Why hasn't anybody sued them yet?

Because the physical product being used is attached to the body.
It would be similar to people sueing for being scared at a theatre.
It wouldnt hold up in court in other words. It's one of those use at your own risk things I think.

 

Most people watch it for free and there is almost zero scientific evidence that proves porn is harmful.
In other words until scientific claims are made the judge will have no choice but to acquit the porn industry.

Ted Bundy always claimed pornography made him kill but as there wasn't any proof of how this affected him they put him on the electric chair and decided to make porn available on an even bigger scale.

Just recently where I live a guy has been sentenced to jail for murdering a girl during sex. Surely these fantasies must have their roots somewhere. Rape porn and porn involving criminal offences is widely available. Although rare perhaps some people with a predisposition to psychotic tendencies are more affected by this type of porn than the mainstream guy. If this could be proven authorities would have no choice but to make pornography illegal since it would then carry risks and dangers to society too profound to deny. One may ask why science isn't carrying out more studies. Ignorance is bliss I guess.

 

I guess it's because it's self-inflicting. It would be the same case as the persons who sued McDonald's because their food made them overweight. To me, its about a critique on a bigger scale, against capitalism that turn people into extreme consumers. One cannot blame a company for getting them addicted to their products (porn, games, food etc.), but we really have to think about the extreme accessibility and extreme exposure through TV, music, internet etc. that over-saturate our culture with temptations.

 

Although I believe that porn is evil and made a lot of problems. I believe in freedom and in a free market. I am against any regulation that would only push the porn production into something illegal. That would only worsen the situation of the people involved, like actors.

I take full responsibility for my porn addiction. I knew from the very beginning, that it wasn't right. I did not think it would give me PIED, but I knew it was wrong.

The only thing that could be done is to do campaigns about the social and medical effects of porn consumption.

 

Who lost his life to this? can you give an example?

 

Life does not have warnings, your brain is what should give you warnings.
On that note though, plenty of warnings were given by independent researchers.

Warnings do not do anything, because people capable of abuse are usually depressed and do not care. They want relief from emotional pain, they will do anything, if drugs were available - they would take them.

 

It's all about education and making good choices.

 

I believe in our freedom as well. I hold a lot of libertarian thoughts and if folks want to smoke, look at porn, eat junk all day (been guilty of all three) then go ahead. As long as it is legal and not infringing on anyone else. However, it is NOT anyone else's fault. If you have put on notice and given fair warning, proceed as you wish.

 

I have seen that interview with Bundy and while somewhat insightful, I don't put that on porn. Sure, snuff and the sicker porn is awful, but if it is staged and no one is getting hurt physically, I don't have a problem. However, Bundy is an extreme narcissist. Anything to get the focus off him. So I don't completely buy it. People have these deranged thoughts and use whatever fuel they can get. It is interesting he spoke about this about 15 years before it became a mini epidemic. I'm sure plenty of folks were addicted back then too, just not as readily available.

 

I think that tobacco = lung cancer is measurable.

How porn is a pariah upon society is not something that we can easily measure.

It took some time to find out just how bad smoking was. Porn (specifically readily accessible internet porn) is relatively new.

Perhaps sometime in the future will there will be a large payout to victims of porn.

 

My only thoughts on this is how prevalent and easy to stumble on for children. I really think this is where their responsibility cones in play. Both my son and daughter were exposed outside my home ( as I was already aware of how bad it was and was very careful with our electronics). Like cigarettes and alcohol it should be far more difficult for children to get to

 

While I don't plan to sue for myself, I for sure will, once my future children stumble over it at most likely what's going to be a single digit age.

 

Good points. Another reason might be that no one wants to wants to go public about their porn addiction. I mean look at us - most of us are hiding behind anonymous username. Most don't want to let the world know they go to NoFap. It's why porn ransomwares can be so successful.

 

There were very specific points with those tobacco lawsuits - early cigarette advertising used to heavily imply that smoking was not only not damaging, but actively healthy - 'More Doctors Smoke Camels Cigarettes' for example, makes a clear implication. They were also paying glamorous women to go on women's liberation marches puffing away on cigs to persuade vulnerable young women that smoking was a symbol of their newfound 'freedom'. And lots of other dodgy tactics.
P is still quite underground, although a lot less than it was. It's difficult to claim that it was forced on me, even though it occasionally comes up on an innocent google search, the fact is that we usually have to seek it out.

I'm also not entirely convinced that occasional or one-off use is damaging for healthy minded people who have a normal love/sex life. Just addicts like me.

 

I completely agree porn can't be a scapegoat for murdering another human being. On a psychological level however there is a possibility that when a psychopath sees his desires being fulfilled in porn, it may be oil on the fire and porn can be the difference between life and death in this respect. In other words a psychopath may be hesitant to go through with his fantasies until he sees something like it in porn. But I get what you are saying, the same could be said about video games and what not. Society should just be careful and protect the vulnerable is all I was trying to say.

 

I appreciate the feedback and I do agree that the Bundy interview can be instructive. However, how far we can say these media affect people is just impossible to do so I side on (legal) freedom of expression. It's just what it is. The "Joker" movie thankfully has not incited incidents as far as I know. People choose ultimately what they do for the most part.

 

A lot of people on this site state they use Porn AS A RESULT of another root cause such as anxiety, depression, a life trauma etc.
It follows that the porn industry may use such testimony in their defence, or even suggest porn as a 'coping mechanism'.

 

theoretically you can sue the porn industry.
theoretically you can sue the prostitution industry.
it didn't worked.

 

Yes, great point. I am quite conscious that I have an 'addictive personality', so I have to be extra vigilant with vices like P (etc). If I wasn't a P-addict, I would be addicted to something else, for sure. Maybe even something worse.