eliminate porn from ones life is to stay indoors and turn off all electronic media, and not too many will opt for that.

    • Replies: @Onebornfree
  148. @Jeff Stryker

    Italians, Jews, Asians, Muslims, Indians, Hispanics

    Muslims aren’t a race or ethnic group anymore than Catholics. But other than that, your point stands.

  149. @Achilles Wannabe

    Some screed! How much of it is irony? Or is it all irony?

    I try to go way over the top to make a point and have some fun.

    Here is some more: E Michael Jones is a baby boomer Leprechaun Kraut — with a full head of hair — who exemplifies the term “INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE” to a degree heretofore unknown in European Christendom. Did E Michael Jones sell his soul to the Devil for that full head of hair? Bald guys like me want to know! Was E Michael Jones in the Germanic Battle scenes from the movie “Gladiator” screaming and waving around a battle ax?

    Watch E Michael Jones laugh with gusto when a Jewish gentleman attempts to haggle and bargain over the price of one of Jones’s books. E Michael Jones is laughing with the Jewish guy and his mirth is of such a merry and honest and natural kind that the Jewish guy is clearly in on the joke and he is not offended at all. I bust out laughing when I saw it!

    If the departed comedian Don Rickles had seen this he would have lost his professional composure and HE would have bust out laughing. Maybe the spirit of Rickles — who loved ethnic comedy — did see this and he laughed:

  150. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Cranberries

    LOL. Yes Michael, no one could possibly disagree with you for any other reason than out of a secret desire to enslave the population to Jewish oligarchs. There is a reasonable debate to be had about the merits of pornography. But Jones thinking is that of a narrow-minded zealot.

    Yep. The article is one long totally deranged incoherent rant. There’s no point in trying to refute specific points since just about every sentence is utter nonsense.

    Unz Review really has become a haven for the sad, the lost, the deluded and the unhinged.

  151. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Commentator Mike

    There used to be a website jewdar.com that allowed you to look up Jewish involvement in the movies. When I entered these two movies, after being intrigued by all those articles about Jews being behind the porn industry, the site returned 0% Jewish involvement in these seminal pornographic films that led to greater acceptance and proliferation of the genre.

    You’re cheating. You’re relying on facts and evidence. This is Unz Review. We don’t need no stinkin’ facts.

    • LOL: Commentator Mike
  152. @Amerimutt Golems

    From Wikipedia:

    In his book XXX-Communicated: A Rebel Without a Shul, Luke Ford wrote about a conversation with Goldstein, in which Ford asked Goldstein why Jews were dramatically overrepresented in the porn industry. He answered, “The only reason that Jews are in pornography is that we think that Christ sucks. Catholicism sucks. We don’t believe in authoritarianism.” Ford then asked, “What does it mean to you to be a Jew?” To which Goldstein responded, “It doesn’t mean anything. It means that I’m called a kike.” Ford also asked, “Do you believe in God?” Goldstein said, “I believe in me. I’m God. Screw God. God is your need to believe in some super being. I am the super being. I am your God, admit it. We’re random. We’re the flea on the butt of the dog.”

  153. Trinity says:
    @TKK

    What a COHENcidence. This ties right into the subject nicely. NO. Most Jews are not that physically attractive IMO, HOWEVER, in keeping with the subject, I did see an attractive stripper once who was “working” in a Tampa nightclub who was an Israeli Jew. Other than that, I have yet to personally meet an attractive Jewess all though I am sure that not every Jewess looks like Joan Rivers and Ruth Ginsberg. Not every Jewish male is the stereotypical Woody Allen type either, former football player Lyle Alzado’s mother was Jewish, which I guess makes him Jewish despite his father being Spanish/Italian. Former “rassler” Bill Goldberg, with a name like that he isn’t Irish, but these guys are the exceptions and not the rule. And neither one of these bruisers are probably deemed as attractive males by heterosexual females I am sure. I can’t speak for heterosexual women or even all heterosexual men because everyone has different taste in the opposite sex, but IMO white women of European ancestry are far and away the most attractive women on the planet, with hispanic women ( who are mostly mixed, so not a race) a distant second.

  154. I hereby agree with E Michael Jones on Ben Shapiro.

    I previously wrote this about Jew Bolshevik Ben Shapiro:

    Ben Shapiro and the treasonous whores in Conservatism Inc. are a clear and present threat to the safety, security and sovereignty of the European Christian ancestral core of the United States of America.

    Ben Shapiro is used by the JEW/WASP ruling class of the American Empire as a nation-wrecking, distractionary agent of subversion and deceit.

    The ruling class of the rancid donor-controlled Republican Party uses evil propaganda whores such as Ben Shapiro to push globalization and financialization and multiculturalism and transnationalism.

    Ben Shapiro’s attacks on the European Christian ancestral core of the United States are much more damaging to the interests of White Core Americans than the outgassings of random corporate propaganda whore Blacks such as Charles Blow at the New York Times.

    Ben Shapiro pushes nation-wrecking mass legal immigration and anti-White multicultural mayhem.

    Ben Shapiro is openly attacking the European Christian ancestral core of the United States.

    Ben Shapiro wants to continue to use mass legal immigration as a demographic weapon to attack and destroy the European Christian ancestral core of the United States.

    Ben Shapiro wants to continue to use the US military as muscle to fight wars on behalf of Israel.

  155. Onebornfree says: • Website
    @Saggy

    “Regards” onebornfree

    • Replies: @Saggy
  156. @RT Murphy

    IF germany had remained Catholic and had an Inquisitor Adolph Hitler would never have come to power.

    But, ever since Moses – He was the first Inquisitor and in two days he ordered the death of men women and children in numbers far greater than did the Spanish Inquisition in three hundred years – sinners prefer to be left alone to indulge this lusts

  157. @Jeff Stryker

    Hollywood jews promote the celebration of individualism as a means to atomize our populace.

    Tearing down the patriarchy is basic Frankfurt School strategy.

    The jews will not allow any hint of white organization or ingroup preference.

    This has nothing to do with Clint Eastwood.

    • Agree: Trinity
  158. Saggy says: • Website
    @Onebornfree

    Libertarianism = Law of the Jungle ….

    It’s not in the cards.

  159. @Jeff Stryker

    You live in in Asia with your low IQ Asian wife and offspring.

    You fled America because you were afraid of the blacks and illegal aliens.

    You refused to fight for the West. The West is better off without you.

    Why do you care about the sexual behavior of Jewish females? If your Asian offspring are daughters, keep your eyes on them. They will want to become sex workers – a popular career choice for Asian females.

  160. Dumbo says:
    @Nathan Bedford Bonsai

    There is no “white identity”. I mean even Jews are “white” when it’s convenient for them. There are Germans, Italians, English, Irish, etc. And they don’t usually like each other.

    I haven’t actually heard the debate, but Styxhexenhammer is a stupid name and the guy seems like a retard. I don’t know why an intelligent man like Jones (agree or not with him) debated with this retard.

    • Replies: @Nathan Bedford Bonsai
  161. @Mefobills

    I was being sarcastic. Calling Capitalism Usury is litotes.

    I meant that the people on here just love Capitalism. So you can’t say anything bad about it on here. Because, you know, Commies, reasons, reasons.

  162. @Dumbo

    RE: “There is no “white identity”. I mean even Jews are “white” when it’s convenient for them. There are Germans, Italians, English, Irish, etc. And they don’t usually like each other.”

    “White” is a category on Census forms. Magically, “Catholic” isn’t, even though Jones, fighting against reality as is his wont, insists it’s an ethnic group.

    People like you and Jones play exactly the same semantic trick that progressives do—they, as well, say it’s OK to be German, Italian, English, etc., but not white. But in the same breath, they’ll condemn all white people and demand reparations from them.

    And they never encourage blacks to celebrate being Nigerian, Somalian, etc.—nope, just “black.”

    So congrats for “deconstructing” race just like progressives do. I see race-deniers such as you and Jones to be just as big a problem as the progressives are.

    There’s no danger in being Catholic in America. There’s intense danger in being white and being OK with it.

    You can prove European ancestry with a DNA test. You couldn’t prove anyone was Catholic, though.

    Obviously the powers that be are targeting whites for extinction. That’s the national question. Demographics. Racial demographics. Jones, in insisting on viewing things primarily through religion rather than race, is being used as controlled opposition to deflect from the real battle, which is here on earth, not in the clouds.

    • Agree: RadicalCenter
    • Replies: @Dumbo
    , @jack daniels
  163. Dumbo says:
    @Nathan Bedford Bonsai

    People like you and Jones play exactly the same semantic trick that progressives do—they, as well, say it’s OK to be German, Italian, English, etc., but not white.

    It’s not me who’s “playing” this trick, it’s white people. By their own words and behavior since, er, FOREVER. Hell, even Anglo upper-class and anglo lower-class won’t see themselves as the same people. Rich Anglo will screw Prole Anglo whenever he has a chance. We wouldn’t even have multiculturalism if it wasn’t for that.

    But go on, dream on about “white identity” and unifying all whites under one banner. Jared Taylor and Richard Spencer (let’s assume for a moment that they are not controlled opposition) had lots of success with that, right?

    I’m not saying that it’s not OK to be white, I think it’s fine and dandy, I’m saying (all caps for emphasis):

    WHITES ARE TOO DIVIDED BY CLASS AND ETHNICITY (AND RELIGION TOO) AND WILL PROBABLY NEVER BE UNITED UNDER THE BANNER OF “WHITE PEOPLE” BECAUSE EXPERIENCE SHOWS THAT THEY NEVER DID AND PROBABLY NEVER WILL.

    And they never encourage blacks to celebrate being Nigerian, Somalian, etc.—nope, just “black.”

    Africans and African-Americans have their differences (hell, even Zimbabwean and South African blacks have differences), but a black is always a “brother” to another black, at least against another white. Now if a white is killed by a black, good luck finding another white person to help you.

  164. @Nathan Bedford Bonsai

    It’s hard to say what the ‘real battle’ is. My own sense is that Jews control the terms of identity politics and also control most of the action. Their motive seems to me to be a mixture of Zionism, secular humanism, and hostility to Christianity. The big struggles of our time were civil rights, women’s rights, and gay rights. In all these struggles Jews were on the anti-traditionalist side whih was in effect the anti-Christian side even if Christian principles can be invoked to support some of the liberal agenda. In all three they prevailed, except that they alienated the white working class.

    The anti-white stuff seems to me to be prompted by Jewish support for the Rainbow Coalition approach to electoral strategy. The working class having largely deserted the Dems, they respond by shifting the oppressor-victim dichotomy from economic to racial and sexual groups, demonizing whiteness, maleness, and straightness — except when desperate e.g. currently there is no electable non-white candidate for the Dems and they are stuck with elderly straight whites and a young gay guy who turns off blacks.

    Whether or not God exists, belief in God and the moral principles, customs, and power-relationships associated with it is an enormous factor in human history, as any history book will verify.

  165. @AnonStarter

    Thank you for all these links! I haven’t checked them out yet, but I will impatiently make what I believe to be an important point: The most consequential pornography is that which emanates from Hollywood, not the stuff you google up on the internet. I admit that I am using a broader definition of porn than usual, in that I regard the depiction of any sex that violates ‘traditional’ (e.g. 1960) morality as porn unless the depiction presents the sex as something to be condemned. The reason Hollywood porn is more important than internet porn is that Hollywood porn conveys elite approval or at least elite indifference to the acts depicted, whereas internet porn conveys a strong message that one is consuming contraband — watching stuff that you wouldn’t want your mother to catch you watching.

    I am surprised that so few commentators on the issue make this point. Hollywood conveys the normality and acceptability of recreational sex by the prestige of its actors and corporations. Part of the reason, no doubt, is that attacking Hollywood is much riskier than attacking low-brow internet porn. Moreover, attacking Hollywood is often seen as antisemitism.

    • Replies: @AnonStarter
    , @dfordoom
  166. @Dumbo

    WHITES ARE TOO DIVIDED BY CLASS AND ETHNICITY (AND RELIGION TOO) AND WILL PROBABLY NEVER BE UNITED UNDER THE BANNER OF “WHITE PEOPLE” BECAUSE EXPERIENCE SHOWS THAT THEY NEVER DID AND PROBABLY NEVER WILL.

    United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Bhagat_Singh_Thind

    United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind, 261 U.S. 204 (1923), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously decided that Bhagat Singh Thind, an Indian Sikh man who identified himself as a “high caste aryan, of full Indian blood,” was racially ineligible for naturalized citizenship in the United States. In 1919, Thind filed a petition for naturalization under the Naturalization Act of 1906 which allowed only “free white persons” and “aliens of African nativity and persons of African descent” to become United States citizens by naturalization. Instead, he attempted to have “high-caste” classified as “free white persons” within the meaning of the naturalization act based on the fact that both northern Indians and most Europeans are Indo-European peoples.

    The court rejected this argument, holding that while Hindi-speaking high-caste Indians were indeed akin to white European peoples, they had intermarried too freely with the non-white pre-Indo-European populace of India, hence their present skin color.

  167. @Dumbo

    Listen closely, or have someone read this to you slowly:

    Yes, people of large groups sometimes will splinter and factionalize. Being Irish and English is very meaningful when your entire world is the British Isles. Being Irish and English changes drastically when you’re in a country where about a third of the people have zero European ancestry.

    People such as you and Jones would have us believe that Rottweilers and Dobermans can’t also both be dogs at the same time.

    Identity is a matter of proximity. In America, whether you like it or not, both whites and nonwhites know exactly what is meant by “white people.”

    White people are being denied jobs and promotions because everyone actually knows what’s meant by “white people.” Their enemies find them extremely easy to identify and target.

    Whiteness is essentially synonymous with European ancestry, your nitpicking and hair-splitting aside.

    It is also a legal category.

    When people talk about demographics, they mention race 1,000 times before the topic of religion—which Jones stupidly misclassifies as “ethnicity”—is ever so much as broached.

    Dumb terms such as “the human race” will only have meaning when Martians invade.

    And what, pray tell, do you think will be the unifying factor?

    Christianity? Two words: Catholics and Protestants.

    None of Jones’s major positions make any sense when examined with even rudimentary scrutiny.

    • Replies: @Dumbo
  168. @Dumbo

    “Jared Taylor and Richard Spencer (let’s assume for a moment that they are not controlled opposition) had lots of success with that, right?”

    Yeah, and E. Michael Jones single-handedly stopped Drag Time Story Hour and banned porn.

    You tools are all working from the same script.

    Since you asked, there are officials in the Trump Administration who read Jared Taylor. Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden have mentioned the Alt-Right in their speeches.

    That means Richard Spencer and Jared Taylor have had far more real-life influence than that bitter loon EMJ. His followers have the most misguidedly arrogant sense of triumphalism I’ve ever seen. They have literally achieved nothing.

    It’s funny how often EMJ’s followers call people feds and “controlled opposition.” The evidence suggest EMJ is the controlled opposition, guiding people away from what the powers that be consider true threats to their power.

  169. Mulegino1 says:
    @Seraphim

    Thanks for the detailed information and corrections, Seraphim.

    You seem to be very knowledgeable about the career of this great man!

    • Replies: @Seraphim
  170. @jack daniels

    /Thank you for all these links!/

    You’re welcome. The article in which you’ll find them includes many more worth checking out. Quite a lot of empirical evidence.

    /The most consequential pornography is that which emanates from Hollywood, not the stuff you google up on the internet./

    I’m glad you’ve made this point. The following study isn’t concerned with the adverse effects of pornography per se, but rather, the sexual objectification of women as portrayed via mainstream media:

    Media and Sexualization: State of Empirical Research, 1995–2015

    https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00224499.2016.1142496?journalCode=hjsr20

    From the Abstract:

    Sexually objectifying portrayals of women are a frequent occurrence in mainstream media, raising questions about the potential impact of exposure to this content on others’ impressions of women and on women’s views of themselves. The goal of this review was to synthesize empirical investigations testing effects of media sexualization. … The findings provided consistent evidence that both laboratory exposure and regular, everyday exposure to this content are directly associated with a range of consequences, including higher levels of body dissatisfaction, greater self-objectification, greater support of sexist beliefs and of adversarial sexual beliefs, and greater tolerance of sexual violence toward women. Moreover, experimental exposure to this content leads both women and men to have a diminished view of women’s competence, morality, and humanity.

    Suggestion to those personally concerned about their own online exposure:

    Make assiduous use of an image blocker, unblocking images only when needed to view infographics, charts, some pictures essential to elaboration upon article content, etc. It’s a pretty effective way of disarming those seeking to exploit visual sexuality as a means of behavioral manipulation.

  171. dfordoom says: • Website
    @jack daniels

    Hollywood conveys the normality and acceptability of recreational sex by the prestige of its actors and corporations.

    So you’re saying that recreational sex is wrong?

    I just want to understand exactly what your position is.

    • Replies: @jack daniels
  172. @Achilles Wannabe

    I do enjoy your stuff Charles, And it is not your fault you are a WASP

  173. Dumbo says:
    @Nathan Bedford Bonsai

    Good luck, what can I say. Yes maybe when whites become a small minority in the US they will see themselves as a unified category worth preserving.

    Personally, I think things like ideology and religion tend to unify people more than a vaguely defined ancestry from multiple regions. Perhaps if whites can create a whites-only religion (like Christendom in practice once was, like Mormons until recently were) or a whites-only type of communism, it might work, who knows. As for the “legal category”, LOL:

    • Replies: @Nathan Bedford Bonsai
  174. https://amgreatness.com/2019/12/15/a-science-based-case-for-ending-the-porn-epidemic/

    Note: again my comments are not an advocacy of the material. But on the issue of cognition, the argument is not supported by the research — save in extreme dysfunctions.

    My comments refer to this study of the 22 and my reference is the original article in full that references the same. Again, the material in question does have impact. But how deep and how broad is is another matter. And the evidence that it leads to the consequences referenced as the sole variable — the studies and I have not read them all don’t get you their. And it only comes close when discussing extreme personality dysfunctions.

    I would caution anyone referencing a study to note the language:

    terms such as : may be, suggests, is associated with, could be . . . etc. And these studies a generous work in using caveats and other qualifying term that matter as to the actual import of their argument.

    In looking at the impacts across the entire populations given the volume of reported use and consequence just does not bare out. And when it comes to veracity – given the volumes of reported uses, one would expect a impacts that reflect the stats in the studies or exceed them. But we don’t have those consequences — based on the level of use even if one classify 120 million US males as addicts to the material — then the rates of sexual aggression would exceed 500,000 reported assaults, even accounting for unreported behaviors.

    Given the reported volumes of viewed material in the US one would expect greater consequence.

    And in reading several studies — the researchers openly admit from the start that there is considerable debate about the cause and effect of the material. I think what they contend is that the volume of correlates support their conclusions.

    An there is this, given the blurring of the lines of what constitutes acceptable explicit material in entertainment in general, it would very hard to ignore the impact of mainstream portrayals, not to mention the millions books that are read every years that contain explicit material in fiction and nonfiction books and other reading material. Netflix and a host of mainstream offerings online, aren’t rated “X”, but contain material in which the m]behavior is on ready display.

    I am not defending the material. But as a mechanism for population control and manipulation — and that by it’s a jewish mechanism of control — I think deserves some pushback

    • Replies: @AnonStarter
  175. @Dumbo

    Yes, Hispanics are counted as white when committing crimes. This helps in making white crime rates look far worse than they actually are.

    Maybe you aren’t aware that they are counted as nonwhite when perceived as the victims of hate crimes.

    Thanks for helping to illustrate that the fundamental bias in our legal system is anti-white.

    Did it never occur to you that there’s NO Jewish version of what you and Jones are doing? When do you ever hear, “Well, we’re Ashkenazim, Mizhrahim, and Sephardim, therefore there’s no such thing as a Jew! And anyway, I can’t even get along with my own mother, so this whole ‘Jewish identity’ thing is a joke!”

    Nope. They’re far smarter than you in that sense.

  176. CBTerry says:

    Dr. Jones’ comment on the Marquis De Sade alone makes this article worth reading. The great Catholic intellectual historian Stephen Tonsor often mentioned De Sade in his lectures, recognizing him as a great anti-Enlightenment figure who recognized, through his own perverse being, that Nature guarantees neither morality nor purpose in history.

  177. Dumbo says:

    Nope. They’re far smarter than you in that sense.

    Jews are far more united than whites, as your own comment well illustrates.

    Goodbye.

    • Replies: @Nathan Bedford Bonsai
  178. CBTerry says:

    “the young men who were the main victims of this campaign of covert psychological warfare announced a boycott of pornography and the masturbation which was its invariable companion . . .”

    Absolutely — masturbation is the invariable companion of pornography, and pornography is best defined as whatever turns you on.

    As such, it is unclear that distinctions between soft-core and hard-core pornography are relevant. I recall a law school dean saying that he asked a Justice if the Court had not ruled as obscene material that the Justices would have no interest in watching and ruled as not-obscene material that they would. The Justice’s response was an angry glare.

    As one involved in the mental health field, I found Styx’s equivocation on the addictiveness of pornography ignorant and his advice for people to just stop it to be ludicrous. If an addiction were that easy to stop, it would not be an addiction.

    Pornography addiction is particularly notorious in that it distorts a natural drive. Nobody has an innate drive to use cocaine or even alcohol, while having a strong sex drive is a marker of health. And because of this distinction, an Alcoholics Anonymous model is completely inapplicable to treating a pornography addiction.

    Where I disagree with Jones is his statement that people cannot make money from porn any longer. In terms of more traditional pornography this is almost certainly true, but what I am encountering is men who have blown tremendous amounts of money on cam girls. Running such cam girl sites must be lucrative.

    Cam shows, by providing live girls right onto your computer monitor, involve sexual interaction with an actual person. This makes them more similar to prostitution than to pornography, where the only interaction is a fantasy of the viewer.

    Christian Societies have long recognized prostitution as harmful and have tried to limit it. Yet we now live in a society where pornography has morphed into easily accessible virtual prostitution, with the only limit being the bank accounts of the addicted.

  179. JWK says:

    I can only speak of my own experience. I would consider an addiction to pornography superior to the addiction to non”social” media. Lust is a natural human attribute, one required for continuation of the species, and once satiated is no longer a distraction for a while. Communicating with a bastardized language without any physical presence, is NOT a natural human attribute. It’s estimated around 80% of human communication is body language, ergo we are communicating at a 20% level with what has degenerated to a primitive language. In other words a majority of us aren’t communicating at all, which I judge to be a far more effective means of political control than pornography, since without communication with others, it turns the victim into a sponge for propaganda.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  180. @Dumbo

    “Jews are far more united than whites, as your own comment well illustrates.”

    …says the guy who denied the very existence of “white” as a category, then implied we’re both white because we’re arguing.

    By your “reasoning,” you should say goodbye to Christianity because Catholics and Protestants argue.

    Confirmed—dumb enough to be an EMJ follower.

    EMJ is cancer.

    • Replies: @Dumbo
  181. Anonymous[297] • Disclaimer says:

    It was rather ignorant and factually incorrect to try and lump in rothbard with the Koch brothers, friedman, and ayn rand. Rothbard was specifically kicked out of the Cato institute because he did not go along with the Koch brothers view that libertarianism was just low tax liberalism. There is a reason that Cato hates rothbard and regularly calls him a racist the few times they even mention him.

    Rothbard supported storm Thurmond for president in 48, supported pat Buchanan for president in 92 and attempted to bring about an alliance of libertarians and paleo comsrvatives, was an open supporter of David duke (!), denied the holocaust took place, and predicted in shocking detail the rise of a right wing demagogue in approving fashion that would later be come trump. Rothbard also wanted to abolish the fed, hated the banksters, and opposed all foreign wars.

    The fed creates the easy money and credit that makes the Jewish oligarchs possible. Foreign wars allow the same sort of profit making and power creating for the oligarchs. Rothbard also opposed open borders, citing the Russian examples of trying to swarm Lithuanian and Latvian nations to alter the demographics and change the country. Mises is still attacked to this day by the Reason crowd for calling homosexuality a perversion and opposing the nation state of israel, not to mention taking the side of the fascists in Spain over the communists.

    In all of the above situations, the establishment approved “libertarians” like Koch brothers Cato/friedman/reason disagreed with rothbard and mises, and have attempted to write them out of history and slime them the same way neocons have done to pat Buchanan or Robert taft. I am not sure whether this attack was done out of ignorance, but it discredits the rest of the points in his article which I am largely sympathetic to, so he should spend a little bit of time evaluating his understanding of libertarianism if he wants to be taken seriously.

    • Replies: @CBTerry
    , @Anonymous
  182. Dumbo says:
    @Nathan Bedford Bonsai

    Thanks! You’re the first commenter who allowed me to test the “Ignore Commenter” feature. It works. Buh-bye.

  183. CBTerry says:
    @Anonymous

    I am certainly not a libertarian, but I commend you for defending the inimitable Murray Rothbard. Rothbard intensely disliked Milton Friedman, asking how somebody who is supposedly an enemy of the establishment can also be a fixture of it as Friedman so obviously was. Towards the end of his life Rothbard became close friends with Catholic Paleoconservative Thomas Fleming, whom I believe changed Rothbard’s opinion on open borders. Regardless, they clearly had the deepest respect for each other.

    As for lumping in Rothbard with Ayn Rand, Rothbard is more than qualified to speak for himself.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  184. Anonymous[297] • Disclaimer says:
    @CBTerry

    I did not have time to go into everything because I am on a kindle, but you are absolutely correct. Friedman is responsible for us having our paychecks deducted automatically with various federal taxes instead of writing quarterly or yearly checks to the IRS, while rothbard wanted to abolish the income tax, payroll tax, etc. Friedman was correct in speculating that the average deplorable joe would not typically notice or object to auto deductions vs writing out a check, so that the feds could take more money away from the citizens.

    You are right on the money about rand. Rothbard had the best takedowns and ridicule of her produced, including the hilarious play he wrote. I try to explain to conservatives that lumping in the Koch brothers crowd with rothbard and mises is like lumping in Bill Kristol or max boot with Peter brimelow or pat buchanan – they may call themselves the same term and the media certainly promote one group, but they are nothing alike.

    Re: immigration:

    https://www.lewrockwell.com/2016/04/bionic-mosquito/open-borders-anti-libertarian/

    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus
  185. @Anonymous

    Jews are 2% of the population. Their presence in the population isn’t doing much to any average measure of which they are a factor.

  186. Anonymous[297] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    Correction: Estonia and latvia were the two nation state mass immigration examples that changed rothbard’s view on immigration.

    Regardless, rothbard disagreed with the oligarchs on race, immigration, secession, the holocaust, the fed, war/foreign policy, history, and on and on. Rothbard was the worst enemy of the oligarchs, hardly in cahoots with them – which is why they despise him and slander him whenever possible.

  187. Ignatius says:
    @anon

    @anon[178] did you bump your head? OANN? That place is swarming with neocons that are of the mindset that America can do no wrong under Trump and they are foaming at the mouth to go to war with Iran based on the Fox News narrative.

  188. @Cranberries

    You want your daughters getting their asses rodded before potentially millions of witnesses online, for pay? An individual’s right to continue his or her family line invalidates your individual freedom to jack off to another’s daughter getting her ass ripped open. Libertarian degeneracy knows no contradiction until dad shows up on your doorstep and sticks a gun in your face.

    • Agree: RadicalCenter
  189. @EliteCommInc.

    /Given the reported volumes of viewed material in the US one would expect greater consequence./

    I’m not entirely sure why you decided to focus upon only one study out of the six I’ve provided in this thread thus far. You seem to be writing under the mistaken assumption that one study found a direct correlation between pornography use and reported incidents of sexual assault.

    The first alludes to a demonstrable correlation between porn use and acts of sexual aggression, which are not necessarily manifest as sexual assault. As such, your entire argument collapses.

    As for the remaining studies which prove correlation between pornography use and adverse psychological, behavioral and marital effects, you don’t bother to address them at all.

    You also write

    /An there is this, given the blurring of the lines of what constitutes acceptable explicit material in entertainment in general, it would very hard to ignore the impact of mainstream portrayals, not to mention the millions books that are read every years that contain explicit material in fiction and nonfiction books and other reading material. Netflix and a host of mainstream offerings online, aren’t rated “X”, but contain material in which the m]behavior is on ready display./

    This has also been addressed several posts above:

    Media and Sexualization: State of Empirical Research, 1995–2015

    https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00224499.2016.1142496?journalCode=hjsr20

    From the Abstract:

    Sexually objectifying portrayals of women are a frequent occurrence in mainstream media, raising questions about the potential impact of exposure to this content on others’ impressions of women and on women’s views of themselves. The goal of this review was to synthesize empirical investigations testing effects of media sexualization. … The findings provided consistent evidence that both laboratory exposure and regular, everyday exposure to this content are directly associated with a range of consequences, including higher levels of body dissatisfaction, greater self-objectification, greater support of sexist beliefs and of adversarial sexual beliefs, and greater tolerance of sexual violence toward women. Moreover, experimental exposure to this content leads both women and men to have a diminished view of women’s competence, morality, and humanity.

  190. Johan says:
    @Mefobills

    “This is why you always hear Jews shilling for democracy, as a democracy is easy to subvert and maneuver.”

    Indeed, democracy means decline, democracy means demagogy, the corrupt and incompetent ruling. Democracy means the rule of mediocrity, the rule of a low level of intelligence which can easily be controlled by those who are cunningly smart and fanatic. Democracy means increasing licentiousness, which brings advantages for the enemies of a society.
    All Zionist Jews need democracy for the countries which they want to control. Hence, this is also why the Western Zionist Empire tries to force democracy everywhere.

  191. “I’m not entirely sure why you decided to focus upon only one study out of the six I’ve provided in this thread thus far. You seem to be writing under the mistaken assumption that one study found a direct correlation between pornography use and reported incidents of sexual assault.”

    For two reasons;

    This research is not new. And the primary study that covers the twenty two studies, opens up with admitting a well established truth — the studies give us a correlation of a very broad understanding of what constitutes exposure to the material in question. I chose that one study because it is reflective of the compendium. To the credit of the original cite, they openly acknowledge that what we have are correlations.

    The study I look is typical of the kinds of conclusions that pervade cognitive research. But I do something else. I acknowledge and provide the level of exposure pf the material to the general population and then consider the negative impacts. I do that by granting out the supposed consequence of addiction and what supposedly results. And in across the board of reported consequence doesn’t even reach 1% and if I dwindle down the impact from exposure, it’s only 4% or slightly above.

    So in real world terms regardless of the study, the actual impacts cannot be duplicated to the general population or even a targeted population.

    These are self reported data sets, and without challenging their accuracy, I want to measure the exposure to impact for example, marriage. So I just take a look act the primary causes of divorce.

    https://www.marriage.com/advice/divorce/10-most-common-reasons-for-divorce/

    http://www.divorceline.org/blog/causes-of-divorce/

    https://www.poweroftwomarriage.com/info/causes-of-divorce/

    http://www.infobarrel.com/Causes_of_Divorce

    The material in question doesn’t even make the hit list across in discussions about divorce.

    https://www.wf-lawyers.com/divorce-statistics-and-facts/

    Well of course just because they don’t actually say it, doesn’t mean that it’s not reflective. Because it’s easy to make a link to the material impacting fidelity, insensitivity, etc. So, the I take a step back note the rate of increase of material exposure and note the rate of divorce and as noted since 2000 the rate of exposure has more than doubled(?) yet the divorce rate has remained relatively stable.

    So the next question might what about marriages are they or down and then make some analysis regarding whether or not the pervasiveness of the material has an impact on whether men and women are choosing marriage.

    Look here’s my view. The material is unhealthy, and how unhealthy has a lot to do with a compendium of factors: exposure, suscetpbility, suggestibility, personality, etc. The material in question, if was removed today as a singular variable, this instant, I have serious doubts it would change the rate of divorce. Is the material a contributing factor — absolutely. But for impact purposes, does it outweigh, family influence and home training and models that a person is provided to follow.

    Again, my comments are not a defense of the material. Most importantly, i looked at the study that covered the twenty that was first provided. I went beyond the abstract and hunted down the actual study. That study is posted in my comments.

    • Replies: @AnonStarter
  192. @EliteCommInc.

    [Why aren’t you writing your responses to me directly? Instead of making a general response to the thread, you should make a habit of using the “Reply” button. It’s common courtesy to do so, that your correspondent doesn’t have to sift through other irrelevant posts to arrive at your own.]

    Your argument is obfuscatory. For example, the links which you cite to disprove the assertion that pornography “doesn’t even make the hit list” do not account for the fact that many — if not most — women consider consumption of porn to constitute infidelity, which is consistently cited as the number one cause of divorce.

    Then you compare data about the increase of exposure to porn since 2000 against that of the divorce rate in the same time period, suggesting that these numbers undermine any correlation between porn consumption and divorce. The problem with this lies in determining whether the sample population of increased consumers is married, something you haven’t confirmed.

    You also completely ignore the study relevant to delay discounting, as well as the study concerning the patently detrimental effects of the sexual objectification of women as portrayed in the mainstream media.

    It’s also worth mentioning that porn addiction desensitizes the addict to direct sexual stimuli, giving rise to an increase in erectile dysfunction with real partners:

    The evidence is earth-shattering: since the Kinsey report in the 1940s, studies have found roughly the same, stable rates of chronic ED: less than 1 percent among men younger than 30, less than 3 percent in men aged 30-45.

    As of this writing, at least ten studies published since 2010 report a tremendous rise in ED. Rates of ED among men under 40 ranged from 14 percent to 37 percent, and rates of low libido from 16 percent to 37 percent. No variable related to youthful ED has meaningfully changed since then, except for one: the advent of on-demand video porn in 2006. It’s worth repeating: we went from less than 1 percent of erectile dysfunction in young men to 14 to 37 percent, an increase of several orders of magnitude.

    See also:

    https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapsychiatry/fullarticle/1874574

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26606725

    • Replies: @AnonStarter
    , @CBTerry
  193. dfordoom says: • Website
    @JWK

    I would consider an addiction to pornography superior to the addiction to non”social” media.

    You may well be correct.

    The very concept of addiction is dubious. Most so-called “addictions” are pure nonsense (you might want to check out Theodore Dalrymple’s excellent book Junk Science on this subject). What we’re talking about is engaging in an activity which is often harmless in itself but possibly harmful in excess. Alcohol for example is harmless, and even mildly beneficial, in moderation. In excess it’s harmful. But do people drink too much because they’re addicted, or simply because they’re self-indulgent?

    Or are they self-medicating another problem? It is possible that heavy porn users are in fact self-medicating to deal with the effects of loneliness and alienation. In which case the porn is not the underlying problem.

    It makes more sense to speak of over-indulgence in a particular activity rather than the emotive and misleading term addiction.

    And when it comes to over-indulgence in a particular activity it is quite possible that social media has worse effects than porn. It is even possible that over-indulgence in reading Unz Review may be harmful. Or over-indulgence in celebrity gossip sites.

    And if it’s masturbation that people are so worried about how come no-one is mentioning the extraordinary explosion in female use of vibrators over the past half century? Is masturbation bad if guys do it but OK if girls do it?

    • Replies: @CBTerry
  194. @AnonStarter

    Edit: For example, the links which you cite to disprove prove the assertion …

  195. CBTerry says:
    @AnonStarter

    The reason I emphasized Jones’s mention of the pornography-masturbation link is that I have found that men often deny or downplay it while women are often ignorant of it. I have had women tell me that they do not mind if their partner looks at porn, but then the relationship goes critical when they catch him masturbating to it, which is almost inevitable.

    And the belief that the behavior represents infidelity — which is to say, a violation of trust — skyrockets when the behavior involves another living women, as is the case with phone sex [I don’t know if this is big or not anymore, the last person I had where this was a known issue was 2012] or a cam girl site [increasingly frequent].

    That being said, the complaints I have had about sexually addictive behavior over the last several years have all been from single men. That they are bringing such a sensitive topic up with me, who is only peripherally involved in counseling / therapy, tells me that they are desperate for help.

    I do not pay much attention to studies, but particularly in this field I would be on guard for any study that involves self-reporting and to be wary in the extreme over selection bias.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    , @Jeff Stryker
  196. CBTerry says:
    @dfordoom

    The addictive behavior is never the underlying problem. With sex addictions (which go beyond pornography), the underlying problem is intimacy.

    Sex addictions are overhwelmingly male. I have never met a woman who said that she had a problem with using pornography or masturbating. I have met several women who have cheated on their partners; all but one brought this up only after they were caught, and every single one was hoping to eventually be absolved of responsibility for her action with a diagnosis of Bipolar Disorder. It is a different phenomenon with women, one that I do not pretend to understand but which seems to involve deep character issues of domination and control. I highly suspect that Suzy Favor Hamilton, who after being exposed as a high-priced call girl starting giving paid motivational speeches on Bipolar Disorder, would be an archetypical example.

    A throw-away point: As for over-indulgence in reading the Unz Review possibly being harmful, it most definitely is, or it would not be over-indulgence.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  197. dfordoom says: • Website
    @CBTerry

    The reason I emphasized Jones’s mention of the pornography-masturbation link is that I have found that men often deny or downplay it while women are often ignorant of it.

    You’re seriously telling me that there are women who don’t realise that? That would be like men not realising that women use vibrators for that purpose. Or not realising that there may be a link between drinking alcohol and getting drunk. Colour me sceptical.

    I do not pay much attention to studies, but particularly in this field I would be on guard for any study that involves self-reporting and to be wary in the extreme over selection bias.

    Agreed.

    An even bigger thing to be on guard against is the assumption that correlation proves causation, a belief that seems to be pretty much universal among the anti-porn brigade.

    And of course it is very necessary to keep in mind that those conducting the survey may have an axe to grind, and may be interpreting the results in various creative ways in order to get the answers they want.

    • Replies: @CBTerry
  198. @CBTerry

    Actually, we are moving into a situation where young women are addicted to pornography. A generation ago, this would have been unheard of but now it is not uncommon.

    I attribute this to sheer opportunity.

    Back in the eighties you had to go to sleazy sex stores. Then it became available in video stores but most women did not want to be seen renting it.

    However, once it hit the internet and women could view it anonymously, porn addiction among women spiraled downwards.

    Not it is common for women to be addicted to porn.

  199. @dfordoom

    Yes, I’m saying that, in general, the recreational view of sex is wrong, both intellectually and morally. To view sex recreationally is psychologically/anthropologically wrong since it doesn’t explain why we revile pedophilia, and morally wrong because it undermines the family.
    In any case, if Hollywood’s sexual values are accepted, there is little reason to object to porn.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    , @dfordoom
  200. “Your argument is obfuscatory. For example, the links which you cite to disprove the assertion that pornography “doesn’t even make the hit list” do not account for the fact that many — if not most — women consider consumption of porn to constitute infidelity, which is consistently cited as the number one cause of divorce.”

    And our conversation ends here —-

    I answer your press directly. The listed reasons for divorce against several sources — do not mention pornography. And while you assertion may apply, there’s no evidence that it does. My point is that the impact is not enough for pornography yo make any list. Given the nature of the complaint, — I am entirely confident that women or men would state the material as cause. it’s just not there. one would expect to see “use of x rated material” – period. and why I find it curious that is not listed. And that matters. It rebuts any real claim to”it’s the same thing as” Clearly it is not.

    Furthermore, I grant out that the material could be a contributing factor. For example when I reference a contributing factor, for some it may decrease their resistance from refraining relations outside of marriage. But even then as the data suggests, the impact overall — has not increased divorce rates. Given the volumes of exposure, against the claim — one would expect to see higher divorce rates — it’s not there. the evidence does not support the claim.
    ——-
    “Then you compare data about the increase of exposure to porn since 2000 against that of the divorce rate in the same time period, suggesting that these numbers undermine any correlation between porn consumption and divorce. ”

    incorrect. That starts at 200 and extends into the teens, if I recall. You are welcome to rehash the marriage numbers exposed to the material.

    I go a step further, I note that overall marriages are down. I leave room that one might make an argument that is the result of the material — note I doubt it, but I make room that it’s a possibility. However there is on variable that is consistent as the stated cause for divorce.

    [MORE]

    https://www.statista.com/topics/2301/alcohol-and-health/?

    https://www.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/brochures-and-fact-sheets/alcohol-facts-and-statistics

    Impacts on performance”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_and_sex

    http://chemforce.in/erectile-dysfunction-quitting-alcohol-is-tough-but-worth/

    https://ageofalchoholconsumption.wordpress.com/fact-sheet/

    And while alcohol consumption has decreased in the last two tears — as a constant staple with direct physiological short term and long term effects — it outweighs even the material in question as a hard factor.

    ——————————

    I am not sure what to do about Kinsey’s report. We now know that his research methods and conclusions were deeply speculative and incapable of replication on their face.

    https://stopthekinseyinstitute.org/kinsey-brief/

    https://studyres.com/doc/8695944/sociological-research-methods

    But suppose I took the number at face value. This is not 1947, but the social changes and expectations of the US male are significantly different and those pressures have been broadcast by several magnitudes by the advent of television which broadcast those expectations 12 ten and 24 hours a day on the network of three and then cable. You are welcome to distinguish which had more impact TV or blue screen viewing, you ate welcome to distinguish which had more impact, the “sexual revolutions” advent of the new rules regarding male female contact expectation of blue room screenings. How about the increase in the use of drugs.

    https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/nationwide-trends

    https://www.drugabuse.gov/news-events/news-releases/2019/09/marijuana-use-historic-highs-among-college-age-adults

    https://www.statista.com/statistics/611118/illicit-drug-use-during-lifetime-in-the-us-by-drug/

    https://www.livescience.com/56026-drug-use-america-2015-report.html

    impacts:

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23841867

    https://bigthink.com/philip-perry/heres-how-marijuana-use-effects-ones-sex-drive (I enjoyed this article because it cuts both ways laughing — more prmoicuous behavior)

    https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/317104.php#marijuana-and-ED

    —–

    Causes of erectile dysfunction:

    https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/erectile-dysfunction/symptoms-causes/syc-20355776?DSECTION=all

    https://www.healthline.com/health/erectile-dysfunction#causes

    https://www.curejoy.com/content/causes-of-erectile-dysfunction/#6.-psychological-and-emotional-factors

    Not a single reference to the use of any of the material in question —-

    _______________________________________

    I have no doubt that the material in question is detrimental. However, as i make clear, the overall impact based on the stated magnitude of exposure is overstated. Considering the impact of just drugs legal and illegal and their growth is in my view the more impactful factors.

    ———————————————–
    “You also completely ignore the study relevant to delay discounting, as well as the study concerning the patently detrimental effects of the sexual objectification of women as portrayed in the mainstream media.”

    This comment alone undermines nearly the entire case because it pollutes the variables. And I make the observation that what constitutes material that has the same effect — is not distinguished from mainstream media. In short, mainstream media is more pervasive and its content promotes the same — in fact, I will go a step further the social pressures placed on body image by the mainstream exceeds that of the material inquestion. The fact that the researchers and yourself muddy the waters, supports what the initial study admits that the cause of said behavior is not linked exclusively to the material.

    ———————————

    I would go so far as to say that the Film, “Kramer verses Kramer” had a greater impact on the nature of relationships including increased divorce rates than the material in question of the time. in fact the number of films mainstreamed that reflect divorce as staple along with cohabitation had greater impact.

    I do not support the material. I don’t deny that it has impact.

    • Replies: @CBTerry
    , @AnonStarter
  201. CBTerry says:
    @dfordoom

    As for the porn-masturbation link, what I sh0uld have written is that they say that they don’t mind if he looks at porn as long as he does not masturbate to it, which is a recipe for disaster because they actually think that he will abstain, and then when they catch him they feel betrayed. So rethinking this, it would be more precise to say that women often do not appreciate the strength of the link.

    But you would be amazed at what people can believe and not believe. As for alcohol, I’ve had people call me up drunk but deny a few days later that they have a drinking problem. I recently had somebody who claimed their documented delirium was due to some new blood pressure medication, not any of the drugs that showed up in their urine. I’ve had people stoned on opiates fall asleep on me and then deny that their dose is affecting their mentation. How much of this is lying to me and how much to themselves, I do not know.

  202. CBTerry says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    The impact of drugs must be enormous. Unbelievable how many kids / young people are on amphetamine. Amphetamine causes a dopamine surge that can enhance sexual performance and libido, which may explain part of their popularity and high street value. I have met men and women who admit to having taken them for sexual enhancement.

    There is a myth that taking amphetamine is harmless if prescribed (blessed) by some shrink, but even so abusing them is easily done by binging on several at a time or grinding and snorting for higher peak levels.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  203. “The impact of drugs must be enormous. Unbelievable how many kids / young people are on amphetamine. Amphetamine causes a dopamine surge that can . . .”

    Given the prevelance of mind and metabolism substances in our society, I have no doubt that they play a large role in in everyone of the dysfunctions associated with the material in discussion. I would further argue as can hardly be ignored that the mainstream of other impactful variables are also huge contributors.

    I am not supporting the promotion of the material in question. But all of the evidence that points to the material in question as singular or the most powerful variable is inaccurate. What is stated about the research is not what the research indicates.

  204. @EliteCommInc.

    And our conversation ends here —-,” said EliteCommInc., thereafter continuing the conversation.

    I certainly hope it hasn’t ended, but before I proceed further, I’d like you answer my first question:

    Why aren’t you using the “Reply” button to submit your responses to me?

  205. “Why aren’t you using the “Reply” button to submit your responses to me?”

    Hmmmm . . . I think i have answered this query before.

    My comment at this stage, anyone who thinks my comments are in defense of the material in question is deeply and I mean deeply mistaken.

    • Replies: @AnonStarter
    , @AnonStarter
  206. @EliteCommInc.

    /Hmmmm . . . I think i have answered this query before./

    Not for me, you haven’t.

    Indulge me, please, however mundane the answer.

  207. E.Michael Jones is a man who cares deeply about his fellow man and his fellow Americans. I can say without hesitation that he is the greatest Christian I have ever heard speak. I have a great deal of respect for his work and his character.
    I would add two things:
    1. I saw his ‘debate’ with this guy called ‘Styxehhammer’. Clearly Styx is an emotional child. His ability to obfuscate, misdirect and engage in petty tactics like ‘what-about’ and ad hominem attacks was there for all to witness. Never heard this guy speak before. Will never waste time on that loser again.
    2.The Rockefeller’s funded the KInsey Institute. The purpose was to destroy America’s Northern European Christian sexual mores. Kinsey was completely unethical and allowed pedophiles to sexually assault children as young as 4 months old as he ‘scientifically’ measured data. Absolutely disgusting. Kinsey was evil as was Hollywood for making a movie in which they covered up all the dirt and used Liam Neeson to try to salvage Kinsey’s reputation. If Kinsey were alive today he would be hated and, probably, end up killed. KInsey falsified data to manipulate public opinion: the average person masturbated every day (not true), had sex with animal as part of their sexual experimentation (blatant lie, not common or normal), had same-sex relations (not common but aberrant), had sex with siblings growing up (happens but not as often as he suggested),etc. The lies never stopped. Kinsey took the money from Rockefeller and delivered a research report designed to distort American and European sexuality.

    I just wanted to point out that efforts to destroy our civilization and our culture come from two groups in a co-ordinated and deliberate effort: Jews and WASP financial ‘elite’-scum from ancient, multi-generational wealth. My research leads me to believe that Jews are the servants in this dynamic. The Rothschilds are not an exception. How many people curse the Orsini, the DuPonts, etc? The Rothschilds are out there, front and centre. The real power players avoid publicity and don’t get their pictures taken.

    The average person, myself included, doesn’t think like a wealthy person. Wealthy people who have had wealth for say, 200-1000 years, or even longer (such as the Orsini clan; descended from Roman patricians), realized that they stay at the top only by kicking away the ladder. They only allow people to move up that they have vetted. They prevent some from moving up and outright destroy others. This is done in collusion with others who have the same level of wealth. Once you have money you start being susceptible to things on a spiritual level; you are a target. Often, wealthy people, of their own volition, seek to maintain and expand their wealth and power through supernatural means. This is a very dangerous position to be in. Take a look at a picture of David Rockefeller and tell me that man looks like a normal human being. He does not; the evil that man funded in his lifetime changed him.

  208. JWK says:
    @J.W.

    Married to one for 35 years.

  209. @Jeff Stryker

    I’m always amazed by Mr.Stryker and his self-hating white pathology.
    Jews are really screwed up people. They gamble, do coke, cheat on taxes, cheat on their wives and bring std’s home. They out-marry at alarming rates especially with blacks. They have a real thing for underage children (pedo rape is more common among Jews, especially Rabbis, than any other group I am aware of). The Rabbi’s are giving babies herpes.
    Watching Jews is like watching a play about the sin of man to the 4th degree. I guess you wouldn’t see that living in Asia though, right?

    Jews have the ability to censor the facts about their community because they own the Media and have the ADL, AIPAC, ETC.
    Really Jeff, how hard is this to figure out?

    • Replies: @Sir Launcelot Canning
  210. dfordoom says: • Website
    @CBTerry

    I have never met a woman who said that she had a problem with using pornography or masturbating.

    Which may simply mean that women are reluctant to admit that maybe they might have such problems.

    The addictive behavior is never the underlying problem. With sex addictions (which go beyond pornography), the underlying problem is intimacy.

    Which logically means that women over-indulging in vibrator use would be just as much of a problem as men over-indulging in porn. But for some reason the arguments on this subject seem to keep coming back to the idea that guys masturbating is bad but women masturbating is fine.

    In fact most of the arguments I’m seeing on this site on this subject are uncannily similar to 19th century arguments against masturbation – that it saps virility. Manly men should be pure. They should be doing manly things, like chopping down trees and hunting and joining the army. Porn is stealing our Precious Bodily Fluids!

    It just seems like Puritan fear of sexuality. Combined with Puritan fear of women as wicked temptresses who drain men of their manliness.

    As for the argument about intimacy, sure intimacy is a problem. In an ideal world everyone would be happily married having pure marital sex solely for the purpose of making babies. But we don’t live in an ideal world. In our world (which we refer to as the real world) not everyone is lucky enough to have an ideal marriage. Telling men who aren’t fortunate enough to have storybook marriages that they’re not allowed to have any sexual pleasure either seems to me to be a bit mean-spirited. Just as it would be mean-spirited to tell women who don’t have storybook marriages that they’re not allowed to pleasure themselves with their vibrators.

  211. dfordoom says: • Website
    @CBTerry

    The impact of drugs must be enormous.

    Yes. Both legal and illegal drugs. When people start fretting about Millennials not having much desire to have actual sex they’re overlooking the enormous consumption of antidepressants (especially of the SSRI variety) in our society. Antidepressants can, and often do, kill sexual desire stone dead. If you’re looking for a reason for increasing levels of sexual dysfunction then antidepressants are likely to be the single biggest factor.

    Even worse, antidepressants can and often do kill any desire for emotional intimacy. They stop you from feeling depressed by stopping you from feeling anything at all.

    I’m not arguing for a ban on antidepressants. In some cases they may do more good than harm. But they’re outrageously over-prescribed, and depression is outrageously over-diagnosed.

    Maybe we should be encouraging our young men to abstain from drugs. I think you can make a strong case that drugs have done more individual and social harm than any other single factor.

    Once again the problem here is that people are focusing on wanting to ban things that they personally find distasteful while overlooking other things that may in fact be much more harmful.

  212. @EliteCommInc.

    Alright, I’m not sure why you don’t answer that simple question, but I’ll proceed with my reply anyways …

    It appears to me that you’ve been laboring under the assumption that I provide links to those studies in order to support the thesis that pornography is promulgated by Jews — in numbers disproportionate to those of the general population — as a means of population control and behavioral manipulation.

    This is a separate argument that I haven’t advanced thus far, one which I’ll address near the close of this response. For the time being, I set it aside in order to focus upon the implications of the available literature.

    First of all, let’s review once more our conclusions about the aforementioned studies …

    Insofar as the first study concerning sexual aggression is concerned, I find your earlier points worthy of consideration and do not contest them. This is not to say, however, that I agree with the conclusion that there is no direct correlation between consumption of pornography and sexual aggression. Rather, the available data simply doesn’t support the thesis thus far.

    The second cited study related to lower interpersonal satisfaction in porn consumers is one that remains uncontested. You haven’t addressed it other than with general derision toward self-reporting, which doesn’t constitute a refutation.

    The third and fourth — related to divorce rates — you’ve attempted to address by citing statistics from an uncited source that porn consumption has increased twofold since 2000, yet divorce rates have remained stable during the same period. The crucial variable is the sample population, which may or may not consist largely of unmarried individuals. As such, I’d appreciate citation to the relevant statistics — that is, the increase of specifically married consumers. Otherwise, your conclusions remain unsupported.

    Moreover, you assert that “use of x-rated material” or the like must, of a necessity, be explicitly referenced in the available lists in order to retain relevancy as a leading cause of divorce. It’s a speculative argument, at best, but I’ll grant that you may level the same accusation at my own. At the very least, you admit that consumption could be a “contributing factor.”

    As for the study proving that porn consumption results in lower delay discounting, you don’t contest this finding as well. This particular study is significant in that its findings demonstrate that porn consumption bears clear potential to adversely affect the decision-making ability of the consumer.

    After I referenced the sixth study, you wrote:

    /This comment alone undermines nearly the entire case because it pollutes the variables./

    Well, given that you’ve made some obvious assumptions about “the entire case” I’ve been making, this isn’t so.

    Personally, I’m not looking at the effects of pornography alone, but rather, I include “the patently detrimental effects of the sexual objectification of women as portrayed in the mainstream media” as a significant factor in determining such phenomena as the marked increase in erectile dysfunction, regardless of the direct psychological causes (e.g. depression, etc.) that the Mayo Clinic or other such sites may list. In fact, you make a salient point by saying the following:

    /This is not 1947, but the social changes and expectations of the US male are significantly different and those pressures have been broadcast by several magnitudes by the advent of television which broadcast those expectations 12 ten and 24 hours a day on the network of three and then cable. You are welcome to distinguish which had more impact TV or blue screen viewing, you ate welcome to distinguish which had more impact, the “sexual revolutions” advent of the new rules regarding male female contact expectation of blue room screenings./

    Let’s just say that it’s impossible to deny the increased availability and proliferation of sexually objectifying stimuli since the late forties, as well as their concomitant adverse effects.

    As to the thesis of Mr. Jones …

    In “Triple-exthnics,” an expose on the outsized role of Jews in the pornography industry, Dr. Nathan Abrams, a Lecturer in Modern American History at the University of Aberdeen, begins:

    https://www.jewishquarterly.org/issuearchive/articled325.html?articleid=38

    A story little told is that of Jews in Hollywood’s seedier cousin, the adult film industry. Perhaps we’d prefer to pretend that the ‘triple-exthnics’ didn’t exist, but there’s no getting away from the fact that secular Jews have played (and still continue to play) a disproportionate role throughout the adult film industry in America. Jewish involvement in pornography has a long history in the United States, as Jews have helped to transform a fringe subculture into what has become a primary constituent of Americana. These are the ‘true blue Jews’.

    Abrams continues:

    Furthermore, as Orthodox Jew and porn gossipmonger Luke Ford explains on his website (lukeford.net): ‘Porn is just one expression of [the] rebellion against standards, against the disciplined life of obedience to Torah that marks a Jew living Judaism.’ … Extending the subversive thesis, Jewish involvement in the X-rated industry can be seen as a proverbial two fingers to the entire WASP establishment in America. Some porn stars viewed themselves as frontline fighters in the spiritual battle between Christian America and secular humanism. According to Ford, Jewish X-rated actors often brag about their ‘joy in being anarchic, sexual gadflies to the puritanical beast’. Jewish involvement in porn, by this argument, is the result of an atavistic hatred of Christian authority: they are trying to weaken the dominant culture in America by moral subversion. [emphasis added]

    Josh Lambert, academic director of the Yiddish Book Center, visiting assistant professor of English at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, and author of Unclean Lips: Obscenity, Jews, and American Culture, wrote a piece for Ha’aretz entitled “‘Dirty Jews’ and the Christian Right,” which bears the following subtitle:

    Brilliant actors like Larry David and Sarah Silverman are challenging America’s powerful religious, family-friendly culture and asserting their Jewishness by glorifying obscenity.

    A highly-recommended read, available here:

    https://www.haaretz.com/jewish/.premium-dirty-jews-and-the-christian-right-1.5318804

    All of this provides glaring evidence that militantly secular Jews, in dominating both the porn and mainstream media industries, have indeed weaponized sexually objectifying stimuli against Gentiles of a predominantly Christian, socially conservative milieu.

    The adverse psychological and social effects of this campaign are inarguable; and you don’t convincingly contest the findings of three cited studies that confirm them. Furthermore, they provide evidence of the very behavioral manipulation that you earlier denied.

    All of that said, I do appreciate your effort at precision, which compels me to disregard the first cited study as supportive of its stated findings. It is my hope that you’re capable of reciprocating such equity when responding to the material I’ve presented.

    Thank you.

    • Replies: @Dumbo
  213. obvious says:

    the real question is why do gentiles insist on endlessly false comparisons

    try BIG and MANY vs. FEW and SPECIFIC

  214. dfordoom says: • Website
    @jack daniels

    To view sex recreationally is psychologically/anthropologically wrong since it doesn’t explain why we revile pedophilia, and morally wrong because it undermines the family.

    I’m not convinced by your first point. You can have social taboos against certain things (such as pedophilia and incest) without necessarily extending those social taboos to all recreational sex. In fact you can believe in marriage whilst reviling child marriage or incestuous marriage. You can believe in marriage whilst reviling homosexual marriage. You can also believe that recreational sex is generally OK but still strongly disapprove of certain practices (pedophilia, incest, sodomy, etc).

    Social taboos against things like pedophilia and incest usually have a sound basis. These are things which are clearly destructive to family relationships. You could add adultery to the list. The social taboo against sodomy was psychologically sound – it’s clearly unnatural and in fact physically harmful.

    There aren’t the same social taboos against recreational sex in general since (unless you have religious scruples about it) the serious social and individual harmful effects aren’t so obvious.

    Such taboos as exist against masturbation are entirely religious, or (in the 19th century and again today) they’re the product of pseudoscientific hysteria about young men’s virility being stolen. The actual social and individual harmful effects are essentially imaginary.

  215. dfordoom says: • Website
    @jack daniels

    Yes, I’m saying that, in general, the recreational view of sex is wrong, both intellectually and morally

    How exactly do you define recreational sex? Does it mean all sex that doesn’t lead to procreation?

  216. Dumbo says:

    In fact most of the arguments I’m seeing on this site on this subject are uncannily similar to 19th century arguments against masturbation – that it saps virility. Manly men should be pure. They should be doing manly things, like chopping down trees and hunting and joining the army. Porn is stealing our Precious Bodily Fluids!

    Chopping wood, or even having a harmless hobby, is certainly better than watching porn and fapping all day, like many Western men unfortunately do today.

    However your point about antidepressants is correct. They may be responsible for other negative effects as well, besides the sexual issue.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  217. Dumbo says:
    @AnonStarter

    Time and again, Jews say that corrupting Christians is one of their favorite obsessions, but nobody believes them.

    Also, calling Larry David and Sarah Silverman, who only perform as themselves, “brilliant actors”, is the utmost chutzpah.

  218. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Dumbo

    Chopping wood, or even having a harmless hobby, is certainly better than watching porn and fapping all day, like many Western men unfortunately do today.

    We’d also do well to remember the Law of Unintended Consequences. If you take their porn away these young men might race out to do healthy manly outdoorsy activities and they might become pillars of society.

    But they might spend their time instead playing moronic violent video games. Or watching mindless reality TV. Or doing drugs. Or drinking themselves into a stupor. Or committing sexual assaults.

    It’s interesting that the increasing availability of porn has coincided with dramatic falls in crime rates, including sexual assaults. Could porn actually do more good than harm? I have no idea, but maybe it’s possible.

    It’s always important to remember that any any kind of social engineering, even the well-intentioned kind, can have have an effect that is the reverse of what was expected.

  219. “The second cited study related to lower interpersonal satisfaction in porn consumers is one that remains uncontested.”

    In short, none of their conclusions are generalizable — period. They don’t pan out ass a narrative truth for the general population. That’s why that original study that examines the 22 is important. And why I highlight the terms used as qualifiers. Those qualifiers delimit the the cause to effect across populations.

    And that is the case throughout. The ability to apply cognitive analysis across populations requires a study of considerable larger sample sizes and even then —

    Hmmmm . . . no. It doesn’t matter whether you think it’s jewish control or not the positions are the same.

    You simply don’t have the impacts stated. I could just as well contends that it is not pornography that impact the impersonal, but rather the dystopian dismantling of the traditional relationships by the mainstream media. That’s one of the issues with corellations.

    I simply grant out the obvious — the material has an impact and it has an impact on both the interpersonal and the society at large. But whether it singularly is the source or itself the consequence of other factors that leads men and women to turn to such material is not answered by the material.

    You are arguing needlessly, the data foes not support the impact and that is a rather simple case to make. I made it, supported it and when the references to mainstream factors were granted out in at least one study —

    the case is essentially over. You could singularly pluck out any number of studies from the twenty two — the end to the general would be the same. And the internal analysis created all kinds of havoc.

    One the columns are down, and the foundation cracked asunder — there’;s little benefit in talking about the bricks that might work. And that is why I ended. It is quite common to have the issues dragged out so as to blur the essentials. It’s great advocacy, but it lacks veracity. If you locate a study that excludes variables such as: alcohol use, drugs legal or illegal, mainstream impacts of movies, TV, music . . .

    Take for example, your introduction of Kinsey — 1947, it is contended that his research overhauled contemporary views of intimate behavior — that impacted how the material was dealt with in film, TV , and most importantly — every level of education, since ——

    here’s the kicker, the material in question was still relegated to out and away places for viewing

    Playboy, Penthouse — were born out of the study . . . not the other way around. And why my side constantly loses in these discussions, misdirected targeting. you want to advocate against the material fine. You have my support. But the real culprit is elsewhere.

    Satan disguised not as a developer of naked images engaging in relations, but as the upstanding Ph.D, angel of light, in classrooms making the way for the material as harmless. It’s the pastors who have been turned not by pornography, but by socioliology, and psycholoical advocacy.

    Railing against the material is easy. What takes skill and effort is taking on the angels of light. And god says is generally not enough. Though I agree that God says so.

    I have been in the front lines of these battles . . . and the negative research of the impact of this material has been around a long time — yet, note the volumes. The impacts are not what is claimed and the enemy doing the most harm is not the obvious.

    It would be an error to consider a lack of response the result of an inability to respond, including to individual studies.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    , @AnonStarter
  220. Remember how most porn videos showcases black males n white females.

    There were a few gigantic Reddit question threads on this very question. All the top voted/manipulated answers were this is a white male fetish. The blame is squarely on white males.

    Which is pure bullshit.

    This is a psychological attack on the white males and the white race as a whole. Ties into a recent unz article about the Jewish producers of porn are the majority in the industry. And the dropping birth rate.

  221. dfordoom says: • Website
    @EliteCommInc.

    I could just as well contends that it is not pornography that impact the impersonal, but rather the dystopian dismantling of the traditional relationships by the mainstream media. That’s one of the issues with corellations.

    Agreed.

    Also people constantly confound causes and effects. Is porn the cause of societal breakdown, or is it merely a symptom? I’m inclined to think it’s a symptom.

    I’m also inclined to think that unless we can magically recreate traditional society with traditional religious moral values, and all the other features of traditional societies (extended families, traditional sex rôles, parental involvement in the choice of spouses for their kids, etc) then we’re stuck with a society in which a very large number of people are going to be alienated and lonely.

    Those alienated lonely people are going to look for something to makes their lives less empty and less unpleasant. If they don’t tun to porn they’re very likely to turn to drugs and alcohol. Or prostitution. Or sexual assault. Or violence. Or all manner of destructive anti-social behaviours.

    There’s no point in getting hysterical about the symptoms of a disease if you don’t treat the underlying cause.

    It may well be that in many ways our society was much healthier in the 1950s, or in the 19th century, or even in medieval times. But your chances of turning back the clock even to the 1980s are very very slim. Your chances of turning back the clock to the 1950s are pretty much zero.

    There’s an amazing amount of wishful thinking among many on the Dissident Right. People who actually seem to believe they can recreate a traditional Christian society.

  222. I thought that this Styx character would be a better debater than this. He didn’t really reply to the main points, and just chose to categorize everything he opposed as a religious argument.

    Porn is poison and it is dragging out society into the toilet.

  223. “It may well be that in many ways our society was much healthier in the 1950s, or in the 19th century, or even in medieval times. But your chances of turning back the clock even to the 1980s are very very slim. Your chances of turning back the clock to the 1950s are pretty much zero.”

    I am not sure that we can’t make some hefty changes. But it requires some consistency and first checking our own attics. And getting our story straight. Jesus essentially called for spiritual reckoning and renewal. It does not mean we are perfect, but we walk cautiously going forward.

    said as a person who is deeply bitter, and am fully aware, i have my own mirror issues — glaring me in the face.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  224. dfordoom says: • Website
    @EliteCommInc.

    I am not sure that we can’t make some hefty changes.

    Some changes are possible. The problem is that those who see the necessity for such changes are often hopelessly unrealistic about what can be achieved, and their extremist prescriptions (and in some cases out-and-out craziness) are going to scare off most people.

  225. Just to be clear

    I am not advocating for the material.

  226. @EliteCommInc.

    /It doesn’t matter whether you think it’s jewish control or not/

    I didn’t make the argument. Jewish scholars themselves did.

    /You could singularly pluck out any number of studies from the twenty two — the end to the general would be the same./

    Well, here’s a big problem: you’re conflating the 22 studies cited in the first meta-analysis to which I linked with the remaining studies I originally cited in my first and second posts to this thread.

    I’m not sure why you do this, but it certainly explains why you imagine “the case is over.”

    /In short, none of their conclusions are generalizable — period. They don’t pan out ass a narrative truth for the general population. That’s why that original study that examines the 22 is important. And why I highlight the terms used as qualifiers. Those qualifiers delimit the the cause to effect across populations.

    And that is the case throughout./

    Only in the first cited meta-analysis (concerning sexual aggression) and the third and fourth studies (concerning divorce) is this verifiable in any real sense. You may assert there isn’t a means by which to practically quantify the effect on interpersonal relations or delay discounting in the general population, but this isn’t the same as an out-of-hand dismissal of those particular studies’ findings. As for the sixth study (concerning objectifying portrayals of women in mainstream media), everything you’ve said thus far actually corroborates its findings.

    Look … We can recycle these details in perpetuity. You’ve made some valid points, particularly in relation to the first study, though I don’t agree that your conclusions about it are necessarily applicable to all other studies. From what I gather, your argument is a general criticism of the scientific applicability of survey-type studies which may include loaded questions, rely heavily upon self-reporting, and use speculative language (“suggests that,” “may be,” etc.) in articulating findings.

    But said language is commonplace in such studies where — rather than hard-wired certainties — tendencies, probabilities, and trends are sought. How is the effect of consumers’ increased delay discounting measurable in the general population? Good question. Does our inability to measure its effect in the general population invalidate the finding? Not at all.

    /I simply grant out the obvious — the material has an impact and it has an impact on both the interpersonal and the society at large. But whether it singularly is the source or itself the consequence of other factors that leads men and women to turn to such material is not answered by the material./

    Again, this depends upon the study. Each has to be examined on its own merits, much as you did with the first cited meta-analysis.

    I can’t argue with your statements concerning Kinsey’s influence upon American popular culture — one made possible largely by the major publishing houses and periodicals of his day — and I certainly won’t deny that other factors may lead to said consumption, but a word of caution is in order …

    Creating a dichotomy between Kinsey’s influence and “the material” seems unnecessary to me. The CIA (via Project MKULTRA) may very well be the primary culprit in popularizing the use of certain narcotics, but what difference does it make when we’re more likely confronted with the narcotic or its effects upon society? Similarly, in the current mainstream, there are readily available oceans of “material,” but mere droplets of Kinsey.

    In the vaunted realms of academe, mighty warriors of intellect contend for a throne both invisible and unattainable to most folks, who see the world in far less abstract terms. In my experience, “God says” works better for them than a PhD thesis exposing the adverse societal effects of Alfred Kinsey’s work or even recent findings from the National Institute of Health. The greater problem lies not in the depth of one’s intellectual comprehension, but in the answer as to why, for many, God remains unsatisfactory.

    I appreciate your fighting the good fight and seeking to maintain scientific integrity in advancing your argument.

    And, though I’m still curious as to why you don’t respond directly to me, I’ll leave it up to you do decide whether or not to answer that question. (Avoiding scripts, perhaps?)

    Until next time, take care.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    , @dfordoom
  227. @steinbergfeldwitzcohen

    I always like your comments. However, you forgot baum and blatt! Er, that would be to unwieldly.

  228. dfordoom says: • Website
    @AnonStarter

    From what I gather, your argument is a general criticism of the scientific applicability of survey-type studies which may include loaded questions, rely heavily upon self-reporting, and use speculative language (“suggests that,” “may be,” etc.) in articulating findings.

    Such studies are obviously completely unscientific.

    Using pseudoscience like surveys for marketing purposes is fine. If you get it wrong the worst thing that can happen is that your new product line doesn’t see as well as you’d expected. But using such pseudoscience for the purposes of deciding social policy has much more serious consequences. And contemplating infringing people’s freedoms on the basis of pseudoscience is clearly misguided, if not flat out wrong.

    • Replies: @AnonStarter
  229. dfordoom says: • Website
    @AnonStarter

    As for the sixth study (concerning objectifying portrayals of women in mainstream media)

    What does objectifying women even mean? It’s feminist psychobabble. Again it’s assertions presented as objective facts.

    • Replies: @AnonStarter
  230. “Well, here’s a big problem: you’re conflating the 22 studies cited in the first meta-analysis to which I linked with the remaining studies I originally cited in my first and second posts to this thread.’

    No the very choice i made was to read the study that was about the twenty two. And I stated , if you can locate a study that is not a corelation, i might be willing to discuss that. If you can find a study in which the researchers or advocates of the researcher’s study aren’t over stating what the study actually indicates — that would be worth a conversation.

    If you can locate a study in which the other variables do not play a significant role, you are welcome to offer it up. I took a look ate several studies and commented on some. Here’s another hurdle. The studies are comprised of information from other countries. The role that physical intimacy plays in Many parts of Europe is entirely different than in the US. And let’s do be honest, the impacts of the material will be impacted by cultural. So those impacts while relevant in europe are not by definition relevant here.

    Again, sample size is a real problem. And it’s a problem because, the samples are global. And that would require something larger than 50K in my view, given the mature of the material in question. I don’t think the research is “bad:” just that conclusions might be over stated.

    My reasons for my comment about ending:

    – you have stated that there are impacts — I had already indicated that there were impacts.

    – when examining the general population against the volume of exposure and i think there is a lot according to the sources I noted, the general population is not experiencing the proportional effects as in the studies. In otherwords, I should be able to look at the study apply it to the population and acquire similar stats to the population and effects. We don;t see that. Let’s take your divorce reference. I do not disagree that those people in that study are not effected by the material which led to divorce. I have no doubt that is the case. I have no doubt that people even divorce over because of effects of the material – no problems. But if in fact, it has the same effect across the general, one would expect to see evidence. And looking at the causes of divorce, it’s not even mentioned. I think your response that women consider such material adultery — would make an interesting and unique study. However, in those references, they note that a spouse would state several reasons — and adultery as pornography is listed. But across the board several issues are ever present and I mention them. Te material may accompany other issues, but given the claims about its impact on marriage — I would expect it to make a showing.

    main stream media — the contamination of man and the material is a real hurdle. Once it is granted tout that the main stream media of the cause — there simply is no point talking about the material. If the main stream media is the primary source, then you undermine the case against pornography. Which suggests something about the seriousness of the advocacy to limit the impact
    on self image and the objectivication assail.

    I on other hand grant that the mainstream media is huge problem and I state why. When i say mainstream media I am including film, TV, advertisements, entertainment . . . that has been entering homes normalizing not only divorce, objectifying humaness and codifying the same since the first films began rolling out stories of men and women. And why the material in question has always been hardsell, and jealous of the main, whose approval from authority figures such as parents and teachers, psychiatrists, etc. has the stamp of approval. I am would put a dollar to a penny that Britany Spears, Miley Cyrus have a far greater impact on body image, explicit sexual behavior, the nature of relations, moral value of traditional mores, than the relevent name to hit the popular circuit for having relations with the president. Today’s you are shelling out billions for the material of those two young women intimate displays on stage mocking human relations. And yet these young women are modern icons of . . . well, it’s not of a virtuous life , not even a moderate life. And yet, there’s Dr. Orenstein mouthing off about pornography as though — naked women are the trend setters. A get a small laugh because she thinks that the prep school crowd are the future trend setters. In her mind the popularity of dress and manner “To live Crew” or “Iron Maiden” or “Kiss” was was set at the prep school environment in which she limits her interviews with young men and boys. And apparently misses the boat about what the influencers are on the young mind.
    Again, the test of reality against the advocacy — it does not take out the material as a source of influence. but to date there are no popular dress up dolls of the actresses involved in the material. Dr. Orenstein are misleading people.

  231. “What does objectifying women even mean? It’s feminist psychobabble. Again it’s assertions presented as objective facts.”

    Actually it’s not. But the manner in which it used I think is semantically abusive. Seeing each other as objects in a nonunique, however. When i am looking at Miss Tina Turner on stage. I am can’t help but note her legs. Ok, so I am leg guy. That is objectivfication. And to some extend, it’s part of the human condition. Feminists, will take that honest appraisal and claim that is all that I see of her and that makes her less than a human person of value. I used to teach a course and one section of that course is about attraction and relational dynamics. As routine, i would ask each student what quality they found most attractive in the opposite sex (in those days a mere several tears ago, it was still ok to make that distinction “opposite sex”).

    The very first thing we notice about a man or woman that one might be attracted is the physical — And why no industry is more invested in body image than; clothing, cosmetics, and all things to physical — athletics: gymns, health spas, exercise equipment . . . because attractiveness is to another trait of value — health. But it is vert animal and it is very hunman.

    There is an entire cadre of advocates who take this natural aspect of humaness and turn it into a monster so as advance the case for more human empathy and care — nothing wrong with human care and empathy. But there is something drastically wrong with turning this healthy response to someone’s appearance into a demon lurking behind every. Miss Joely Richardson is offended that I find her legs attractive — anytime she would like to risk getting know me better. She is welcome to invite me to tea. There is no indication that noting another’s attractiveness should be a crime — laugh — and utterly misses the point of the purpose to be attractive. The advocacy is overwrought. excuse my oggling Miss Coulter, Miss Jolie, and Miss Dern . . . and Miss Turner, love her music, buy those legs are to die for —-

    Millions of girls are not buying the music of Doris Day, and they are not buying the music of Beyonce because they see as the woman if the year.

    In fact, women care more about what they look like compared to each other more than men. Miss Universe, Miss USA, Miss Black Tenn, Miss Teen — largest viewers are women in spite of lower ratings. The feminist would applaud their victory — depriving young women of the pleasure . . . of taking note of attractiveness —

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    , @AnonStarter
  232. @dfordoom

    /What does objectifying women even mean?/

    Media and Sexualization: State of Empirical Research, 1995–2015

    https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00224499.2016.1142496?journalCode=hjsr20

    From the Abstract:

    Sexually objectifying portrayals of women are a frequent occurrence in mainstream media, raising questions about the potential impact of exposure to this content on others’ impressions of women and on women’s views of themselves. The goal of this review was to synthesize empirical investigations testing effects of media sexualization. … The findings provided consistent evidence that both laboratory exposure and regular, everyday exposure to this content are directly associated with a range of consequences, including higher levels of body dissatisfaction, greater self-objectification, greater support of sexist beliefs and of adversarial sexual beliefs, and greater tolerance of sexual violence toward women. Moreover, experimental exposure to this content leads both women and men to have a diminished view of women’s competence, morality, and humanity.

    If you want to believe that no such thing exists, feel free. I’m not interested in trying to explain this to those who dismiss it out of hand as “feminist psychobabble.”

  233. @dfordoom

    /Such studies are obviously completely unscientific./

    If you believe so, then we should also disregard a huge bulk of studies in other scientific domains, since they also make use of the same language as a precautionary measure, not because the findings are arbitrary or capricious.

    And I highly doubt your freedoms are going to be snatched from you on the basis of such studies. To imagine so requires a hefty helping of imagination, seasoned generously with paranoia.

  234. “But said language is commonplace in such studies where — rather than hard-wired certainties — tendencies, probabilities, and trends are sought. How is the effect of consumers’ increased delay discounting measurable in the general population? Good question. Does our inability to measure its effect in the general population invalidate the finding? Not at all.”

    Ohh good grief, I never said that — which is part of the problem. You make arguments that i do mot. i have repeatedly stated that the studies have value, but that value is very limited to that study. The point of research is the validity of its claims to a larger population. Of course the information is relevant to that group; — and may be informative for further research — hence the section of research that repeatedly states:

    the other implications of, etc. I state the relevance to that group , , , it’s not valid beyond that.

    ————————————————

    State one study, one that examines more than even two percent of any given population, just one. The sample size matters. So if you are going to discuss validity — and you dismiss my previous comment on the sample sizes and that is always a tough aspect of research. In this case, when examining that validity — it simply cannot be ignored. Furthermore, validity is not some byword. It goes to supporting the truth of a condition and the accuracy thereof. The err is not noting the research valid for a specific population — ok great, fine, but making comments that this is the case across populations — no.

    —————————————-

    “Creating a dichotomy between Kinsey’s influence and “the material” seems unnecessary to me. The CIA (via Project MKULTRA) may very well be the primary culprit in popularizing the use of certain narcotics, but what difference does it make when we’re more likely confronted with the narcotic or its effects upon society? Similarly, in the current mainstream, there are readily available oceans of “material,” but mere droplets of Kinsey.”

    This makes no sense whatsoever, And seeing that you raised the Dr. Kinsey’s research as key to the statistical change, it’s hard to comprehend why you now dismiss the work on behavior that followed is peculiar. even those researchers who are advocates of outlawing all pornography critique the influence , especially the start point of Playboy and Penthouse fare — the gateway was not pornography. But instead, Dr. Kinsey’s research and subsequent book. As I noted by the referenced material, Dr. Kinsey’s methods were deeply flawed and some of the researchers in the studies engage the same choices. For example, Dr. Kinsey’s choice for his research the US prison system. Less than one percent of the US has ever seen the inside of a jail, much less a prison. Less than one percent of women have lived in shelters, or experienced the tragedy of rape. Selecting these populations and then generalizing them is loading the deck and hardly a case for validity.

    You miss the point entirely of why Dr. Kinsey’s research is problematic. Again. so when references are made about the societal impacts — and the validity thereof, I look to the the prevelance of those impacts on the population as a whole — I went straight to the incidences as if nearly every male was addicted to the material in question. In fact, while the amount of the material in question has increased, the level of instances based on crime stats related to relational conduct has decreased. Divorces were up even when the material was largely closeted — and yet today divorces are essentially at a stand still — the relational dynamic simply is not there. But if you interview divorced couples or one gender — then your argument applies to divorce — but in the listed references — the material isn’t mentioned – reasonable implication, the material has little support that this material is a cause for divorce – for the population in general – yet you and the researchers contend that it does — and that is inaccurate.

    Hence the rehash — I acknowledge some revelance, you continue to state that I don’t — and you then attempt to divert the matter by suggesting that I consider the material invalid — generalizability is not the same as validity. Somethings may be true for some people but cannot be applied as truth for the population as a whole.

    This is the same kind of rhetoric that has accompanied crime stats, “war on police”, child abduction, sex trafficking . . .

    It’s Dr. Kinsey doing research and inserting his agenda.

    ——————————————–

    Whatever my choices regarding comments. If I choose to ignore a comment, I simply won’t respond. However, my method of response is generally one of responding to comments. My method also is double edged. I am just as inclined to miss a response to me because a person doesn’t know I have responded. I do my utmost to avoid making personal references about people or their motives unless motive is so stated. Despite being a lousy writer and continuously failing to proof-read, I respond generously, knowing full well, that I open myself to critique as result.

    I think my record of avoiding a conversation because I am afraid is non-existent. In fact, I should ignore more comments than I do — which is practically nil. I will go back to acknowledge some error I made and will so state. And if i think I have been too personal recognized by that person or not I will not as much.

    And I think despite being disliked — whatever else people think — I am not sure there is much supporting that I avoid hard issues or hide as the result of personal attacks — just taking a break is taking a break Our conversation reached an impasse when you insisted on impacts, that I readily acknowledge, but challenged the magnitude. And yet you repeatedly contend that I say the studies are invalid — I made no such claim.

    • Replies: @AnonStarter
  235. I was going to post a list of mainstream media productions everything i could find from:

    “Lolita” to “50 Shades of Grey” but was tagged with so much of the material inquestion, i opted not to

  236. @Anonymous

    Friedman was correct in speculating that the average deplorable joe would not typically notice or object to auto deductions vs writing out a check, so that the feds could take more money away from the citizens.

    That’s true, but the context was financing US involvement in World War II.
    Henry Morgenthau, Jr. was Secretary of Treasury and, if not a committed zionist at least intensely influenced by zionists who called upon him frequently to keep him in the pew, so to speak.

    In his diaries Morgenthau claims that he implemented auto deductions, in addition to increasing the tax base dramatically, from a relatively small number of very wealthy persons to wage earners — all in the years leading to WWII, all to finance WWII.

    • Replies: @Achilles Wannabe
  237. @SolontoCroesus

    Isn’t it worth mentioning that Morgenthau was committed enough to Zionism and Jewish Power that he tried to mass murder the Germans with his Morgenthau Plan which would have been the implementation of the Jewish “Germany Must Die” theme of the 30’s and 40’s?

    • Replies: @Vespasian
  238. dfordoom says: • Website
    @EliteCommInc.

    Ok, so I am leg guy. That is objectivfication. And to some extend, it’s part of the human condition. Feminists, will take that honest appraisal and claim that is all that I see of her and that makes her less than a human person of value.

    The key point that usually gets overlooked is that men respond much much more strongly to visual stimuli. That’s just the way men are. Men respond to the sight of a woman’s body in ways that women don’t usually respond to the sight of a man’s body. And men do focus visually on certain parts of the female anatomy while women don’t have that obsessive visual focus on parts of the male anatomy. That’s not objectification, it’s normal male sexuality.

    That’s why men like looking at porn while women prefer reading porn (literary erotica is almost entirely a female preserve). And women like reading romance novels because it’s romantic/erotic situations that get them excited. Take a look at some of the women’s literary erotica on sale at amazon. This is pure porn, but it’s the porn that excites women.

    I’ve known women whose obsession with masturbation was as intense as any man’s, but they didn’t look at porn to get in the m00d.

    The concept of objectification of women is merely an expression of the Puritan wing of feminism’s hostility to male sexuality, a thing that frightens them because they don’t understand it. Just as sexuality frightens Puritans in general, so they demonise it.

  239. “The concept of objectification of women is merely an expression of the Puritan wing of feminism’s hostility to male sexuality, a thing that frightens them because they don’t understand it. Just as sexuality frightens Puritans in general, so they demonise it.”

    I think you have a healthy view, even I am not sure that I agree on all points. I think it is possible for people to see and behave that certain or people in general are commodities., I just don’t think the evidence demonstrates this is accurate for most men or even boys despite their level of inexperience. The vast majority of men still recognize women as valuable partners in life, in fact still by and large seek their good will and operate to their protection — whether women need or not. And pornography certainly has negative impacts, its overall impact in light of other factors seems surprisingly the lesser.

    I am sure that factors such as family, and other environments play a major role despite the veiwing on the material. I appreciate the foundations laid by Dr. Meade – Symbolic Interaction which is useful as a floor plan to understanding the shaping of self. Can viewing other humans as objects of use occur, no doubt, and I would even acknowledge that humans from time to time – even in the most loving dynamic can be less than empathetic, caring, sympathetic etc. Whether not this is the result of pornography is a tenuous argument that I have no doubt warps the mind of some.

    I should be careful here because these discussions are ripe with people who any disagreement as someone who indulges in porn, supports the material, or is in some manner other devient. And therefore suspect. As a believer, this is a no brainer bandwagon, and my position can easily be misconstrued into something nefarious.

    You got to the romance literature before me . . . laughing.

    The best medicine besides a good dose of Christ are parents and family and an educational system that is not duplicitous in condeming naked bedroom antics while teaching the virtues of Miley Cyrus or a host of others

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    , @dfordoom
  240. dfordoom says: • Website
    @EliteCommInc.

    I think it is possible for people to see and behave that certain or people in general are commodities., I just don’t think the evidence demonstrates this is accurate for most men or even boys despite their level of inexperience. The vast majority of men still recognize women as valuable partners in life

    One thing that feminists and Puritans can’t comprehend is that a man can look at a woman and think that she has an amazingly cute posterior, but there’s no disrespect or contempt implied in that. He can still see her as an intelligent and capable woman, and he can certainly still see her as worthy of respect. We just happen to be programmed to notice women’s bodies.

    The really shocking thing to feminists is that women, by and large, like being looked at. They like being looked at by men, and they like it when men notice their bodies.

    • Replies: @AnonStarter
  241. dfordoom says: • Website
    @EliteCommInc.

    I should be careful here because these discussions are ripe with people who any disagreement as someone who indulges in porn, supports the material, or is in some manner other devient. And therefore suspect.

    Yeah, it’s unfortunate that on the dissident right there’s not much tolerance of dissidence! There’s a tendency to see things in black and white, good vs evil, and any attempt to suggest that certain problems are actually complex and that there may be two sides to an argument is greeted with hostility, followed inevitably by ad hominem attacks and name-calling.

    You got to the romance literature before me . . . laughing.

    I’m amazed no-one else has brought that up. Incidentally I should point out that while I see no difference between visual porn and the more overtly erotic romance novels I don’t disapprove of those romance novels. I don’t regard something with contempt just because women enjoy it.

  242. Correction’ I should be careful here because these discussions are ripe with people who think any disagreement as someone who indulges in porn, supports the material, or is in some manner other devient. And therefore suspect.

    Laugh. I have no comment about women’s erotic fair. But I know the material in any format has plenty of willing female producers, writers directors performers etc.

    Celibacy the spice of life

    On the road so my responses will be worse than usual

  243. Vespasian says:

    Pathetic that this site would post articles from catholic theocrats like e michael jones and that supreme idiot hexenhammer. I’m new here, and UNZ just got its first strike

  244. Vespasian says:
    @Achilles Wannabe

    SolontoCroesus is a crypto jew apologist riding a fine line between jew exposure and controlled opposition.

    • Replies: @Achilles Wannabe
  245. @Vespasian

    Yeah, I intuited that. I was hoping to draw him out

  246. @Vespasian

    Yeah, I intuited that. I was hoping to draw him out

  247. @Vespasian

    Why don’t you give EMJ a chance? He can be very good on the economics of the J question BECAUSE he is a traditional Catholic. I have no brief for the Church but Trad Catholicism understood usury whereas Protestants relapsed into the Hebrew ‘Bible and out came their inner Jew.

  248. @EliteCommInc.

    /If you can find a study in which the researchers or advocates of the researcher’s study aren’t over stating what the study actually indicates — that would be worth a conversation./

    I cited two studies in which the findings — unlike those concerning divorce — remain immeasurable in the general population:

    Pornography and Satisfaction: A Meta-Analysis

    https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/hcre.12108

    Finding: Pornography consumption was associated with lower interpersonal satisfaction outcomes in cross-sectional surveys, longitudinal surveys, and experiments.

    … and …

    Trading Later Rewards for Current Pleasure: Pornography Consumption and Delay Discounting

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26305628#

    Findings: Participants who abstained from pornography use demonstrated lower delay discounting than participants who abstained from their favorite food. The finding suggests that Internet pornography is a sexual reward that contributes to delay discounting differently than other natural rewards.

    Whether or not the findings are “overstated” would appear to depend ultimately upon one’s opinion.

    /The studies are comprised of information from other countries. … And that would require something larger than 50K in my view/

    Only the first study mentioned above is comprised of data from other countries, and its sample size exceeds 50K. The second study is exclusively American.

    /If the main stream media is the primary source, then you undermine the case against pornography. Which suggests something about the seriousness of the advocacy to limit the impact on self image and the objectivication assail./

    Did I say the mainstream media was the primary source? I don’t think so.

    There’s no reason to think that both objectifying portrayals in the mainstream media and those in the porn industry bear impact — both, in all likelihood, to different degrees. The sixth study I cited is focused strictly upon the mainstream media, but as I said earlier, I’m not interested solely in the impact of pornography.

    And I wrote about this earlier, but you appear to have forgotten it.

    I completely agree with your statements about the effect of popular culture in relation to pornography.

    Now, please do not consider this a “gotcha” moment … my following question is dead serious:

    As a Christian on the front lines of this fight, where do you draw the line?

    It appears that many Christian men rationalize viewing attractive women, leaning heavily upon the conditional phrase “with lust” [Matt 5: 28], yet deceiving themselves in the process.

    So how do you know when you’ve crossed the unacceptable threshold set forth in Matthew 5: 29?

    I, too, agree that physical attraction is a natural response to certain stimuli, but surely you can see the conundrum between claiming to battle the deleterious impact of sexual objectification in popular culture and admitting your own weakness against it (e.g. Tina Turner), no?

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  249. @EliteCommInc.

    /Ohh good grief, I never said that — which is part of the problem. You make arguments that i do mot./

    Well, I never claimed that you did say that, so it appears you’re being a bit premature in your assessment.

    Rather, I sought to draw a distinction between the validity of any given finding and the measurability of it in the general population. That’s all.

    /The sample size matters./

    Indeed, it does, as do cultural variances (something to which you had alluded in an earlier post which I failed to address there).

    /This makes no sense whatsoever/

    Alright, perhaps it wasn’t articulated to your satisfaction. Let’s try it again differently …

    You stated it’s “easy to rail against the material,” but difficult to take on people such as Kinsey, suggesting that our focus should be on Alfred Kinsey and his influence rather than “the material.”

    But the vast majority of people aren’t confronting the work of Alfred Kinsey and his influence upon the so-called “sexual revolution” that has brought us to where we currently are. In comparison to the quantity and availability of “the material” we’ve been discussing, the likelihood of such confrontation or even interest in the subject of Kinsey is slim.

    Go ahead and try to convince the average parent that teaching his son or daughter about Kinsey is the panacea that will decisively prevent them from indulging in “the material.” Personally, I’m skeptical it’s a more effective approach.

    /And seeing that you raised the Dr. Kinsey’s research as key to the statistical change, it’s hard to comprehend why you now dismiss the work on behavior that followed is peculiar./

    Do you have any other statistic on the prevalence of ED contemporaneous with Kinsey’s research? I’m not really interested in throwing the proverbial baby out with the bathwater.

    /For example, Dr. Kinsey’s choice for his research the US prison system./

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Kinsey#Controversial_aspects

    Historian Vern Bullough writes that the data was later reinterpreted, excluding prisoners and data derived from an exclusively gay sample, and the results indicate that it does not appear to have skewed the data. [emphasis added]

    /You miss the point entirely of why Dr. Kinsey’s research is problematic./

    Not really, but it’s okay that you make this mistake. Understandable, given that I hadn’t provided an explanation.

    /I acknowledge some revelance, you continue to state that I don’t — and you then attempt to divert the matter by suggesting that I consider the material invalid/

    Once again, you’re being a bit premature in your judgment.

    I did nothing of what you state. You’re free to review my statements and prove otherwise if you so wish. Admittedly, I earlier pointed out potential flaws in your argument, but I’m not putting words in your mouth. Not by a long shot.

    /Whatever my choices regarding comments. If I choose to ignore a comment, I simply won’t respond./

    I think you’re still misunderstanding me: I didn’t mention anything about your choice to respond or avoid response. I spoke specifically to the fact that you don’t use the “Reply” function at the end of my posts in order to respond to me.

    It’s still quite cryptic to me why you avoid it, but there it is. If this thread were more active, I’d have to scroll through dozens of posts just to find your response because you can’t be bothered to hit “Reply,” compose your post, and submit it like most of us here do routinely.

    But hey, you appear to have your reasons.

    Anyways, thanks again.

  250. @dfordoom

    /They like being looked at by men, and they like it when men notice their bodies./

    Perhaps we should change the law to codify this kind of exploitation as sexual assault – in the interest of gender equity, of course.

  251. Let virtue garnish thy thoughts unceasingly.

  252. dfordoom says: • Website
    @AnonStarter

    As a Christian on the front lines of this fight, where do you draw the line?

    The first thing you need to keep in mind is that the majority of the population consists of people who are not Christians. They’re going to (quite rightly) bitterly resent any attempt to impose Christian moral values on them. Just as Christians (quite rightly) bitterly resent attempts by homosexuals to impose their values on Christians.

    You can use Christian morality as a basis for living your own life. You cannot argue for basing any kind of social policy on Christianity. No sane person would argue that there should be no restrictions at all on sexual behaviour, but those restrictions cannot be based on Christianity.

    As a Christian on the front lines of this fight, you have to draw the line at trying to force others to conform to your beliefs or your dislikes.

    • Replies: @Dumbo
  253. Thanks for the reminder, but I’ve known for most of my life that any attempt to impose religion upon those antipathetic to it is a recipe for disaster.

    /As a Christian on the front lines of this fight, …/

    I’m not a Christian, though I do love Jesus. I’m only interested in what ECI has to say.

    Thanks again.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  254. @MBII

    Profanity is a symptom of a weak mind trying to express itself forcefully.

  255. You keep referencing the meta-analysis and then provide the abstract. I have posted the entire meta analysis in my first response. I ignored nothing in that regard. There first paragraphs state — that what is established is a corellation, not cause and effect. You continue to miss the point as a corellation they don’t consider other factors regarding dissatification—- and you are suggesting that 50,000 which I reference more than once I think is a valid number — the planet has 6 billion people plus.

    Here’s the abstract:

    “A classic question in the communication literature is whether pornography consumption affects consumers’ satisfaction. The present paper represents the first attempt to address this question via meta‐analysis. Fifty studies collectively including more than 50,000 participants from 10 countries were located across the interpersonal domains of sexual and relational satisfaction and the intrapersonal domains of body and self satisfaction. Pornography consumption was not related to the intrapersonal satisfaction outcomes that were studied. However, pornography consumption was associated with lower interpersonal satisfaction outcomes in cross‐sectional surveys, longitudinal surveys, and experiments. Associations between pornography consumption and reduced interpersonal satisfaction outcomes were not moderated by their year of release or their publication status. But analyses by sex indicted significant results for men only.”

    None of the information addresses age, cultural influences, alcohol, legal and illegal drugs which are on the increase (minus alcohol – but remains a staple) and what undermines the entire facade — is the introduction of mainstream media which is referenced more than once — and in a cross section meta analysis — utterly undermines the case — In otherwords, interpersonal disastisfication is not derived from the material in question — but the artifacts accepted as the norm. Minus any explication of which has the greater impact — – your claims are simply not supported.

    “But the vast majority of people aren’t confronting the work of Alfred Kinsey and his influence upon the so-called “sexual revolution” that has brought us to where we currently are. In comparison to the quantity and availability of “the material” we’ve been discussing, the likelihood of such confrontation or even interest in the subject of Kinsey is slim.”

    Laughing. No they are not they used his information as incorrect as it may to advance the very material as mainstream content. No most are not confronting sex ed films as pornography, they are not confronting the thousands of instructors in HS who use Kinsey’s, material to condone the material as acceptable.

    Here’s a dilemma along with the myriad of others you simply attempt to skip– the level of dissatifsaction measured — was it the result of the material or did exist prior to and even looking at the material did not resolve it. Again, alcohol consumption, drug use, state of life, work, income, intrapersonal environment. Hence the issue with corellation — and it is there that the matter also crumbles — because the researchers and your self are making leaps to causation that is not supported by the data. And certainly the abstracts don’t even scratch the surface.

    No. you attempted to mischaracterize mt position regarding generalizability as a contention that the studies were were not valid. And i corrected that notion. The fact that one cannot predict to the general population said effect does not invalidate the study. It limits its usefulness as a model applicable to the whole. It limits it to those populations in the study or similar said populations.

    And here again — loading the dice. If you research people with problems — and that is not a random sample, save the issues in question, then it’s safe bet, one will find the issues — in man cases, choosing : shelters, prisons, divorced couples, marriage counseling clinics in which the population is captive and mirrors the scenarios one is seeking — then laugh — well enough said. Hmmmm . . . let’s see who else did that oohh

    Dr. Kinsey.

    ——————————————

    Your explanation did not address the issue. Which is simply that the material in question has become accessible because of the mainstreaming and in modern environment, Dr. Kinsey and other academics take what was backroom, offsite into the living room. As the references of accepted material demonstrates.

    ——————————————-

    I never said anything about being a christian in the front lines.. I said i have been in the front lines of the issue referring what is acceptable — I don’t I have interjected faith and practice. I don’t need to — the value of rejecting the material is a benefit to society as a whole in my view regardless of faith and practice.

    ——————————————–

    “Go ahead and try to convince the average parent that teaching his son or daughter about Kinsey is the panacea that will decisively prevent them from indulging in “the material.” Personally, I’m skeptical it’s a more effective approach.”

    Never maybe this contention or anything similar, I discussed the value of parenting as model, family, and environments that promote traditional values. Laughing, The material in question existed long before Kinsey — what i say is that Dr. Kinsey made the material mainstream and opened the flood gates — not at all the same thing. Nor did i say that Dr. Kinsey should be ignored though, that is an idea. I think it would do well, to know what Dr. kinsey says and did and why it has meaning in understanding research methodology and conclusions.

    ——————————————–

    Your hopscotch around which has more impact — well, so much for your entire argument. But more importantly, is this, the fact that the researchers had to reach across the aisle to “mainstream” content and impact makes the case. Despite the numerous studies 22 in this case composing a total of some 30,000 plus — it could not be demonstrated that the material alone caused x . But if we look at the main – to get the results we want. Excuse me — the case is closed. Unless you can dilineate and create a brightline as the impact of each — your pornography press is just that a press. Again, what are the kids of today emulating is key. Disatisfaction because: take your pick
    Negative body image take your pick.

    It’s more complex than self identifying surveys. Maybe complex is the incorrect word. In need of more precise modeling.
    ——————————————-

    No. You made a direct suggestion of why I don’t use the reply button — it was incorrect . And your slide of cryptic is a way of doubling down on the matter.

    ——————————————–
    laughing.

    “Historian Vern Bullough writes that the data was later reinterpreted, excluding prisoners and data derived from an exclusively gay sample, and the results indicate that it does not appear to have skewed the data. [emphasis added]”

    The clean up study — I am familiar with this reference. Laughing. The

    _________________________

    I take it you are changing your position on Dr. Kinsey’s value. You introduce him. Then claim he doesn’t matter. And now you are proffering his study cleansed. Laugh.

    If prison was the only problem, the cleanse might have value — hardly, but I have no doubt people who use his material would make the effort.

    never seems to dawn on advocates of this or that — they are wholly compromised even by making the references.
    ——————————————–

    But as I said at the outset, despite the data that contradicts the magnitiude of the material on the population on the whole. The value of ignoring that truth is to hop on a portion aspect to support the claim. My case overwhelming delimits the magnitude based on the research conclusions.

    Sure the material has impact. But singularly — not near as impactful as the mainstream media material in which the gate is wider open to cognitive acceptance because it is part of the main.

    As I say, Beyonce, Miley Cyrus, Britney Spears, take your pick . . . day time soap operas . . . vogue, victoria secret . . .

    Top male magazines in the mainstream circuit.

    https://www.ranker.com/list/best-mens-magazines/ranker-books

    ——————————————-

    ——————————————-

    • Replies: @AnonStarter
  256. “Did I say the mainstream media was the primary source? I don’t think so.”

    No. I am saying that. And I am saying that it is overwhelmingly the case.

    —————————————–

    “Do you have any other statistic on the prevalence of ED contemporaneous with Kinsey’s research? I’m not really interested in throwing the proverbial baby out with the bathwater.”

    I am sure i addressed this:

    https://www.doctorfox.co.uk/news/erectile-dysfunction-part-1-the-stats-the-science-the-causes/

    https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/erectile-dysfunction/symptoms-causes/syc-20355776?DSECTION=all

    ——————————————
    Relevence

    Then I am unclear why you press on the interpersonal/intrapersonal impacts. I simply don’t buy the most prevalent cause is the material.

    I popped around some websites on interpersonal – this material is not even listed as an issue.

    the dilemma

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/thinking-man/scary-effects-pornography-21st-centurys-accute-addiction-rewiring/
    _________________________

    “Maybe we should be encouraging our young men to abstain from drugs. I think you can make a strong case that drugs have done more individual and social harm than any other single factor.”

    (excluding war)
    My bet would be alcohol. And I agree on the other suggested use of drugs.

    ——————————————-
    “dfordoom”

    I appreciated your comments and your directness.

    I think one can contend for the principles of Christ and the apostles as a benefit — and in my view believers need to learn to contend beyond jesus said so, in my view.

    ———————————

    What Jesus did acknowledge is that the world would become worse and worse

  257. dfordoom says: • Website
    @AnonStarter

    Thanks for the reminder, but I’ve known for most of my life that any attempt to impose religion upon those antipathetic to it is a recipe for disaster.

    Yeah, but what I’m seeing on quite a few recent threads on UR (I’m not talking specifically about anything you’ve posted) is a great enthusiasm for imposing upon others a moral framework that is built on a Christian base, and really makes no sense without that Christian foundation. So while it’s not directly an attempt at imposing religion per se it is an attempt to impose an essentially religious morality.

    If for example people want to argue that sex for any purpose other than procreation is wrong (and that argument has in fact been explicitly made on some of these recent threads), that’s an argument that makes no sense other than as a religion-based argument.

    We even seem to be seeing the emergence of a weird kind of atheist Puritanism.

  258. @EliteCommInc.

    /You keep referencing the meta-analysis and then provide the abstract. I have posted the entire meta analysis in my first response. I ignored nothing in that regard./

    There were two meta-analyses cited in my original post. You addressed only the first in your initial response.

    In your second response, you make clear that your “comments refer to this study of the 22 and [your] reference is the original article in full that references the same,” confirming this.

    It’s difficult to know if you address the second meta-analysis in your third response since the antecedent of your references to “studies” aren’t always clear. At best, you mention something about the first meta-analysis being “reflective of the compendium,” provide an argument against the findings concerning divorce, then don’t reach the second meta-analysis or the delay discounting study until much later in the thread.

    /Here’s the abstract:/

    You’ve confused the second abstract with the first.

    /and what undermines the entire facade — is the introduction of mainstream media which is referenced more than once — and in a cross section meta analysis — utterly undermines the case —/

    You’re referring to the second meta-analysis, I take it.

    Could you please provide a specific quote from that analysis where material from the mainstream media is referenced? We’ll need to see the context of it in order to understand where you’re coming from.

    /No most are not confronting sex ed films as pornography/

    Was it Kinsey who was responsible for the introduction of sex ed classes in America? If so, then you’ve made a great point.

    /they are not confronting the thousands of instructors in HS who use Kinsey’s, material to condone the material as acceptable./

    They use his research findings in high school classes?

    I recall the instruction being brief and anodyne in middle school. Certainly no introduction to the Kinsey Scale or anything resembling his work. My, how times have changed.

    /Here’s a dilemma along with the myriad of others you simply attempt to skip–/

    Well, no. This is simply how many meta-analyses are done, without consideration for myriad factors that are apparently — though not necessarily — extraneous to the analyses. Again, you make a good point with which I can’t argue. The psychometric methodology is sound.

    /No. you attempted to mischaracterize mt position regarding generalizability as a contention that the studies were were not valid/

    I don’t need to characterize your position at all, as you yourself have made it abundantly clear.

    Yes, you’ve said they’re valid, yet you qualify this validity such that you render the findings ultimately useless when considering myriad other factors, such as their generalizability. Pragmatically, it’s a distinction without a difference.

    /Your explanation did not address the issue. Which is simply that the material in question has become accessible because of the mainstreaming and in modern environment, Dr. Kinsey and other academics take what was backroom, offsite into the living room./

    No need to address it. You’ve covered this already and I simply didn’t contest it. I merely spoke to the proliferation and availability of “the material,” whether x-rated or mainstream media-based.

    I’m glad you raised the issue of Kinsey’s role in bringing sex ed to the public school classroom, though. That is problematic insofar as giving the imprimatur of normalcy to whatever may be taught in said classrooms, and I thank you for making that point.

    Still, if the average age at which children see porn for the first time is 11, then we’re looking at a sizeable group of youth who will be exposed well before they’re enrolled in sex-ed classes, so my own point still stands.

    /I never said anything about being a christian in the front lines.. I said i have been in the front lines of the issue referring what is acceptable — I don’t I have interjected faith and practice./

    It would be nice if you put forth a little more effort in editing your statements properly. Very difficult to understand you from time to time.

    Here’s what you wrote:

    Railing against the material (porn) is easy. What takes skill and effort is taking on the angels of light (e.g. Kinsey). And god says is generally not enough. Though I agree that God says so.

    I have been in the front lines of these battles . . . and the negative research of the impact of this material has been around a long time — yet, note the volumes. The impacts are not what is claimed and the enemy doing the most harm is not the obvious. [emphasis added]

    You see, in this statement, “these battles” could easily be construed to mean the battle against pornographic material or sexually exploitative material in the mainstream or Kinsey’s effect or some of this or all of it.

    And your synthesis of faith and practice doesn’t really resolve the conundrum for the rest of us. Are you saying you’re not Christian? If so, then how does this faith/practice rationalize oggling your favorite female celebrities via the mainstream media while being on “the front lines of the issue referring what is acceptable” (whatever this means)?

    /the value of rejecting the material is a benefit to society as a whole in my view regardless of faith and practice/

    It’s odd to hear this from you since your rejection of it is predicated upon your faith/practice rather than the findings of empirical research, the bulk of which you view with a jaundiced eye.

    /Your hopscotch around which has more impact — well, so much for your entire argument./

    Doesn’t each study have to be examined on its own merits?

    The second meta-analysis examines the impact of pornography, while the sixth cited study (in my response to jack daniels) examines that of sexually objectifying portrayals of women in the mainstream media.

    So what’s the problem with recognizing the impact of both on their own terms?

    /In need of more precise modeling./

    You may be correct. Can’t argue with that.

    /No. You made a direct suggestion of why I don’t use the reply button — it was incorrect . And your slide of cryptic is a way of doubling down on the matter.

    ——————————————–
    laughing./

    Doubling down?

    You try to make it appear as if I’ve done something nefarious by asking you why you don’t do what most posters here do routinely. I didn’t suggest anything. I merely asked you a question.

    /I take it you are changing your position on Dr. Kinsey’s value. You introduce him. Then claim he doesn’t matter. And now you are proffering his study cleansed. Laugh./

    I only cited one statistic from his research, that related to the frequency of ED among young men. Never claimed “he doesn’t matter,” and I’m not committed to “cleansing” his findings. I merely presented what Bullough wrote in response to your statement, but if you’ve got a convincing case to undermine the “clean-up study,” then I’m all ears.

    It would be one thing if I demonstrated an unwillingness to change each and every one of my opinions. I may be tenacious in some respects, but I won’t hesitate to revise my views where you provide a persuasive argument.

    If I’m wrong, at least I stand to learn something.

    And I thank you for edifying me in matters where I may lack knowledge.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  259. dfordoom says: • Website
    @AnonStarter

    I’m glad you raised the issue of Kinsey’s role in bringing sex ed to the public school classroom, though. That is problematic insofar as giving the imprimatur of normalcy to whatever may be taught in said classrooms,

    There’s no question that our education systems are normalising a great deal of sexual behaviour that probably should not be normalised. This is another example of the difficulty of untangling exactly what is driving changes in sexual behaviour. And our education systems are introducing children to variant sexual practices at terrifyingly young ages. This may be a bigger problem than porn, since being taught something in school gives it an apparent official seal of approval. And parents have done little or nothing to resist the education systems.

    I may be reasonably relaxed about porn but I’m horrified by the stuff kids are deliberately and consciously exposed to at school under the guise of sex education. They are being specifically told that these practices are normal and healthy. Very few parents have the courage to then tell their kids that things like sodomy are actually not normal and healthy.

    There’s also another question that has not been raised – the extent to which psychiatrists and assorted “therapists” are telling confused and unhappy people (including confused and unhappy adolescents and even children) that things like sodomy or changing one’s sex are perfectly normal and healthy.

    Maybe teachers and therapists are the real villains. Exposing adults to sexual material is one thing. Propagandising children and the vulnerable is quite another thing.

    • Replies: @AnonStarter
  260. @dfordoom

    /And our education systems are introducing children to variant sexual practices at terrifyingly young ages. This may be a bigger problem than porn, since being taught something in school gives it an apparent official seal of approval. And parents have done little or nothing to resist the education systems./

    “Very disturbing” doesn’t even begin to describe it.

    /Maybe teachers and therapists are the real villains. Exposing adults to sexual material is one thing. Propagandising children and the vulnerable is quite another thing./

    Absolutely, though if the earliest age for porn exposure is somewhere around 5, that precedes their first public school sex education course by at least six years.

    If parents are doing little or nothing to resist the teaching of abnormal practices in middle school, there’s a strong likelihood they’re negligent with their children at an even earlier age.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  261. Dumbo says:
    @dfordoom

    No sane person would argue that there should be no restrictions at all on sexual behaviour, but those restrictions cannot be based on Christianity.

    So what are they going to be based on?
    Islam?
    Feminism?
    Or laws by the Ministry of Love?

    It’s not that there are many restrictions now, and society is as secular as it gets. We are likely at peak secularism.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  262. “You see, in this statement, “these battles” could easily be construed to mean the battle against pornographic material or sexually exploitative material in the mainstream or Kinsey’s effect or some of this or all of it.”

    As a person of faith, who operates in a secular world, i think it is important for me to have some ability to contend an issue on the merits without interjecting said faith into an issue. Because most people are not scripturally oriented, even on matters if faith, and in my view most christians see jesus as a social worker as opposed to the spiritual redeemer he is. And given that environment, the use if Jesus and the truths that surround him are easily rejected on matters spiritual much more secular. So critical thinking requires addressing said issue from a secular perspective. So when I say front lines — there is no implication about faith at all and I don’t make any here. The fact remains that the material in question has little support as a major contributor to the overall, state of US society, even though on its face one would think that it does. And these studies at the end of the despite attempts to make it otherwise — don’t make the case in lieu of other impacting variables. As someone who holds a lot of bitterness I am careful about aligning myself to christianity — “bitterness” is absolutely forbidden. I have it in spades.

    You note that 11 year old boys are exposed to the material. Perhaps, but the impact on the impressionable 11 year old is not singularly the material in question, at least not for most 11 year old. And as the last article makes clear — well finally admitting at the end that when we discuss the issue, what constitutes pornography has itself a vast array of perspectives. I would say the movie Sliver which has the underrated actress, Miss Sharon Stone, is loaded with material that is a bit heavy for me is highly suggestible. And yet, it has no X rating. I could note a host of films that are explicit but not neccessarily graphic in detail, that exceed even that readily available on mainstream media sites. But such material is in context in composition with the nature of the family environment, relation between parents, parent and child outwardly expanding . . . the single most important factors are those that buffer against the exposure. One has to further consider the level of exposure. Managing the context of the said material matters.
    —————————

    “Doesn’t each study have to be examined on its own merits?

    The second meta-analysis examines the impact of pornography, while the sixth cited study (in my response to jack daniels) examines that of sexually objectifying portrayals of women in the mainstream media.

    So what’s the problem with recognizing the impact of both on their own terms?”

    But that is not how this began. It began as part pf a meta analysis — a study of studies. So once there are significant issues in the compendium and there as I noted, then those individual studies are impacted and why i only reference a couple as samples of the problems. But overall as admitted up top — what we have are corellations — which does have value. But many of the conclusions describing the general population are overstated and misleading/

    And I think it is the case that the mainstream media material is a much heavy variable(s) on every aspect of our human relations to self and others. That is where the highest demands and expectations are created to the overall society. And that includes the internet apparently:

    https://www.lifewire.com/most-popular-sites-3483140

    https://www.infoplease.com/science-health/internet-statistics-and-resources/most-popular-internet-activities (note where adult material is located as to percentage)

    Content/activities

    https://www.quora.com/Whats-the-most-popular-content-on-the-internet (38%)

    https://www.infoplease.com/science-health/internet-statistics-and-resources/most-popular-internet-activities (repeat)

    https://ahrefs.com/blog/most-visited-websites/

    I did a brief look to check on whether youtube still provides this material — apparently not. But I can certainly watch basic instinct, 91/2 weeks, Sliver . . . I guess Barbarella and Last Tango are mighty tame by comparison. Couple of notes I love many of these actresses and actors — it would be a mistake to think my submissions in any way reflect any less admiration for their compendium if work — the point is not to muck rake them in any manner. The point is that they represent a far brighter influence in depth and scope to the general than does the material in question here.

    And while Hollywood loves the focus on the material here as degenerate, they will continue to erode traditional views. It was mainstream hollywood, academia and corporate entities that actually changed the culture, not those in the material in question. Kramer vs Kramer did more to upset the husband wife / wife husband dynamic than any of this material. In my view, the material now so easily accessible is so because of the mainstream deconstructing traditional realities of men and women, family, community, etc. “Boyhood” which doesn’t resemble anything i am familiar with regarding growing up — top film according the award shows.

    So in the discussion, when the top is top influencers — this material takes center stage, while the real serpents are reaping in billions on mainstream screens large and small not to mention Dr. Ruth and her radio contemporaries. mainstream and ready to eat cognitive meals.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    , @AnonStarter
  263. I am a hair’s breath away from buying the critiques on the Kinsey’s volume. Because this issue come up repeatedly on this issue.

    “It’s odd to hear this from you since your rejection of it is predicated upon your faith/practice rather than the findings of empirical research, the bulk of which you view with a jaundiced eye.”

    That is incorrect, I have not added the voice of faith and practice on this issue, save bare reference. But my contentions have been soley to the data. I am keenly aware how easy it id to dismiss matters of ethos predicated on principles of faith. No. I abide by a keen sense that i had better have more tools in my basket than — because jesus says so. But the hat trick by liberals has been to align themselves against pets they don’;t like as they embrace the ones they do. They blow up the abuse of priests into a global crisis, when it isn’t even a percentage point of any catholics experience – less in fact. Why because they care about children and priests maybe — but their real goal is diminishing the power of the catholic Church in the public arena of influence. The goal is not end the material here, it’s to compromise people of faith to disempower their advocacy in the public arena. The same goes with issues of “sex trafficking” a liberal ruse of concern. jesus is fairly shrewd customer and there are plenty of reasons to reject or challenge the ,material that don’t require invoking his name.

    Sidenote: my fellows supporting invading two countries without cause —- and have yet to fall on their faces in forgiveness, instead they are getting ready to double down on nonevidentary cases against others. people of faith are saved, we aren’t always right, even if sincere. Objective reality and rules, justice, efficacy of truth still matter. No. I don’t hate Israel or jews —

    This material can be destructive to believers and nonbelievers as well for the same reasons. tangential —

    _______________________________

    The problem with attempting to cleanse Dr. Kinsey’s research is that you cannot cleanse his agenda or the questions many of which according to his colleagues were loaded, leading, suggestive and many of his subjects were already noted abberants, even if not in prison. What has saved his work to om value is the volume, not the quality.

  264. There have been comments about evangelicals being “stupid” and “clueless” among other negative traits.

    I think the volume of evidence will indicate that evangelical christians are stalwart men and women of sound character, with varying degrees of skills, varying degrees of intelligence, hard working, patient, caring, giving — well past what is given to Israel ( do have a quality naivete’ or innocence – to their stead in my view) and if citizens of the US deeply devoted to her well being

    And they don’t all agree on issues of secular politics.

  265. dfordoom says: • Website
    @AnonStarter

    Absolutely, though if the earliest age for porn exposure is somewhere around 5, that precedes their first public school sex education course by at least six years.

    It may be different in the US but in Britain it seems that school kids are being told about the joys of anal sex much earlier than that.

    If parents are doing little or nothing to resist the teaching of abnormal practices in middle school, there’s a strong likelihood they’re negligent with their children at an even earlier age.

    If parents are that negligent the battle is lost. There’s very little you can do when parents either have no interest in resisting the propaganda push for abnormal sexual behaviour, or have no courage to do so. I fear that in many cases the parents actively support the propaganda war directed at their children. In that case the only alternative is for the state to step in, but we can trust the state even less than we can trust parents.

    And the Christian churches seem to be doing nothing at all. The only limited fight back is coming from some Muslim parents (especially in Britain).

    It may be that all the things we’re seeing are just symptoms of an underlying social malaise.

    Obviously I agree with you that the kind of sexual material to which children are exposed is horrifying, but it’s coming from everywhere – from porn, from the education system, from the mainstream media, from pop music, from social media. And from parents.

    What’s the answer? A greater degree of autonomy for local communities (such as we’ve discussed elsewhere) might be a partial answer.

    • Agree: AnonStarter
  266. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Dumbo

    No sane person would argue that there should be no restrictions at all on sexual behaviour, but those restrictions cannot be based on Christianity.

    So what are they going to be based on?
    Islam?
    Feminism?
    Or laws by the Ministry of Love?

    Imposing moral codes on a secular society is a challenge. They have to be codes that most people will accept as reasonable. And a secular society is not going to accept specifically Christian moral codes as reasonable. That’s reality. Christians are not going to accept specifically Muslim moral codes as reasonable. Muslims are not going to accept specifically Christian moral codes as reasonable. Nor are Orthodox Jews. So in a multi-faith society it’s not just a problem of secular vs Christian values.

    Secular people are not without morals however. Amazingly most secular people regard murder as wrong. Some things just seem to be universally regarded as wrong. Robbery, rape, assault, etc. Possibly these views are based on deep-seated taboos we’re not aware of.

    I don’t think anyone is going to quarrel with the need to protect minors or to outlaw rape. Beyond that it gets tricky. I think most people are naturally inclined to regard sexual behaviour that is clearly unnatural and unhealthy as abhorrent but recent experience has shown (depressingly) that people can be propagandised and/or brow-beaten into believing (or pretending to believe) that such things are A-OK.

    I don’t think many people would consider that a male desire to look at naked women is unnatural or unhealthy. And I don’t think most people would consider masturbation to be unnatural or unhealthy. Puritans think so (including the Puritan wing of the dissident right), but Puritans think pretty much everything is wrong.

    I think you could make a more convincing case for banning adultery than porn, but of course it would be futile to try. There’s also the question of whether you want to ban things you disapprove of, or merely discourage them.

    I think the best solution is giving local communities (religious or secular) some degree of autonomy so they can do their own moral policing.

    It’s not that there are many restrictions now, and society is as secular as it gets. We are likely at peak secularism.

    Europe, Britain and Australia may be close to peak secularism. The US still has quite a way to go. Maybe another generation.

  267. dfordoom says: • Website
    @EliteCommInc.

    But I can certainly watch basic instinct, 91/2 weeks, Sliver . . . I guess Barbarella and Last Tango are mighty tame by comparison.

    Come on man, Barbarella is one of the great cultural achievements of postwar western civilisation. Made before Jane Fonda had her sense of humour surgically removed.

    Last Tango in Paris on the other hand is worse than most softcore porn movies of its era.

  268. “Come on man, Barbarella is one of the great cultural achievements of postwar western civilisation. Made before Jane Fonda had her sense of humour surgically removed.

    Last Tango in Paris on the other hand is worse than most softcore porn movies of its era.”

    I think the point was missed. My comment was to their availability, not my watching. As I hace stated repeatedly, my comments are not meant in support.

    Rephrase: But one can certainly watch basic instinct, 91/2 weeks, Sliver . . . I guess Barbarella and Last Tango are mighty tame by comparison with today’s fair of film. I am not going to debate merits of films in this context. But I will note that exposure to what is today mainstream material us a serious issue because of what imports through the gateway of acceptability.

    Furthermore, I think the discussion of parental involvement at the local level and at home is a far more effective tac. That the tougher fight, the closest threat is our own system of loaded with psychologists, sociologists, etc. The ceding of family control to a counselor advising children — unwise in my view. Again the use of extreme cases as though they represent the whole is exactly why people who care about family, children, community, state, country be cautious with research and who’s advocating what and why.

  269. @EliteCommInc.

    /As a person of faith, who operates in a secular world, i think it is important for me to have some ability to contend an issue on the merits without interjecting said faith into an issue./

    I understand what you mean, though when you’ve synthesized faith and practice, it really makes no difference: you’re representing said faith whether you do so directly or not.

    In the secular realm, there is no comprehensive consensus as to what constitutes “inappropriate material,” be it explicitly pornographic or otherwise, so designating it as such and dealing with it accordingly ultimately become a matter of personal or communal conviction, whether or not the findings of any given study appear to corroborate our worldview.

    This is why, if we assume the entirety of your argument correct, it becomes a prodigal exercise to appeal to secular studies in this field, since they remain forever predicated upon competing opinions and haplessly flawed methodologies. Were it otherwise, I trust that you, as a man of faith and reason, would have already presented evidence that proves the exception to the general rule you set forth.

    /As someone who holds a lot of bitterness I am careful about aligning myself to christianity — “bitterness” is absolutely forbidden. I have it in spades./

    May God envelop us in His light, that, in our hour of darkness, the destination to which we travel be seen for what it is.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  270. dfordoom says: • Website
    @AnonStarter

    In the secular realm, there is no comprehensive consensus as to what constitutes “inappropriate material,” be it explicitly pornographic or otherwise

    Is there actually a consensus about that in the religious realm?

    Do all religious people believe that nudity is inappropriate in all circumstances? What about nudes by Old Masters like Titian? What about nude photography. Do they distinguish between art nudes and girlie-magazine nudes, and if so on what grounds?

    Are all vaguely sexual scenes in a movie inappropriate? How much is it permissible to show? Is a fully-clothed scene of a breast being touched inappropriate?

    What about homosexual activity? Is homosexual kissing inappropriate? A lot of Christians seem to think it’s A-OK.

    Is Lady Chatterley’s Lover pornographic?

    I’m sceptical as to whether there is any consensus on such matters among any groups, secular or otherwise.

    • Replies: @AnonStarter
  271. @dfordoom

    /I’m sceptical as to whether there is any consensus on such matters among any groups, secular or otherwise./

    You are correct, though a congregation acting upon fealty to its leadership more readily inclines toward such consensus.

    Bottom line: it remains, and always shall remain, a matter of personal or communal conviction.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  272. “I understand what you mean, though when you’ve synthesized faith and practice, it really makes no difference: you’re representing said faith whether you do so directly or not.”

    I don’t think I make that reference until you made the mistake of saying that my view was christian when I had not entered such a view into the discussion, U dealt soley with the data. Attributing my later references to the previous — would be incorrect application. Until you interjected that I made such reference — it was not in anyway part of the discussion — prior to that interjection, made by you.

    “In the secular realm, there is no comprehensive consensus as to what constitutes “inappropriate material,” be it explicitly pornographic or otherwise, so designating it as such and dealing with it accordingly ultimately become a matter of personal or communal conviction, whether or not the findings of any given study appear to corroborate our worldview.”

    Which of course undermines these kinds of broad studies having efficacy as applied to the overall population — the multiple variables at play.

    “This is why, if we assume the entirety of your argument correct, it becomes a prodigal exercise to appeal to secular studies in this field, since they remain forever predicated upon competing opinions and haplessly flawed methodologies. Were it otherwise, I trust that you, as a man of faith and reason, would have already presented evidence that proves the exception to the general rule you set forth.”

    Given that the entirety of my position has nothing to do with faith and practice,

    but soley on the content and the conclusions from said study as predicated on the rules of research methodologies and the standards of sound argument, I am not sure your comment siaccurate.. in that regard, the parameter are very exacting, thought one might not know it given where we are today and why so many embrace a less than objective based study. But prefer the ethnography, or other experiential models. And in this what Dr. Kinsey sought gas value. A statistical model predicated on individual experiences of such scope to have noted some actualities — had he not bent/flouted the rules so profoundly — who knows.

    (for example, Dr. Kinsey’s advance that there is a continuum is not supported by any scientific data, nothing in medical science supports it, but it used as truth in nearly all of social research)

    And why faith and practice as I may hold are not relevant to the studies.

    Note: I have no objections to expriential/ethnographic models – but often their application to overall truths to policy are far too diaspora to have specific use aside from establishing human bonds.

    ———————

    • Replies: @AnonStarter
  273. dfordoom says: • Website
    @AnonStarter

    Bottom line: it remains, and always shall remain, a matter of personal or communal conviction.

    Agreed. But that logically means that no group has the right to ban things on moral grounds, except among its own members. And even among its own members it’s debatable to what extent a group has a right to enforce a ban, although they can certainly use strong moral persuasion and possibly ban such activities in public. Or threaten to expel those who participate in such activities.

    It does mean that local and religious communities should have the right to do things (within their own jurisdictions) like banning alcohol, Gay Pride Marches, porn, etc and to exercise control of the moral education of their own children (by controlling the curricula of schools within their jurisdiction). Individual members of such communities can of course participate in these activities simply by leaving the jurisdiction of their group. So if you lived in a dry community and you decided you really wanted a drink you could drive to the next town where alcohol was freely available.

  274. “It does mean that local and religious communities should have the right to do things (within their own jurisdictions) like banning alcohol, Gay Pride Marches, porn, etc and to exercise control of the moral education of their own children (by controlling the curricula of schools within their jurisdiction).”

    And hence the dilemma . . .

    when the community standard stifles another’s

    “free exercise thereof”

    In the area in which I live those christians in services such as the fire department were required to march in the parade of those who choose same relational expression. It seems personal conviction was nor enough.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  275. dfordoom says: • Website
    @EliteCommInc.

    In the area in which I live those christians in services such as the fire department were required to march in the parade of those who choose same relational expression. It seems personal conviction was nor enough.

    The problem is that when it comes down to it almost everybody succumbs to the temptation to impose their values on others. If they have the power to do, they will. Whether they’re Social Justice Warriors or Christians or the homosexual lobby or dissident rightists. They complain when it’s done to them but they’ll do the same thing if they ever have the power to do so.

    The only chance you have is if there’s no single group powerful enough to impose its values on everyone else. At the moment the corporate sector has the monopoly on power and they get whatever they want.

    • Replies: @JackOH
  276. @EliteCommInc.

    /Until you interjected that I made such reference — it was not in anyway part of the discussion — prior to that interjection, made by you./

    No, ECI. It became part of the discussion when you said, “Though I agree God says so,” referencing “Satan” and “angels of light” in the same post:

    https://www.unz.com/ejones/pornography-and-political-control-the-hexenhammer-debate/#comment-3647206

    You say that I’m mistaken in calling you Christian, though I’ve seen you self-identify as Evangelical on previous occasions.

    /Given that the entirety of my position has nothing to do with faith and practice, but soley on the content and the conclusions from said study as predicated on the rules of research methodologies and the standards of sound argument, I am not sure your comment siaccurate.. /

    I didn’t say “faith and practice,” I said “faith and reason.”

    It’s a curious prospect to accept that the principles of research and standards of argument to which you adhere have nothing to do with your faith, as pragmatically, it makes little sense. Obviously, your faith allows you to apply them, otherwise you wouldn’t do so.

    /Note: I have no objections to expriential/ethnographic models – but often their application to overall truths to policy are far too diaspora to have specific use aside from establishing human bonds./

    Can you cite an example of one or more studies in which the findings advocate for this specific use of “establishing human bonds”?

  277. “No, ECI. It became part of the discussion when you said, “Though I agree God says so,” referencing “Satan” and “angels of light” in the same post:”

    1. I don’t use that as argument.

    2. “angels of light” satan in this case are metaphors for deception very common usage in secular communication — as in “wolves in sheeps clothing” in scripture but a common reference to a personson of deception or engaged in deception. Those are not as used arguments that lay claim to behaving and thinking as per God’s instruction
    I didn’t say “faith and practice,” I said “faith and reason.”
    ———-

    I didn’t use faith and reason either.

    ———–
    “You say that I’m mistaken in calling you Christian, though I’ve seen you self-identify as Evangelical on previous occasions.”

    Laughing. This the same call as using mainstream consequence to support an unverified consequence to material in question. If you are going to reach across the aisle to a discussion that has no relationship to this — then I think the case is made. I don’t not use scriptural references to deal with the material in this discussion — even though I agree that with faith and practice view of the material. I look at the study according to the parameters of what such studies of this nature are intended to convey — and in that my faith has no bearing. You will not find an argument that says i agree because God says. My comment is an observation not an argument. And i go to length to distignuish why that is important. In fact many people of faith would be quite irritated that I don’t take causes merely because jesus said alone. They get quite discomfit, that I don’t argue soley from a biblical perspective —

    The attempt t0 diminish a position by luring out one’s principles and them laying claim that is why they are saying so and so. The reasons for my views of the study are based soley on the studies themselves. There are lots of reasons to challenge the material without referencing jesus as the reason. As even my simple observations and metaphorical references have encouraged muddying the water.
    —————

    Sure, in short it postulates coming to truth via experience and in doing so fosters greater understanding between people by shared experience.

    https://research-methodology.net/research-philosophy/phenomenology/
    https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/phenomenology/

    take a look at the phenomenological research of Dr. Bell Hooks

    Consider the work of Henry David Thurough

    • Replies: @AnonStarter
  278. @EliteCommInc.

    /The attempt t0 diminish a position by luring out one’s principles and them laying claim that is why they are saying so and so./

    [laughing]

    Well, I’m not trying to “diminish” your position by “luring out” your principles, since I don’t hold discussion here to consist of argument alone. I’m merely hoping to engage you in conversation and learn from you, much as phenomenology “postulates coming to truth via experience and in doing so fosters greater understanding between people by shared experience.”

    Perhaps we have more in common than you might imagine.

  279. “Well, I’m not trying to “diminish” your position by “luring out” your principles, since I don’t hold discussion here to consist of argument alone.”

    If I have over stepped — it was not intentional.
    —————–
    “Perhaps we have more in common than you might imagine.”

    I am not unmindful of the following comment.

    “May God envelop us in His light, that, in our hour of darkness, the destination to which we travel be seen for what it is.”

    • Thanks: AnonStarter
  280. “• Thanks: AnonStarter”

    No reason. I acknowledged the sentiment. But of it’s generic nature to meaning —- caution.

    • Replies: @AnonStarter
  281. JackOH says:
    @dfordoom

    ” . . . [C]orporate sector has the monopoly on power and they get whatever they want.”

    Pretty much true, at least as I saw it when I was a minor political operative way back when. Interstitial, marginal, and downright weird-ass issues may get unduly pushed forward to national prominence, because the big questions have already been decided upon by K Street power players and their partners in the White House, Congress, and the Supreme Court.

    FWIW-much of the angry rhetorical gear-grinding and wheel-spinning here on these pages seems to be good evidence there’s a small fraction of very bright Americans who bloody well know they’re being had.

    • Replies: @JackOH
  282. @EliteCommInc.

    /But of it’s generic nature to meaning —- caution./

    Addendum: “And in this light, may we find with ease our path to Him and His good company.”

    http://www.ijhssnet.com/journals/Vol_4_No_6_April_2014/10.pdf

  283. JackOH says:
    @JackOH

    Someone really ought to do a taxonomy of lobbies to help clarify the sort of gunk we live under. Phylum, class, genus, species, all that. Junior and senior, maybe, or superordinate and subordinate, whatever helps.

    The top of the heap in the States would be likely something like Big Medicine’s Iron Pyramid of physicians, hospitals, Big Pharma, medical equipment manufacturers, and group health insurers. Those guys enjoy extraordinary powers of initiative and veto, and just sheer obstructionism enforced by threatening to stop practicing medicine and refusing to manufacture drugs..

    At the low end might be green-haired Martians for the liberation of Canalistan back on their home planet. Those guys’ll have to piggyback their arguments atop AIPAC and whatever other hustlers are working the Washington circuit.

  284. “Addendum: “And in this light, may we find with ease our path to Him and His good company.”

    “Finally, brethren, whatever things are true, whatever things are noble, whatever things are just, whatever things are pure, whatever things are lovely, whatever things are of good report, if there is any virtue and if there is anything praiseworthy—meditate on these things.”
    Philippians 4:8

    “6Be careful for nothing; but in every thing by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known unto God. 7And the peace of God, which passeth all understanding, shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus.”
    Philippians 4:8

    https://newcreeations.org/think-things/
    https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Philippians-4-8/

  285. Although I am inclined to agree with him, I do not feel that Mr. Jones did very well in this debate..

  286. Hive Raid says:
    @Jeff Stryker

    Good question. In a recent takimag article, the Jew David Cole explains that Jews’ hate for whites is stronger than Jews’ love for Jews. They take the poison pills of porn, black-on-Jew violence, 3rd world invasion, potential nuclear winter, and so on, because hate is their primary drive.

    https://www.takimag.com/article/suicide-final-solution/

  287. gerry says:

    LOGOS IS RISING!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Especially when it comes to climate change:

    The Lord will cause people to hear his majestic voice and will make them see his arm coming down with raging anger and consuming fire, with cloudburst, thunderstorm and hail. (Isaiah 30:30)

    Rain will come in torrents, and I will send hailstones hurtling down, and violent winds will burst forth. Therefore, this is what the Sovereign Lord says: In my wrath I will unleash a violent wind, and in my anger hailstones and torrents of rain will fall with destructive fury. {Ezekiel 13:11-13}

    “The word of the Lord came to me, Son of man, if a country sins against me by being unfaithful and I stretch out my hand against it to cut off its food supply and send famine upon it and kill its men and their animals, even if these three men Noah, Daniel and Job were in it, they could save only themselves by their righteousness, declares the Sovereign Lord.” {Ezekiel 14: 12-14}

    “Have you entered the storehouses of the snow or seen the storehouses of the hail, which I reserve for times of trouble, for days of war and battle?” (Job 38:22–23)

    He brings the clouds to punish people, or to water his earth and show his love.” (Job 37:5–13)

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All E. Michael Jones Comments via RSS