On a homeschool email list, a concerned member posted a PR-release about an interview by James Dobson of Focus on the Family with Ted Bundy, an infamously notorious serial killer who targeted young women between 1974 and 1978. I was a young woman between 1974 and 1978, so a national crime spree concerning that age group caught my attention, and held it.
The public relations release is curious:
- Why is a 20th anniversary ... observation ... necessary?
- What was Florida-incarcerated Bundy's real motive in talking to a 20-years-ago Coloradan James Dobson instead of someone else? (yes, I've seen the credited reason)
- Are the statements in the press release accurate?
- If it's so important, why did Focus on the Family cancel the public appearance on the Glenn Beck show because it seems that Mr. Beck is a Mormon. (? -- I'm unfamiliar both with Mr. Beck and with the program) If pornography is a national emergency, shouldn't a television host's religious faith be immaterial if our immortal souls are at stake?
I also wonder what application the press release has to homeschooling since I saw the release only on a list meant for local homeschooling parents. I really don't mean to kvetch about what shows up on the list, but the apparent conclusion that anything from Focus on the Family = 'homeschooling concerns' is a niggling pebble-in-a-shoe. [read]-[delete] [read]-[delete] [read]-[delete] [ad infinitum] It also seems petty to send items to the list that I find significant, but that have nothing specific to do with homeschooling. Pointed discussions are discouraged.
=========================
But back to the pornography.
Is the conclusion that pornography leads to evil actions accurate? I don't have any use for pornography,but I also don't like being made to fear things for no good reason because I'm of a slightly nervous temperament, so the fear aspect is personal for me.
I remember when Erich von Däniken's book Chariots of the Gods? was made into a television program in the 1970s. When I watched it in my parent's' living room during one visit (4 channels, no surfing) my husband was sitting on the couch, and I was sitting on the floor between his feet with my back against the couch. Part of the way into the program, my husband startled me by patting me on the shoulder. "It's OK. Calm down. It's just a tv program." I didn't even know I was nervous, and I don't remember believing every single word of the narration. Apparently, though, my body language was obvious, even from the back of my head. I guess, at heart, I'm gullible.
So, do I need to worry about the pornography epidemic? Is a fear-reaction prudent? I hear that pornography is everywhere (especially online -- :::glances around the screen:::) and that I must beware lest I'm trapped in the filth. I wonder about the nudie pictures because I lived in Germany for 18 years and didn't notice rampant sexual violence, while at the same time I did see rampant nekkid ladies (rarely any nekkid fellows);pictured on magazines in the grocery store, and billboard ads with untowelled (non-frontal) families relaxing in their indoor saunas. Then there were the people who changed clothes outside at the swimming pool. Srsly! (I bet Hitler had something to do with it.) How did we escape the vile effects?
Intrigued by the email (gullible, gullible, gullible), I virtually went looking for information, and found a research paper. It is an older paper (in line with the age of James Dobson's interview with Ted Bundy), but the research looks sound.
The paper was part of the proceedings at a criminology conference held by the Australian Institute of Criminology. The page was updated in 2007 (meaning someone still values the information), so I'm happy not to have to sully my hard drive history with more searches for sex crimes.
I don't intend to give the impression that I want to sanitize pornography or give it a Good Housekeeping-style seal of approval (not that the paper does that), so I'll just include brief quotations that seems to reflect my limited observations about differences between sexual attitudes in Germany and in the U.S.:
According to these studies, sex offenders generally reported sexually repressive family backgrounds, immature and inadequate sexual histories and rigid, conservative attitudes towards sexuality.
(I consider this quotation significant because of the suicide of a friend of my sister whose father was like nothing I'd ever heard of before, even though her suicide was by gunshot)
...
At any rate it would seem fair to conclude that overall there could not have been any increase in the actual number of rapes committed in West Germany during the years when pornography was legalised and became widely available.
In this study of the crime statistics in four countries, pornography was not implicated in sex crimes despite James Dobson's assertion ca. minute 4:45.
The paper is just 14 pages long and is readable.
Ted Bundy may have believed that pornography was what fueled his repulsively malignant actions. In the brief look I've taken just now at the online information about him, I would guess that his grandfather's repellent influence had more to do with his character malformation than did looking at 'dirty pictures.' (although, the images must have been a trigger for him -- he would know that)
I find nothing uplifting or useful in pornography, but I don't think it helps matters to blame what is possibly the wrong cause of a social problem that brings such despair to the human spirit. Focusing our efforts in the wrong area only delays finding a solution.
Recent Comments