If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Innocent question for bobandcarole
On Sep 4, 9:43 pm, Dexter Sinatra wrote:
On Tue, 04 Sep 2007 18:31:16 -0700, "R. Steve Walz" wrote: Dexter Sinatra wrote: When dealing with children, "consensual" is not the legitimizing criterion it is for adults. Indeed, almost invariably, sexual predators defend their "loving" physical relationships with children as being "consensual," when in reality the seduction and manipulation of children -- resulting in their "consent" -- is both an art form and the stock in trade of pedophiles. Dr Judith Reisman ------------------------- Quoting that crank liar again, eh? She's been discredited for her lying slander about Kinsey. Amongst pedophiles,incestuous sexual deviants and the like, she may well have been. Meanwhile,back in the real world; "Dr. Reisman received her Ph.D. in communications from Case Western Reserve University and has lectured and testified the world over to professional organizations, legislatures, parliaments, and courts regarding the power and effect of images and the media to alter human behavior. She has served as a consultant to the U.S. Departments of Justice, Education, and Health and Human Services." http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...ith_A._Reisman Judith A. Reisman Dr. Judith A. Reisman describes herself as a researcher, lecturer, expert witness and educator "regarding fraudulent sex scientists, sex education and the power and effect of images and the monopoly media to alter human behavior. The special emphasis of her work has been and continues to be the negative influence of these change agents upon children and society." Her work has been endorsed by conservative commentators including "Dr. Laura" Schlessinger. On Reisman's website, Schlessinger is cited stating "Dr. Reisman has produced a scholarly and devastating study revealing the ugly and frighteningly dangerous pseudo-scientific assault on our children's innocence." [4] She has also drawn support Charles E. Rice, Professor at Notre Dame Law School for her work critiquing Kinsey's survey work on sexuality. "Dr. Reisman's study supports the conclusion that Alfred Kinsey's research was contrived, ideologically driven and misleading. Any judge, legislator or other public official who gives credence to that research is guilty of malpractice and dereliction of duty," Rice stated. A major focus of her work has been discrediting Kinsey, who she saw as single-handedly inventing the sexual revolution. Reisman was described October 5, 2000, by David M. Bresnahn in WorldNetDaily as "formerly a research professor at American University, veteran pornography researcher and expert witness before the attorney general's commission on pornography ..." "Contrary to the popular view that there is little crossover between homosexuality and pedophilia, she says homosexuals are anxious to recruit young boys -- a practice that is becoming easier thanks to sex education and 'diversity programs' in schools that teach children to consider homosexuality as both acceptable and normal." According to an interview posted online May 26, 2005, by Wes Penre, a "talented musician and songwriter," Reisman "has produced educational music histories for museums in Los Angeles, Milwaukee, and Cleveland, and during the 1970s she produced music videos for Captain Kangaroo, the long-running children's television program. "Dr. Reisman received her Ph.D. in communications from Case Western Reserve University and has lectured and testified the world over to professional organizations, legislatures, parliaments, and courts regarding the power and effect of images and the media to alter human behavior. She has served as a consultant to the U.S. Departments of Justice, Education, and Health and Human Services." shes a researcher? wheres her research? criticizing someone elses research is not doing your own research. lectures and testimony is not research. being a consultant is not research. what has she done to prove what she says? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Innocent question for bobandcarole
Dexter Sinatra wrote in
news I guess this might be one of the most influential of her studies. The psychopharmacology of pictorial pornography I guess I still don't understand how a PhD in communications makes one an expert on human brain function. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Innocent question for bobandcarole
Dexter Sinatra wrote:
On Tue, 04 Sep 2007 19:08:54 -0700, nudist_emy wrote: On Sep 4, 9:43 pm, Dexter Sinatra wrote: On Tue, 04 Sep 2007 18:31:16 -0700, "R. Steve Walz" wrote: Dexter Sinatra wrote: When dealing with children, "consensual" is not the legitimizing criterion it is for adults. Indeed, almost invariably, sexual predators defend their "loving" physical relationships with children as being "consensual," when in reality the seduction and manipulation of children -- resulting in their "consent" -- is both an art form and the stock in trade of pedophiles. Dr Judith Reisman ------------------------- Quoting that crank liar again, eh? She's been discredited for her lying slander about Kinsey. Amongst pedophiles,incestuous sexual deviants and the like, she may well have been. Meanwhile,back in the real world; "Dr. Reisman received her Ph.D. in communications from Case Western Reserve University and has lectured and testified the world over to professional organizations, legislatures, parliaments, and courts regarding the power and effect of images and the media to alter human behavior. She has served as a consultant to the U.S. Departments of Justice, Education, and Health and Human Services." http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...ith_A._Reisman Judith A. Reisman Dr. Judith A. Reisman describes herself as a researcher, lecturer, expert witness and educator "regarding fraudulent sex scientists, sex education and the power and effect of images and the monopoly media to alter human behavior. The special emphasis of her work has been and continues to be the negative influence of these change agents upon children and society." Her work has been endorsed by conservative commentators including "Dr. Laura" Schlessinger. On Reisman's website, Schlessinger is cited stating "Dr. Reisman has produced a scholarly and devastating study revealing the ugly and frighteningly dangerous pseudo-scientific assault on our children's innocence." [4] She has also drawn support Charles E. Rice, Professor at Notre Dame Law School for her work critiquing Kinsey's survey work on sexuality. "Dr. Reisman's study supports the conclusion that Alfred Kinsey's research was contrived, ideologically driven and misleading. Any judge, legislator or other public official who gives credence to that research is guilty of malpractice and dereliction of duty," Rice stated. A major focus of her work has been discrediting Kinsey, who she saw as single-handedly inventing the sexual revolution. Reisman was described October 5, 2000, by David M. Bresnahn in WorldNetDaily as "formerly a research professor at American University, veteran pornography researcher and expert witness before the attorney general's commission on pornography ..." "Contrary to the popular view that there is little crossover between homosexuality and pedophilia, she says homosexuals are anxious to recruit young boys -- a practice that is becoming easier thanks to sex education and 'diversity programs' in schools that teach children to consider homosexuality as both acceptable and normal." According to an interview posted online May 26, 2005, by Wes Penre, a "talented musician and songwriter," Reisman "has produced educational music histories for museums in Los Angeles, Milwaukee, and Cleveland, and during the 1970s she produced music videos for Captain Kangaroo, the long-running children's television program. "Dr. Reisman received her Ph.D. in communications from Case Western Reserve University and has lectured and testified the world over to professional organizations, legislatures, parliaments, and courts regarding the power and effect of images and the media to alter human behavior. She has served as a consultant to the U.S. Departments of Justice, Education, and Health and Human Services." shes a researcher? wheres her research? criticizing someone elses research is not doing your own research. lectures and testimony is not research. being a consultant is not research. what has she done to prove what she says? I guess this might be one of the most influential of her studies. The psychopharmacology of pictorial pornography http://www.drjudithreisman.com/archives/brain.pdf ------------------------------------- Sex on the brain Mark Pilkington The Guardian Thursday July 14 2005 It is all around us, seeping into our brains, via magazines, newspapers and television. Once there, it gets to work, "reflexively and mechanically restructuring the brain "; terrifyingly, "involuntary cellular change takes place even during sleep, resisting informed consent ". According to Dr Judith Reisman, pornography affects the physical structure of your brain turning you into a porno-zombie. Porn, she says, is an "erototoxin ", producing an addictive "drug cocktail " of testosterone, oxytocin, dopamine and serotonin with a measurable organic effect on the brain. Some of us might consider this a good thing. Not Reisman: erototoxins aren't about pleasure, they're a "fear-sex-shame-and-anger stimulant". Reisman's paper on the subject The Psychopharmacology of Pictorial Pornography Restructuring Brain, Mind & Memory & Subverting Freedom of Speech has helped make her the darling of the anti-pornography crusade, and in November last year she presented her erototoxin theory to the US senate. Under the auspices of Utah's Lighted Candle Society (LCS), Reisman and Victor Cline, a clinical psychologist at the University of Utah, began raising money from American conservative and religious organisations. They hope to raise at least $3m to conduct MRI scans on victims under the influence of porn and so prove their theories correct. They foresee two possible outcomes: if they can demonstrate that porn physically "damages " the brain, that might open the floodgates for "big tobacco"-style lawsuits against porn publishers and distributors; second, and more insidiously, if porn can be shown to "subvert cognition " and affect the parts of the brain involved in reasoning and speech, then "these toxic media should be legally outlawed, as is all other toxic waste, and eliminated from our societal structure ". What's more, people whose brains have been rotted by pornography are no longer expressing "free speech " and, for their own good, shouldn't be protected under the First Amendment. But there's a catch. Much of Reisman's research in developing her theory has necessitated examining hundreds, perhaps thousands, of pornographic magazines and films. By her own reasoning her brain ought, by now, to be a seething mass of toxic smutmulch ... -- (One of these days we're gonna have to NUKE Utah! Steve) When asked in a jail cell interview with a local TV reporter why he killed the little girl, Gregerson said he was "addicted to pornography at one point. It was ruining my life and affecting my relationship with my wife. I can tell you this: I have now become a strong advocate against pornography. I do apologize to the public, and everyone else who's been involved in what happened." ------------------- Anybody who actually thinks that he is being controlled by pornography *IS* ****ing crazy to START with! But if evidence is needed, there is serious research that proves this to be the case. ---------------- That, above, isn't evidence, or have you gone stupid? One asshole who killed a kid is NOT to be believed when interviewed, or how come YOU don't GET that! For instance, the Rand Corp. in Pittsburgh has just published in the current issue of Pediatrics the results of a survey indicating that teens who listen to music full of raunchy, sexual lyrics start having sex sooner than those who prefer other songs. -------------------- Thank GOD, we've found a way to return young humans to NORMAL! Let's make lots more of that stuff RIGHT AWAY!! Nobody suggests that everybody addicted to pornography becomes a violent person or sexual predator. ------------------ Sure you are, and that's what makes it obvious that you're ****ing stupid! But as Corydon Hammond, codirector of the Sex and Marital Therapy Clinic at the University of Utah, says: "I don't think I've ever yet seen an adult sex offender who was not involved with pornography." ----------------------------- Nor any murderer who has not also chewed chewing gum!!! (How can anyone in any position of scientific respect make such a stupid statment!!??) MOST of us like PORN, there are BOUND to be some of ANYTHING among us!! Judith Reisman, author of "The Psychopharmacology of Pictorial Pornography," sees a direct causal link between pornography and sex crimes. ------------------------------------ And that's because she has a degree in "Communications", the EASY major, and because she wrote Captain Kangaroo and sang on his show for 20 years, and because the "Kangaroo" money ran out. "In many cases I don't think we have any problem saying pornography caused [the sex offense]. We have tons of data," she writes. ----------------------------------- None of it interpeeted by reputable science to be a cause of anything. You see, Reisman has an axe to grind, she can't cum. Congress has attempted legislation seeking to control pornography but found it vetoed by courts claiming the legislation hobbled free speech. ---------------------- And THAT'S because the Congress is made of bought and sold public assholes and the courts guard our freedoms! Human sexuality researcher Reisman gets it right when she says: "It's not that pornography acts like a drug. It is a drug." ------------------------ But what she doesn't like you thinking is that it is a very GOOD drug for us!! Steve |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Innocent question for bobandcarole
"R. Steve Walz" wrote in news:46DE231E.3A52
@armory.com: But there's a catch. Much of Reisman's research in developing her theory has necessitated examining hundreds, perhaps thousands, of pornographic magazines and films. By her own reasoning her brain ought, by now, to be a seething mass of toxic smutmulch ... Oh, no. That's not true. I understand that feminists possess a special immunity to this. If only that could be bottled or turned into a pill, then anyone could view porn without suffering such damage. But, alas, that's simply just not possible. The rumor I heard was that research into this pill ended up producing Viagra instead! But I could be wrong about that. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Innocent question for bobandcarole
On Tue, 04 Sep 2007 19:08:54 -0700, nudist_emy
wrote: "Dr. Reisman received her Ph.D. in communications from Case Western Reserve University and has lectured and testified the world over to professional organizations, legislatures, parliaments, and courts regarding the power and effect of images and the media to alter human behavior. She has served as a consultant to the U.S. Departments of Justice, Education, and Health and Human Services." shes a researcher? wheres her research? criticizing someone elses research is not doing your own research. lectures and testimony is not research. being a consultant is not research. what has she done to prove what she says? Gee, Dex, seems that question just keeps getting bigger and bigger??? Why don't you answer it? -T. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Innocent question for bobandcarole
On Sep 4, 10:29 pm, Dexter Sinatra wrote:
On Tue, 04 Sep 2007 19:08:54 -0700, nudist_emy wrote: On Sep 4, 9:43 pm, Dexter Sinatra wrote: On Tue, 04 Sep 2007 18:31:16 -0700, "R. Steve Walz" wrote: Dexter Sinatra wrote: When dealing with children, "consensual" is not the legitimizing criterion it is for adults. Indeed, almost invariably, sexual predators defend their "loving" physical relationships with children as being "consensual," when in reality the seduction and manipulation of children -- resulting in their "consent" -- is both an art form and the stock in trade of pedophiles. Dr Judith Reisman ------------------------- Quoting that crank liar again, eh? She's been discredited for her lying slander about Kinsey. Amongst pedophiles,incestuous sexual deviants and the like, she may well have been. Meanwhile,back in the real world; "Dr. Reisman received her Ph.D. in communications from Case Western Reserve University and has lectured and testified the world over to professional organizations, legislatures, parliaments, and courts regarding the power and effect of images and the media to alter human behavior. She has served as a consultant to the U.S. Departments of Justice, Education, and Health and Human Services." http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...ith_A._Reisman Judith A. Reisman Dr. Judith A. Reisman describes herself as a researcher, lecturer, expert witness and educator "regarding fraudulent sex scientists, sex education and the power and effect of images and the monopoly media to alter human behavior. The special emphasis of her work has been and continues to be the negative influence of these change agents upon children and society." Her work has been endorsed by conservative commentators including "Dr. Laura" Schlessinger. On Reisman's website, Schlessinger is cited stating "Dr. Reisman has produced a scholarly and devastating study revealing the ugly and frighteningly dangerous pseudo-scientific assault on our children's innocence." [4] She has also drawn support Charles E. Rice, Professor at Notre Dame Law School for her work critiquing Kinsey's survey work on sexuality. "Dr. Reisman's study supports the conclusion that Alfred Kinsey's research was contrived, ideologically driven and misleading. Any judge, legislator or other public official who gives credence to that research is guilty of malpractice and dereliction of duty," Rice stated. A major focus of her work has been discrediting Kinsey, who she saw as single-handedly inventing the sexual revolution. Reisman was described October 5, 2000, by David M. Bresnahn in WorldNetDaily as "formerly a research professor at American University, veteran pornography researcher and expert witness before the attorney general's commission on pornography ..." "Contrary to the popular view that there is little crossover between homosexuality and pedophilia, she says homosexuals are anxious to recruit young boys -- a practice that is becoming easier thanks to sex education and 'diversity programs' in schools that teach children to consider homosexuality as both acceptable and normal." According to an interview posted online May 26, 2005, by Wes Penre, a "talented musician and songwriter," Reisman "has produced educational music histories for museums in Los Angeles, Milwaukee, and Cleveland, and during the 1970s she produced music videos for Captain Kangaroo, the long-running children's television program. "Dr. Reisman received her Ph.D. in communications from Case Western Reserve University and has lectured and testified the world over to professional organizations, legislatures, parliaments, and courts regarding the power and effect of images and the media to alter human behavior. She has served as a consultant to the U.S. Departments of Justice, Education, and Health and Human Services." shes a researcher? wheres her research? criticizing someone elses research is not doing your own research. lectures and testimony is not research. being a consultant is not research. what has she done to prove what she says? I guess this might be one of the most influential of her studies. The psychopharmacology of pictorial pornography http://www.drjudithreisman.com/archives/brain.pdf And here is an example of what she talks about. Pornography: the social ill behind some dangerous crimes By John Hughes http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0816/p09s02-cojh.html SALT LAKE CITY - From his jail cell a few days ago, 20-year-old Craig Roger Gregerson explained the reason he has been arrested and charged with capital murder, punishable by death, and first-degree child kidnapping. In a case that created national media attention, he is accused of killing 5-year-old Destiny Norton, who went missing from her home in Salt Lake City July 16. Hundreds turned out to search for her. Eight days later police found her body stuffed in a container in the basement of Mr. Gregerson's house just two doors away from her home. Police charge that he lured her to his own property, suffocated her, then abused her dead body. When asked in a jail cell interview with a local TV reporter why he killed the little girl, Gregerson said he was "addicted to pornography at one point. It was ruining my life and affecting my relationship with my wife. I can tell you this: I have now become a strong advocate against pornography. I do apologize to the public, and everyone else who's been involved in what happened." Those who profit from the production and sale of pornographic and violent material in magazines and books, on videos and television, argue that there is no evidence to prove that what they create can foster violence, child molestation, and sex crimes in those exposed to it. The ugly case of Craig Roger Gregerson, and what happened to 5-year-old Destiny Norton, is at least one convincing piece of evidence that it can and does. It should not require a doctorate in psychology to understand that what we see and hear can influence our behavior. But if evidence is needed, there is serious research that proves this to be the case. For instance, the Rand Corp. in Pittsburgh has just published in the current issue of Pediatrics the results of a survey indicating that teens who listen to music full of raunchy, sexual lyrics start having sex sooner than those who prefer other songs. The Associated Press quotes the lead researcher on this project, Steven Martino, as saying that exposure to lots of sexually degrading music "gives them a specific message about sex." Boys learn they should be relentless in pursuit of girls, and girls learn to view themselves as sex objects. "We think that really lowers kids' inhibitions," he says. Benjamin Chavis, who heads a network coalition of hip-hop musicians and recording industry executives, responded to the survey by asserting that explicit music lyrics are a cultural expression that reflect "social and economic realities." This is a familiar echo of the plaint by some Hollywood movie and TV producers who argue that when they splatter their movies and TV productions with violence, profanity, and lurid sexuality, they are merely reflecting society as it is. To be asked to clean up their acts is an infringement upon their artistic freedom. Nobody suggests that everybody addicted to pornography becomes a violent person or sexual predator. But as Corydon Hammond, codirector of the Sex and Marital Therapy Clinic at the University of Utah, says: "I don't think I've ever yet seen an adult sex offender who was not involved with pornography." Judith Reisman, author of "The Psychopharmacology of Pictorial Pornography," sees a direct causal link between pornography and sex crimes. "In many cases I don't think we have any problem saying pornography caused [the sex offense]. We have tons of data," she writes. Congress has attempted legislation seeking to control pornography but found it vetoed by courts claiming the legislation hobbled free speech. The courts, on copyright grounds, have outlawed the sale of videos in which distributors have edited out profanity or questionable scenes. A new legislative attempt may require cable TV channels, where most questionable material appears, to carry a label warning of the offensiveness, but without deleting it, thus circumventing the free speech issue. The Kaiser Foundation has undertaken extensive research on the amount of sex-oriented and violent programming on TV, and its impact on young viewers. The watchdog Parents Television Council has campaigned vigorously against sex, violence, and profanity on television and in other media. It has lobbied against the cable industry's mandatory inclusion of questionable channels in omnibus packages offered to subscribers, arguing that subscribers should have the right to pick and choose individual channels. Human sexuality researcher Reisman gets it right when she says: "It's not that pornography acts like a drug. It is a drug." once again all i see are criminals being studied. so she concludes criminals look at porn so then porn caused their criminal activities. well, all those criminals ate food, so i can conclude that food causes crime. all those criminals wore clothes in front of their parents, so clothing causes crime. show me a study that looked at non-criminals and their viewing of nude people and the affects on them. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Innocent question for bobandcarole
Dexter Sinatra wrote:
On Tue, 04 Sep 2007 21:17:18 -0700, wrote: On Tue, 04 Sep 2007 19:08:54 -0700, nudist_emy wrote: "Dr. Reisman received her Ph.D. in communications from Case Western Reserve University and has lectured and testified the world over to professional organizations, legislatures, parliaments, and courts regarding the power and effect of images and the media to alter human behavior. She has served as a consultant to the U.S. Departments of Justice, Education, and Health and Human Services." shes a researcher? wheres her research? criticizing someone elses research is not doing your own research. lectures and testimony is not research. being a consultant is not research. what has she done to prove what she says? Gee, Dex, seems that question just keeps getting bigger and bigger??? Why don't you answer it? OK To answer your pet pervert I will just say you both should learn the difference between primary and secondary research. -------------------------------- Invented terminology, the sure sign of a liar. crneyf va sebag bs fjvar V xabj. ---------------------------- Rot13 for: pearls in front of swine I know. You're the swine, Dex. Steve |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Innocent question for bobandcarole
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Innocent question for bobandcarole
Terry J. Wood wrote:
wrote in news:c6ctd3tort7jj1ar7gvgla6i8esggjss9s@ 4ax.com: Specifically, where is the "research" to support the bit of bull**** above? Or are you one of those fellas who just wants to repeat the lie over and over, until someone thinks it true? What kind of man is it who posts something like that without ever knowing whether it was, in fact, true? And how can you do this without a web page? -------------------- Is your question: "How can one determine whether it was true without a web site??"? I have news for you, Science was done LONG before websites, and websites lend themselves to unwarranted use by liars, who can never be questioned about their content, and websites can be mass-manufacturered LIE-sites, meant to overwhelm singular logic and reason-bearing sites with their seemingly higher numbers of sites featuring only a set of crank notions. Steve |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Why kids are very innocent? | Ali | General | 8 | July 17th 06 11:48 AM |
Innocent boy needs help | forthedefense | General | 5 | May 20th 05 05:54 PM |
Gay men are innocent | GI Trekker | General | 0 | March 20th 04 03:46 AM |
MICHAEL JACKSON IS INNOCENT!!! | Christine | Pregnancy | 0 | November 24th 03 05:44 PM |
THRILLER! He's innocent! | Robert Gautier | General | 0 | November 22nd 03 11:13 AM |