Masters of Porn: The Systematic Promotion of Sexual Deviance
Alfred Kinsey, Time Magazine cover, 1953
“The only unnatural act is that which you cannot perform.”
It comes as a big shock to learn that two of the fathers of the Sexual Revolution were both sexual perverts with an evangelical mission in life: to infect society with their wacky ideas and turn the world into a vast masturbatorium.
I refer to the 2oth century’s premier sex researcher Alfred Kinsey (1894-1956) and his notorious contemporary, cult psychoanalyst Wilhelm Reich (1897-1957).
Steeped in the dangerous claptrap of the fraudulent Freud—see here and here—both Kinsey and Reich enthusiastically embraced the laissez-faire Freudian philosophy: “I advocate an incomparably freer sexual life”. Like their Viennese mentor, they would have been only too pleased to add, “If only Americans knew—we are bringing them the plague!”
According to Freud and his followers, anti-Semitism was a universal pathology which had its roots in sexual repression. Its cure lay in “sexual liberation”. The theory, in its crudest and simplest form, amounted to this: instead of picking on the Jews, why not just chill out and have sex?
The underlying assumption here is that sex is the great liberator and that all political and economic frustrations can be alleviated by sexual activity—particularly by obsessive and addictive sex. People who spend all their waking hours in search of sexual stimulation are obviously unfit to organize pogroms, mount bloody revolutions, or become a threat to the rich and powerful.
This, in a nutshell, was the philosophy of Wilhelm Reich, high priest of the “masturbation industry”, to borrow a phrase from E. Michael Jones’s magisterial work Libido Dominandi, where Kinsey and Reich are both discussed in great detail.
Sex, according to the philosophers of the Sexual Revolution inspired by Reich, is to be the panacea for all society’s problems: the new opium of the people. If people cannot have bread, let them eat cake. If they cannot have jobs, security, fulfillment, and a valid purpose in life, let them have sex as a substitute. If nothing else, recreational sex will provide a useful distraction and give people something to do.
The Case Against Reich
A compulsive masturbator himself, Reich believed that masturbation was a useful tool in producing “well-balanced” individuals without religious hang-ups or anti-Semitic attitudes. His major finding (here and here) was that masturbation and the religious life were incompatible, which is why he advocated masturbation as the most effective means of eradicating the religious instinct—which he regarded as the ultimate evil. “What Reich discovered was a fundamental truth of sexual politics, one discovered by the Catholic Church long ago, “Dr E. Michael Jones comments. “Either masturbation destroys your prayer life, or prayer destroys your ability to enjoy masturbation. The two forms of activity are psychically mutually exclusive.” (See here, p. 259) Like many other psychoanalysts, Reich is known to have masturbated his female patients in therapeutic sessions. “The pleasure of living and the pleasure of orgasm are identical,” he pontificated, thereby equating infinite happiness with the provision of an infinite number of orgasms.
Reich was, by his own account, not only a compulsive masturbator from early childhood but a self-confessed pervert with wide-ranging sexual interests. Beginning sexual activity at the early age of four with a maidservant whose pubic hair he was allowed to play with, he went on to seduce the family cook at eleven-and-a-half. While still a small boy, he had begun to take an unhealthy interest in farm animals and could be seen prowling around the stables where he “stimulated mares by inserting whip handles in their vaginas.” At 15 he began visiting brothels where his insatiable appetites made him the talk of the town. Here he is in his Autobiography describing his uncontrollable libido:
Was it the atmosphere, the clothing, the red lights, the provocative nakedness, the smell of whores—I don’t know! I was pure sensual lust. I ceased to be. I was all penis! I bit, scratched, thrust, and the girl had quite a time with me! I thought I would have to crawl inside her…
Nursing an incestuous passion for his mother, he would snoop on her having sex with the family tutor. “I need a woman,” he wrote in his journal, “who is both mother and whore.” Once he was tempted to break into his mother’s room, while she was engaged in sex with his tutor, and demand to be part of a threesome:
I heard them kissing, whispering, and the horrible creaking of the bed in which my mother lay. Ten feet away stood her own child, a witness to her disgrace…. All I remember of that catastrophic night is that I wanted to rush into the room, but was held back by the thought: they might kill you!… I crept back to bed, without hope of consolation, my youthful spirit broken! For the first time, a deep feeling of misfortune and of having been abandoned overcame me…. [I even thought of] breaking in on them and demanding that she have intercourse with me too (shame!), threatening that otherwise I would tell Father.
As it turns out, he did inform his father about his mother’s infidelities, conveniently omitting to mention his own incestuous desires for his mother. His disloyalty to her in becoming an informer, combined with the brutal ill-treatment she was to receive from her tyrannical husband Leon, finally drove his mother to suicide. She swallowed a pint of Lysol, a common domestic cleaning fluid, and died in agony. Another account fills in the bizarre background details to this family saga: “She swallowed one poison after another, while Leon continued to beat her as she died” (emphasis added).
Wilhelm Reich, her son, the famous psychoanalyst-to-be, was only 13 at the time.
This is the man who went on to become, like his equally perverted contemporary Alfred Kinsey, one of the godfathers of the Sexual Revolution of the 1960s.
From the likes of Kinsey and Reich, the easily duped Americans were to receive instructions on how to conduct themselves sexually.
(For corroborative details, see Wilhelm Reich [pdf download])
As part of the neo-Freudian school of psychoanlysts, Reich received the enthusiastic support of a number of psychiatrists and writers, many of them part of the Jewish psychoanalytic sub-culture that was so important to erecting a powerful critique of Western culture, reaching its peak influence in the post-WWII era: Herbert Marcuse, Erich Fromm, Adorno, Horkheimer, Alexander Lowen, Stanley Keleman, Moshe Feldenkreis, Ida Rolf, Paul Goodman, Norman Mailer, Allen Ginsberg, Saul Bellow, Fritz Perls and Arthur Janov (see here and here).
Jewish Porn star Richard Pacheco, who had wanted to become a rabbi at one stage and had even applied for admission to a seminary, was an ardent admirer of Reich whose books he read from cover to cover. Reich apparently influenced his final decision to become a porn star rather than a rabbi. Like his mentor, Pacheco was also an unabashed masturbator. When asked if he still watched pornographic movies now that he had retired from acting and become a senior citizen, he replied with disarming candor, “Occasionally I’ll toss one on for masturbation if my wife ain’t around.”
In 1954, at the height of the McCarthy era, Reich was imprisoned on a charge of medical fraud for trying to promote and sell “orgone boxes”. Slightly smaller than telephone boxes, these were little compartments that patients were told to sit in for short periods to soak up “cosmic rays”. These would reportedly reinvigorate them sexually, cure impotence and cancer, and act as an antidote to radiation poisoning from UFOs which (according to Reich) had secretly invaded the earth. (See here)
While interviewing Einstein, Reich told the great man in confidence that most people considered him (Reich) mad. Einstein replied dryly, “I can believe that.”
The Case against Kinsey
It comes as no surprise to learn that Kinsey, like Reich, was also an avid consumer of pornography, even going so far as to photograph his own penis on several occasions and getting his wife to act in home-made porn movies. His favorite boast was that his Institute’s collection of pornography was the second largest in the world, the largest being housed at the Vatican. A malicious lie, it turned out, since it was easy enough to prove that the Vatican was entirely porn free. (See “The Case Against Kinsey”, here)
It has to be emphasized that Alfred Kinsey, though born and brought up as a Christian, was not only an atheist with a lifelong hatred of Christianity in general and the Catholic church in particular, but was also a Zionist and Shabbat goy who owed his spectacular success entirely to organized Jewry. His fraudulent research, designed to make deviancy appear to be the norm, was generously funded by the Rockefeller Foundation and other Jewish-dominated organizations. (pp. 340–341). “By the time it cut him off in 1954,” E. Michael Jones tells us, “the Rockefeller Foundation had poured hundreds of thousands of dollars into the coffers of the Kinsey Institute.”
The only reason they decided to stop the funding is that by this time the Institute, anxious to retain its squeaky clean image, could no longer take the risk of being associated with Kinsey. His shady criminal activities with a predatory homosexual pedophile, a pervert who had molested and tortured 800 children, suddenly made Kinsey persona non grata (see E. Michael Jones, Libido Dominandi, pp. 327–337).
A sexual pervert of the kinkiest kind, Kinsey once inserted a toothbrush into his urethra and had himself filmed, subsequently adding this gem to his porn collection. Himself a homosexual with an avid interest in little boys, he would make a point of measuring the penis, both recumbent and erect, of every male he interviewed while conducting his “research”. Why? One can only guess.
A year before he died, Kinsey sliced off the foreskin of his penis with a pocket knife—a crude attempt at self-circumcision. No one has been able to figure out why he did this. Kinsey’s death, however, has been ascribed to his sexual proclivities.
Dr. Judith Reisman writes:
An early adherent and advocate of masturbation, Kinsey suffered an untimely death due, at least in part, to ‘orchitis,’ a lethal infection in his testicles that followed years of orgiastic self-abuse.
The New York Times, owned by the Sulzberger family and known to be America’s foremost organ of left/liberal propaganda, did its best (like the Rockefeller Foundation) to promote Kinsey and turn his name into a household word. Indeed, it comes as no surprise to learn that Arthur Hays Sulzberger, publisher of the New York Times, was actually on the board of trustees for the Rockefeller Foundation all during the time it was approving money for Kinsey’s dubious experiments (see here, p. 340).
Kinsey’s most vocal critic and nemesis, Dr. Judith Reisman, has this to say about the Kinsey-Rockefeller connection:
The Rockefeller Foundation was the major funding source for Kinsey, even though it had ample, repeated warning from noted statisticians and social scientists that Kinsey’s pseudo-science was a hoax….
Kinsey is second only to Darwin in the secular pantheon, and a lot of people recognize that exposing Kinsey’s lies is a major assault on the Sexual Revolution and a threat to the sexual license they enjoy….
Kinsey claimed to have proven, based upon the deviant samples used in his research, that 95 percent of American men engaged in deviant sex and thus were sex offenders….
Kinsey believed that all sex was legitimate—pedophilia, bestiality, incest, adultery, prostitution, group sex, transvestitism, sadomasochism—and he worked to overthrow all laws prohibiting any of these perversions. (See here)
Kinsey went out of his way to interview the dregs of society, frequenting slums, gay bars, brothels and prisons. From these interviews he formed sweeping generalizations about the sexual habits of society in general. His methodology, you could say, was outrageous. In Gary, Indiana, for example, he collected 71 case histories, all of them based on interviews with Black female prostitutes. Taking note of what these women told him, Kinsey was apparently happy to conclude that the average White American housewife was a cat in heat—sexually adventurous in the extreme! American psychologist Abraham Maslow put it mildly when he said, “The whole basis for Kinsey’s statistics was proven to be shaky.” (See here, p. 322 and p. 324)
Dr E. Michael Jones is as convinced as Dr Judith Reisman that Kinsey was far more than just an impudent fraud, he was in fact a criminal: a blackmailer (p. 330 ff), a perverted pornographer, and a pedophile who masturbated little children as part of his so-called “research”.
One four-year-old was “specifically manipulated” for twenty-four hours around the clock. This child achieved twenty-six orgasms in this time period. Another eleven-month-old infant had fourteen “orgasms”, according to the Kinseyan definition, in a period of thirty-eight minutes, or one orgasm every 2.7 minutes. (E. Michael Jones, Degenerate Moderns, p. 106)
It cannot be stressed too strongly that all this criminal activity was supported by generous grants from the Rockefeller Foundation to the Kinsey Institute, still flourishing at Indiana University. Waxing eloquent with indignation, Jones’s devastating conclusion is that Americans have to all intents and purposes been led over the cliff like Gadarene swine by Kinsey and his corrupt supporters:
The Rockefeller family was not above supporting illegal activities to attain their ends. … They were willing to use psychological warfare against their fellow Americans. … Sex was part of the arsenal of psychological warfare, and the Rockefellers’ interest in supporting Professor Kinsey of Indiana University gave every indication that they were planning to use that weapon in dealing with new enemies. (p. 313) …
The Kinsey Institute was now in the pornography business and the Rockefeller Foundation was footing the bill . … the Rockefellers were [now] funding the filming of the molestation of children. (p. 336) …
The Rockefellers were interested in social engineering through the manipulation of sexuality, and the Kinsey Report was the vehicle which would make that possible in the near future, with the collaboration of a supine mass media culture. (p. 341)
If Kinsey is still a national hero today, the ultimate authority on all things sexual, we have to thank the Rockefeller Foundation for this remarkable public relations stunt.
The bizarre private lives of sex researchers who dupe millions of people into buying their books—and enthusiastically adopting their mad, bad, and dangerous ideas—simply beggars belief.
Sexual Perversion is good for you: The case of The Independent
Here is another representative of the elite intelligentsia, British prize-winning author Howard Jacobson, who happens coincidentally to be Jewish. He, too, would be proud to wear a T-shirt sporting the slogan: SEXUAL PERVERSION IS GOOD FOR YOU!
Prizewinning author Howard Jacobson puts in a good word for sexual perversion:
It is only when we explore the outer boundaries of our sexual desires that we become most fully human. We are all sick in our way….When he wasn’t looking at pornography or writing The Trial, Kafka visited brothels. I am glad for his sake and for literature’s that he did. I feel about prostitution as I do about pornography—that a man ought to avail himself of whatever is on offer…
We grow a little freer when we read De Sade’s One Thousand Days of Sodom, though we know we cannot live up to its lawlessness….We must find the space to think, and where possible to act, rebelliously, refusing all attempts to confine us to the hell of the normative…
We are strange creatures, part angels of reflection, part beasts that claw the earth. It is too cruel that an accidental species as peculiar as we are should ever have been made to think there is a right way and a wrong way of conducting ourselves sexually, as though there were some divine pattern we were framed to follow. I don’t say that giving ourselves over to the demoniacal, or just the deviant, will necessarily make us happy … but the straight and narrow has never yet made anyone anything but miserable. — Howard Jacobson, In Praise of Perversion. (Emphasis added)
According to this unabashed advocate of sexual perversion, being sexually normal is “hell”. Add spice to your life by making use of prostitutes and pornography. A man, after all, “ought to avail himself of whatever is on offer.”
Howard Jacobson is a Jewish writer who has written novels in which sexual perversion always plays a predominant part. For example, in his novel Peeping Tom he gives us voyeurism; in The Act of Love he dishes up generous dollops of fetishism. All Jacobson’s heroes, like Philip Roth’s Portnoy, are devout masturbators. Jerking off, you could say, is their substitute for religion.
Jacobson’s article advocating perversion was published in a newspaper in which he has appeared as a regular columnist for many years. The same British newspaper, the Independent, has also published for many years the articles of another Jewish writer known as Johann Hari who shows an equal aptitude for sexual perversion. In 2002 Hari wrote an infamous article for the Guardian, Forbidden Love, in which he had put in a good word for incest.
A self-confessed plagiarist, Hari received the Orwell Prize fraudulently in 2008 with the full backing of his newspaper editor who vouched for his veracity. He was forced to return the prize in 2011 when the full extent of his plagiarisms and other duplicities became apparent. For example, he had made up many stories for the Independent, including African atrocities, passing off fiction as fact. Later on, to make matters worse, this gay rights activist and mincing homosexual was to be outed as a writer of gay incest porn.
Now consider this bizarre coincidence: two Jewish writers, both vocal advocates of sexual perversion, receive major literary awards in quick succession (in 2008 and 2010), thereby giving an air of legitimacy and glamor to sexual perversion.
Orwell prizewinner Johann Hari, incest apologist and writer of gay incest porn
If you’re repelled by the idea of having gay sex with your brother, don’t upset yourself needlessly by reading Hari’s How my little brother learned to be a whore, written under the secret pen name of “David Rose”.
* * *
Now try and connect the dots here: during the many years that these two Jewish writers, Howard Jacobson and Johann Hari, both of them enthusiasts for deviant sexuality, had been regular columnists for the Independent, the editor of that newspaper was also a Jew: one Simon Kelner.
And now for the Big Surprise: the Independent is also Jewish-owned!
Here, then, is the pattern: Jewish columnists pushing sexual perversion, Jewish editor encouraging sexual perversion by publishing their articles, and Jewish newspaper tycoon presiding over the same edifice of sexual perversion by making it all possible by his ownership of the newspaper.
Who owns the Independent?
Step forward Alexander Yevgenievich Lebedev, listed in Forbes magazine in May 2008 as the 358th richest person in the world. Estimated fortune: $3.1 billion. Mr Lebedev, a Russian oligarch, ran away from Russia with billions of rubles under his belt when Vladimir Putin came to power and decided to claw back some of the ill-gotten wealth that a small number of mega rich Jews had filched from the Russian treasury.
On 25 March 2010, Lebedev bought the Independent for a nominal fee of £1, with the derisory token sum of £9.25m to be paid a few months later.
This reminds me of that other Russian oligarch, convicted crook Mikhail Khodorkovsky, who in 1995 rigged an auction in which he managed to steal Russia’s largest oil company, Yukos, reportedly worth $40 billion, for the laughably small sum of $300 million—a mere fraction of its value. (See here)
How do they do it?
The Case of Frank Kameny
Founding father of the gay rights movement in America, Jewish pornographer and perversion promoter Frank Kameny was the main force behind pressuring the American Psychiatric Association (in 1973) into reclassifying homosexual activities as “normal sex”. Hitherto regarded as a socially destructive mental disease that was curable, homosexuality was now given the green light and reclassified as a normal and healthy “alternative lifestyle”.
Here is Kameny saying nice things about sexual perversion:
If something which someone arbitrarily defines as a ‘sexual perversion’ provides happiness for consenting adult participants, then its enjoyment is enshrined in basic Americanism. So let us have more and better enjoyment of more and better sexual perversions, by whatever definition, by more and more consenting adults. We will all be the better off thereby. And that will be Americanism in action…
Having given his imprimatur to sexual perversion in general, Kameny then gives bestiality his blessings. He himself is not particularly keen on having sex with dogs, he tells us, but he sees no reason why other people shouldn’t have sex with the family pet if that’s what turns them on:
Bestiality is not my thing. But it seems to be a harmless foible or idiosyncrasy of some people. As long as the animal doesn’t mind (and the animal rarely does), I don’t mind, and I don’t see why anyone else should. (See here).
How can Kameny be so sure animals “don’t mind”? Has he asked them? No, he casually assumes they will be delighted. Had he studied the Babylonian Talmud, he might have been astonished to learn that bestiality was forbidden to a woman at all times, though it was permissible for men under certain circumstances—a clear case of double standards. “If a woman allows herself to be made the subject thereof, whether naturally or not, she is guilty. But if a man commits bestiality, he is liable only for a connection in a natural manner, but not otherwise.” (Scroll down to picture of Talmud, page 55a, here).
To clarify: For a woman, sex with an animal is wrong at all times, whether the sex is natural or unnatural. For a man, on the other hand, sex with an animal is wrong only when the sex is “natural”. It’s NOT wrong when the sex is unnatural! Figure that out for yourself. I confess I am stumped.
We’ve all heard of Jewish chutzpah, but it comes as a surprise to learn that this famous gay rights icon Kameny has the cheek to condemn God Almighty for his prudish homophobia. Wagging his finger at the God of the Bible, Kameny describes him as “a sinful homophobic bigot who needs to repent.”
Sigh. That’s the trouble with God. If he’d been less bigoted, he would have allowed Adam and Steve to have sex—and make babies.
It comes as even a greater surprise to learn that President Obama recently conferred the supreme honor on this bestiality-supporting Jewish paragon of sexual perversion by rolling out the red carpet for him at the White House, actually shaking his hand and congratulating him on the remarkable benefits he had bestowed on mankind.
“We are proud of you, Frank!”
At a Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender (LGBT) reception held at the Oval Office in June, 2009, President Obama congratulated Frank Kameny, gay rights pioneer and promoter of sexual perversion, for his outstanding contributions to society. “We are proud of you, Frank,” he said, “and we are grateful to you for your leadership.” (See here)
Jews Dominate the American Porn Industry: The Case of Reuben Sturman
Let’s approach this subject from another angle now by asking a simple question: What group dominates the systematic promotion and dissemination of pornography in society? What group can therefore be held responsible for the mass contamination of minds that takes place on a daily basis in Hollywood movies, television shows, magazines, newspapers, and advertising?
We shall now consider this question as objectively as possible, relying only on established facts from the most reputable sources. No source could be more reputable than academic historian Dr Nathan Abrams, world authority on Jewish pornography. I have therefore relied heavily on Dr Abrams. His classic article on Jewish dominance in the porn industry, Triple-exthnics, was published in the winter edition, 2004, of the prestigious Jewish Quarterly.
From 1890 onwards, the main peddlers of inflammatory erotica in America were immigrant Jews of German and East European origin. In the postwar era, America’s most notorious pornographer was a Jew: Reuben Sturman, known as the ‘Walt Disney of Porn’.
By the end of the 1960s, Sturman ranked at the top end of adult magazine distributors and by the mid-70s he owned over 200 adult bookstores, including updated versions of the traditional peepshow booth.
This involved a hole in the partition wall of the booth, through which a pervert would thrust his erect penis, allowing an anonymous individual on the other side of the partition to fellate him discreetly without being seen. The hole in the wall, for some reason, is called a “glory hole”. And its inventor was almost certainly a degenerate Jew associated with Sturman and his sleaze factory.
Convicted of tax evasion and other crimes, Sturman was to die in prison in 1997, surrounded by a stack of his own pornographic magazines. His son David continued the family tradition of constructing “glory holes” across America for the delectation of millions.
If I focus here on the sordid aspects of the peephole, it is not out of prurience but because I wish to draw attention to the fact that Jewish-dominated Hollywood during the next few years has thought it perfectly legitimate to introduce the glory hole into the average American home, which includes children, as a normal and healthy ingredient of family entertainment.
The same people who try so hard to squeeze tears out of the eyes of the public with Holocaust movies such as Schindler’s List, are also, it seems, doing their best to contaminate the minds of the public with movies like Sex Drive, Serial Mom, Jackass Number Two, and other such excursions into the sleazy world of lavatorial lust.
Family entertainment has now been reduced to nasty and scurrilous scenarios such as this: lurkers hanging around urinals hunting for sex, heavy breathers in cubicles with their pants round their ankles, lesbians thrusting their breasts through portholes cut in female washroom walls, female voyeurs invading male washrooms and looking through a peephole only to have their eyes injured by a rampant penis rearing up at the other side, deadly snakes sinking their fangs into tumescent organs thrust though same peephole—and other such abominations too depressing to mention. (See list here.)
It’s worth noting that all this gross indecency continued unchecked without the American government lifting a finger to intervene. There was no attempt to rein in the smut merchants or restrain them from defecating on the cherished values of Christian America. It’s almost as if the ruling classes wanted to see their “huddled masses” turn into salivating perverts.
The reason for this laissez-faire attitude to the systematic demoralization of Christian America is not hard to identify. It clearly lay in the fact that America’s former elite, the WASPs, had already capitulated to the rising Jewish elite. They had been debased and corrupted themselves by the polluted mental atmosphere in which they lived, a psychosphere created by the philosemitic media and Hollywood. One could hardly expect these victims of moral decay to clean out the Augean stables of America, given that they were themselves accustomed to wallow in the same filth and feculence. When the Good Shepherds are up the creek without a paddle, what hope for the good sheeple?
Parable of the Blind Leading the Blind, James Tissot
“If the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.” (MATT. XV. 14)
The link between pornography and sex crime
According to Rabbi Samuel Dresner, an orthodox Jew (born 1923 in Chicago), the rootless Jews who ran Hollywood and were behind the lucrative porn industry were all “despoilers of morality and corrupters of culture.” Indeed, Jewish history for Rabbi Dresner was “one long battle against sexual deviancy.” (See here and here)
Ted Bundy, Serial Killer
In an interview with his prison psychologist, James C. Dobson, Bundy confessed to the murder of over a hundred young women. Agonizing over his life-long addiction to pornography, he revealed how it had fueled his compulsive behavior. “I’ve lived in prison for a long time now,” the serial killer confided, “and I’ve met a lot of men who were motivated to commit violence. Without exception, every one of them was deeply involved in pornography—deeply consumed by his addiction.” (See here). Homosexual serial killer Gary Bishop was equally candid in revealing that porn had turned him into a sex killer. “Pornography was a determining factor in my downfall,” he admitted.
Perhaps the most chilling and persuasive porn-made-me-into-a-sex-killer story is that of Thomas Schiro of Evansville, Indiana, whose obsession with pornography from the age of six onward—accompanied by compulsive masturbation 10-12 times a day—led him into a spree of sex crimes in the 1970s and early 80s. “The one thing that remained constant in Schiro’s slide toward the ultimate violation was his constant use of pornography,” Dr E. Michael Jones reports. “It was the gas that fueled his obsession.” (Libido Dominandi, p. 569).
THE AXMAN COMETH, Joshua Hoffine
“Exposure to erotica has no impact on moral character….. The increased availability of explicit sexual materials has been accompanied by a decrease in the incidence of sexual crime…. There is no evidence to date that exposure to explicit sexual materials plays a significant role in the causation of delinquent or criminal behavior.” (The Lockhart Commission Report on Pornography. Quoted here, p. 558)