SamBee and porn

Personally I thought you were more than forgiving in letting some things in that first post slide (no pun).

I’m not going to get into detail… it was completely disgusting and I can’t get rid of the mental image… but here’s the disgusting details.

What is that?

There are ways to make the argument that not all porn is harmless without getting into specifics.

Some porn normalizes violence against women. Period. No need to elaborate on specific acts of violence.

Porn can create unhealthy standards for beauty for women and unrealistic expectations for men. Period. No need to make the conversation about someone’s cup size.

It’s a difficult topic to address. I think SamBee and others are taking a very black and white approach to the issue. I think the tendency is for people to use their own definition of porn to launch into an argument against someone before they’ve even settled on a common language.

I see many of the comments operating at the extremes. Viewing naked women will lead people down the path that culminates in ritual human sacrifice or whatever the argument is. It’s impossible to be addicted to porn, or porn isn’t bad at all. I don’t think many people are making those arguments, maybe the exception is SB, but I think the thread turned into arguing against those extreme arguments.

And finally it ended in a personal attack from SamBee. Nice. SamBee has shown a little temper in PMs we’ve exchanged in the past (two years ago, so it’s been a while). I’ve come to accept that he’s very particular in some ways and tread accordingly.

Bottom line, the thread was about ARP, not porn. If we want another porn discussion we should create (and be sure to keep an eye on) a new thread.

I agree with moving the posts. frankly, I see sambee and DA at opposite extremes of the spectrum and I do not want to have the thread derailed in that matter.

I am also fine with keeping the thread locked with a short explanation.

I would add something like the following:

“This thread has been closed for the following 2 reasons: 1) It is turning into a discussion of porn and the relative addictiveness thereof. We have had that discussion before and can again (One of the better and longer discussions can be viewed here http://forum.staylds.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=6664) but this thread needs to stay geared towards the topic at hand. 2) In the discussion of porn addiction graphic descriptions were used that have been determined by the moderator team to be inappropriate. The moderator team sincerely thanks everyone for contributing to the thoughtful, balanced, and respectful discussions that we enjoy here at StayLDS.”

Is the consensus to leave the topic locked perhaps with a further explanation as to why?

I was actually considering explaining my overall experience a bit more in detailing how the program works from an outsider’s point of view. That is, I think I’d like to explain what I learned about the roles and differences between the groups leaders and facilitators and how the program is supposed to work according to its administrative handbook. I don’t want to leave an implication about the program – it does work for some people, just like AA works for some people. Even if it’s just one person it therefore has value. The calling opportunity was just not for us.

So, I’d rather delete the whole porn exchange, perhaps with an explanation and perhaps with a PM to Sambee which I am open to writing but also open to someone else writing. If not deleting the whole exchange, the personal attacks certainly need to be deleted because that’s just not part of our forum decorum.

I really don’t have a problem with PMing Sambee and saying “The moderation team has discussed the issue and decided discussions about pornography in such graphic detail is not appropriate for the forum. We also feel the discussion veers off topic from the thread about addiction recovery. Further, personal attacks are not and never have been acceptable on the forum. The topic will be reopened with a note to stay on topic. If you would like to have another discussion about the effects of pornography you are welcome to open a new thread, however graphic descriptions will be moderated. Personal disagreements should be resolved using the private message feature, not in the general forums.”

The only part of that I have concerns about is that he may attack others via PM. We don’t have to respond to such attacks, of course, but I’m not sure DA or MM would like to get an attack PM under the guise that I advised it. I could leave that part off and let him fend for himself, and I am fine with ignoring PMs anyway.

part of the problem with acting by committee is that it is hard to get 100% agreement.

I feel that the easiest path is to keep the thread locked (at least in the short term) with the note added explaining why.

The thread was already locked so to keep it so would have it fade from the collective consciousness fairly quickly.

Otherwise, there is potential for passionate (no pun intended ) or hostile content to continue and it just seems like more work overall.

Let me know if there is anything I can do to help whatever the course taken.

He did respond to my PM to him as I expected.

It is clear that I have failed to communicate certain points to you.

It was not helpful to me for you to use the phrase “pissing contest”. If you have spent any substantial time with twelve step programs, you will be used to hearing lurid stories – some much more so than any I told you.

I will reiterate what I said. I do think ARP should be run by recovering addicts. Our local couple are good folk, but we have had at least one person leave because they said the group leader evidently had no personal experience of addiction.

You also seriously need to reconsider your views on pornography. It is one thing to watch a nude scene in an R film or even see a topless picture but the dedicated industry drags people down into increasingly aberrant sexuality and simulations of it. It is impossible for me to discuss this when you press the point but refuse to listen to evidence.

Furthermore, you should never ever belittle someone’s addiction, no matter how harmless, stupid or funny it might seem to you.

I am not going to respond to his PM. I do agree that ARP should be run by recovering addicts and that’s one of the reasons we turned it down – because we are not addicts we cannot relate. We all know that leaders are most likely to follow the manual in any given situation and in this situation the manual says the leader couple are not addicts.

And FWIW, I don’t believe I did press the point but others did. In truth I agree that porn is harmful to individuals, families and societies but only if it’s a regular thing. And I don’t believe I belittled anyone’s addiction, if I did it was certainly unintentional.

Nibbler, you said what I would say in response to today’s post and I plan to refrain from addressing Sambee’s posts unless absolutely necessary.

good feedback Roy.

Good job DJ and everyone involved there! :clap: