Research group for Amelie
rosalee, 18 Oct 2005 11:57:44
The research group is here
http://www.smartgroups.com/group/group.cfm?GID=3280178
and I believe it's an open group now so you don't need an invite to join. I think it was decided that rather than try to amass a huge amount of data, people would wait until someone requested something - like stats on rape cases. You're welcome to join.
Ginny
----- Original Message -----
: Amelie, 18 Oct 2005 11:57:44
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 11:17 AM
Subject: Re: [backlash] RE: Become a sect
By the way, I have heard there is a research group but although I have
offered my services, I have not heard any more about it.
Attachment:.
message.html (text/html)
clare, 18 Oct 2005 12:24:20
If you offered, it got lost in the mass of postings I'm afraid. I didn't see the offer.
At the last meeting it was Paul Taverner, Morgarth and myself, they may be others who were not at the meeting. But Ginny is right, it amounts to nothign more than a group of people who are prepared to look for stuff that other people want if for some reason those people can't find what they need themselves. It's a "Who Can Does" arrangement.
There is no plan to research without direction or limit, because this topic is huge and we could accumulate untold material that no one ever wants to look at.
Author wrote:
> The research group is here
> http://www.smartgroups.com/group/group.cfm?GID=3280178
> and I believe it's an open group now so you don't need an invite to join. I think it was decided that rather than try to amass a huge amount of data, people would wait until someone requested something - like stats on rape cases. You're welcome to join.
> Ginny
> ----- Original Message -----
om: Amelie, 18 Oct 2005 12:24:20
> Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 11:17 AM
> Subject: Re: [backlash] RE: Become a sect
> By the way, I have heard there is a research group but although I have
> offered my services, I have not heard any more about it.
Amelie, 18 Oct 2005 12:35:56
thanks - but that seems to fall into the trap of "if you don't know what is
out there, how do you know what questions to ask?
I have been posting links to intereting snippets that may help in responses
and which people may follow if they wish, Perhaps this is not useful?
Last one on this topic - my killer question - if there is, as they have
admitted, and we can can substantiate, no verifiable suggestion that
pornography corrupts - what is the purpose of the proposed legislation?
http://www.melonfarmers.co.uk/arnptory.htm
----- Original Message -----
To:
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 12:24 PM
> If you offered, it got lost in the mass of postings I'm afraid. I didn't
> see the offer.
>
> At the last meeting it was Paul Taverner, Morgarth and myself, they may be
> others who were not at the meeting. But Ginny is right, it amounts to
> nothign more than a group of people who are prepared to look for stuff
> that other people want if for some reason those people can't find what
> they need themselves. It's a "Who Can Does" arrangement.
>
> There is no plan to research without direction or limit, because this
> topic is huge and we could accumulate untold material that no one ever
> wants to look at.
>
> Author wrote:
>> The research group is here
>> http://www.smartgroups.com/group/group.cfm?GID=3280178
>> and I believe it's an open group now so you don't need an invite to join.
>> I think it was decided that rather than try to amass a huge amount of
>> data, people would wait until someone requested something - like stats on
>> rape cases. You're welcome to join.
>> Ginny
>> ----- Original Message -----
rom: Amelie, 18 Oct 2005 12:35:56
>> Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 11:17 AM
>> Subject: Re: [backlash] RE: Become a sect
>> By the way, I have heard there is a research group but although I have
>> offered my services, I have not heard any more about it.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> If you want to share pictures, use the calendar, or start a vote
> visit http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/Backlash
>
> To leave the Group, email: Backlash-unsubscribe@smartgroups.com
>
> Report abuse
> http://www.smartgroups.com/text/abusereport.cfm?gid%3D3271426&mid%3D1714
>
>
demolitionred, 18 Oct 2005 12:51:59
I've sent another list of questions.
as a member of the lobby and press groups, I do think of an awful lot of questions that people might ask me, ideas that strengthen our arguments if challenged etc.
I'm sure there are loads of things that I don't think of so can people make sure they put either links to good arguments, research etc or questions up on the research group site.
Thanks
clare, 18 Oct 2005 13:06:35
I think that is slightly the wrong question. It is not whether pornography "corrupts" but whether it causes people to re-enact the violent scenarios that they see.
Excuse the diversion into the difference between an image corrupting and an image causing violent behaviour. It is relevant because one of the options is to extend the Obscene Publications Act to a possession offence, and "corruption" is the principle that underlies the Obsence Publications Act. Under that Act publication of material will be banned if it is likely to corrupt the people that view it. That principle can work in relation to publication because had A not published the material, B would not have seen it and been corrupted.
The same principle cannot work where the offence is possession (rather than publication). You can't say, if you hadn't looked at it, you wouldn't have corrupted yourself. And anyway, the people least likely to be "corrupted" by looking at something are the degenerates and the ones most likely to be corrupted are the innocent. Thus the extension of the OPA to possession cannot work without being extremely silly. The COnsultation Paper recognises this problem.
The issue that Government admits there is no evidence of, is whether the images cause people to re-enact the violence they see. Or at least whether such images are a significant cause. As you say, the government accepts that there is no evidence that there is a causal connection.
My view, expressed in several places, is that we should rely on the government's admission that there is no evidence. It is not for us to substantiate an admission that has already been made. Any attempt to "substantiate" it will only involve delving into academia which both sides agree is inconclusive. It can therefore achieve at best, the admission we already have. At worst, a muddying of waters.
Author wrote:
> thanks - but that seems to fall into the trap of "if you don't know what is
> out there, how do you know what questions to ask?
> I have been posting links to intereting snippets that may help in responses
> and which people may follow if they wish, Perhaps this is not useful?
> Last one on this topic - my killer question - if there is, as they have
> admitted, and we can can substantiate, no verifiable suggestion that
> pornography corrupts - what is the purpose of the proposed legislation?
> http://www.melonfarmers.co.uk/arnptory.htm
> ----- Original Message -----
> To:
> Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 12:24 PM
> Subject: [backlash] RE: Research group for Amelie
> > If you offered, it got lost in the mass of postings I'm afraid. I didn't
> > see the offer.
> >
> > At the last meeting it was Paul Taverner, Morgarth and myself, they may be
> > others who were not at the meeting. But Ginny is right, it amounts to
> > nothign more than a group of people who are prepared to look for stuff
> > that other people want if for some reason those people can't find what
> > they need themselves. It's a "Who Can Does" arrangement.
> >
> > There is no plan to research without direction or limit, because this
> > topic is huge and we could accumulate untold material that no one ever
> > wants to look at.
> >
> > Author wrote:
> >> The research group is here
> >> http://www.smartgroups.com/group/group.cfm?GID=3280178
> >> and I believe it's an open group now so you don't need an invite to join.
> >> I think it was decided that rather than try to amass a huge amount of
> >> data, people would wait until someone requested something - like stats on
> >> rape cases. You're welcome to join.
> >> Ginny
> >> ----- Original Message -----
From: Amelie, 18 Oct 2005 13:06:35
> >> Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 11:17 AM
> >> Subject: Re: [backlash] RE: Become a sect
> >> By the way, I have heard there is a research group but although I have
> >> offered my services, I have not heard any more about it.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > If you want to share pictures, use the calendar, or start a vote
> > visit http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/Backlash
> >
> > To leave the Group, email: Backlash-unsubscribe@smartgroups.com
> >
> > Report abuse
> > http://www.smartgroups.com/text/abusereport.cfm?gid%3D3271426&mid%3D1714
> >
> >
*** This message has been edited by clare on 18 Oct 2005 13:13:00 ***