this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2025
456 points (98.9% liked)
PC Gaming
11874 readers
575 users here now
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Just to make sure, this is the game you are defending and think there is no harm to people being exposed or reinforcing this view of women:
Could you please be realy clear: You don't see any problem with this?
I can think it's a messed up fantasy, but that doesn't mean it should immediately be banned by a payment processor.
Regardless, there are tons of studies showing that consuming this kind of porn actually helps prevent people from acting on these fantasies. The net result is likely less sexual abuse, not more. Because it's fantasy media, it likely is able to keep the fantasy a fantasy, it gives people an outlet.
Show me a meta study that supports this claim, please. Not a single study, but something that looks at those alleged thousands of studies and comes to the conclusion you are implying here.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32691692/
Next sentence
Also:
Also also this study has nothing to do with your claim. Its not about porn preventing violent behaviour, it's about whether porn causes it or not.
This is not contradictory.
The meta-study says that pornography contributing to sexual aggression is not proven. Meaning, it doesn't make it worse.
Meanwhile the population study seems to suggest porn usage reduces sexual aggression, or is at least correlated with it.
The last sentence of the abstract (More studies with improved practices and preregistration would be welcome.) seems to be adressing this. In the study itself they say:
You said, at the start of our dialog, that:
"This kind" refers to violent porn, i suppose? Because the study states that:
So they are not talking about "this kind" of porn.
The meta analysis addresses porn in general. That includes fetishized content like violent or "taboo" pornography. It states there's no evidence that it makes sexual aggression more prevalent, and that population studies show that it's at least correlated with a reduction instead.
We can nitpick the wording all day long, but ultimately I think the takeaway is that there's no evidence that it has negative effects, and there's at least some evidence that suggests it has positive effects.
If anything, this points towards the opposite conclusion. And that is with zero nitpicking.
The inability to distinguish between selection and socialization means there's no evidence for a causal link. At best, it suggests that people who commit sexual aggression generally like porn featuring it more, but even that is apparently a weak correlation apparently.
I don't disagree. It also doesn't prove your point though, so we are back to square one.
Maybe this is of some relevance for us, i came across it in another discussion a while back.
It's a study that looks at CFSM (Child fantasy sexual material) and tries to determine, if it makes pedophiles more or less likley to assault children in real life.
Unfortunately they arrive at the conclusion, that we don't have enoth studys to know yet. I would assume the same to be true for violent porn and rl sexual assault. But i am happy to be corrected, if you have the data to back it up.