to say sorry to the Daily Mail

[Itstartshere]

Because they have produced an absolute blinder of an article. I'm actually grateful to them. I've never been anything but rude about them before now.

Ok, so I still think they're a rag not fit to wipe your arse on, but this article is spot on. Ex lad's mag editor writes about how incredibly damaging porn is to our society

I concur with everything he writes. I think many parents have no idea what their teenagers are watching, I think exposure to (often violent, degrading) porn is damaging our society and our children, and we need to do something about it. Thirteen, fourteen, fifteen year olds should not be feeling distressed having watched anal sex, bestiality, women being raped and exploited. It damages girls and boys.

And on this occasion, I link to the DM without shame.

This is one example where the DM's conservatism actually is spot-on.

OK... (takes deep breath) I'm going in, for the first time (intentionally) for over two years.

...reads...

and (and off to check dtd's laptops)

I watch this thread with interest...

I just knew it would be Martin Daubney before I clicked.

I'm doubtful about his Damascene conversion. I think it's more likely he's spotted a lucrative berth as the Mail's go-to male anti-porn campaigner.

Because obviously men's opinions count more than the women who've been saying the same thing for years and getting trashed in the Mail for years too.

Expect many more articles on the same lines with Martin looking and

Occasionally they do put out some really good articles. Unfortunately they're usually surrounded by right wing shite..
YANBU on this occasion though.

I'm never letting DS online. Or out of the house.

Yy limited.

I don't think that you should apologise to them because they have produced one exellent article in amongst all the lies and propganda. A newspaper that deliberately distorts the truth in the way that they do can only be regarded as evil.

There's no need to say sorry to them.

This is a good article.

They are often misogynistic and unpleasant and trollish.

You can applaud them for the positive while still recognising the negative.

What's with all the lovingly uplit, utterly creepy pictures of the writer?

Not a bad piece, though

But what I saw during the making of the film changed my opinion of pornography forever.
The true stories of boys I met whose lives had been totally taken over by porn not only moved me to tears but also made me incredibly angry that this is happening to our children.
And the looks of revulsion on those poor girl's faces in the playground enraged me.
I feel as if an entire generation's sexuality has been hijacked by grotesque online porn.
To find out what porn is doing to young men, and the girls they have relationships with, we spoke to them via online forums and discovered that there were many young lives seriously blighted by an excessive, unhealthy relationship with pornography that can begin when they are as young as 12.
We learned that some had lost their jobs, others had broken relationships, failed exams, or got into serious debt through using porn.
'When you interview young women about their experiences of sex, you see an increased level of violence: rough, violent sex. That is directly because of porn, as young boys are getting their sexual cues from men in porn who are acting as if they're sexual psychopaths'
Take the 19-year-old man I got to know. He was handsome, articulate and in full-time employment as an apprentice electrician. But his life was dominated by his porn habit.
'Every bit of spare time I have is spent watching porn,' he says. 'It is extreme. I can't hold down a relationship for longer than three weeks. I want porn sex with real girls, but sex with them just isn't as good as the porn.'

Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2432591/Experiment-convinced-online-porn-pernicious-threat-facing-children-today-By-ex-lads-mag-editor-MARTIN-DAUBNEY.html#ixzz2fz8MBdEu
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Isn't that the man who locked his little boy in his room at night because he wouldn't stay in bed? I can never look at him again after that, especially when he said his little boy cried himself to sleep and when they opened the door in the morning he was curled up against the door wrapped in a blanket.

Anyway, I will read the article. But I still can't stand the man who wrote it.

'Because obviously men's opinions count more than the women who've been saying the same thing for years and getting trashed in the Mail for years too.'

Totally agree with this. His opinion shouldn't count more just because he is male.

This was the bit I meant to copy. It seems to really ring true to me - that a lot of young people can't think of sex in any other way than pornographically. It's very sad.

I suppose if you'd grown up only seeing films/images of cars being driven in stunt rides and had never driven yourself, then when you got in a car you wouldn't think of the aim being to drive carefully along the road.

'When you interview young women about their experiences of sex, you see an increased level of violence: rough, violent sex,' she says.

'That is directly because of porn, as young boys are getting their sexual cues from men in porn who are acting as if they're sexual psychopaths.

'Pornography is sexually traumatising an entire generation of boys.'

It might be a good article (I won't read it). I gather they sometimes have good recipes and get the weather forecast right, too.

That doesn't mean it isn't a pestilential pustule of a publication, and certainly doesn't mean you owe them any kind of apology.

And it’s not a departure for the Mail. They’ve been banging on about the evils of pornography for years, even when what they’re frothing about isn’t porn.

At the same time they’ll continue peddling their pernicious view of women, which is more damaging, because for all they say that hardcore porn is just a click away, their own message is far more mainstream.

It’s amusing that the article is plugging a Channel 4 programme, because they’re one of the Mail’s regular targets. They even hysterically called Michael Grade Britain’s Pornographer In Chief when he was chief executive because they objected to some saucy programme or other.

I wouldn't give too much credit to the Daily Mail.
The same guy was in the Sunday Times, albeit interviewed by Eleanor Mills and quoted rather than having written it himself.

The bit from the ST article that stood out most to be was this:
More important, he thinks, is “to make sex education in our school fit for the 21st century”. All the teenagers he talked to were desperate for information. “Porn has created a new baseline. Parents have to contextualise it, explain it is not real and what loving relationships look like. Too much of what is online is painful and humiliating for girls.

“I grew up in a working-class family in Nottingham, among coal miners. My dad would point at women in the street with black eyes and tell me, ‘A man never raises his hand to a woman.’ Lads these days need to be told, ‘A man never inflicts pain on a girl during sex.’ Lots of sex that boys want because they’ve seen it on porn is painful for girls — they need to know it isn’t right to do that.”

It is a great job by the Channel 4 PR department to get this out before the programme airs, which if the articles are anything to go by, is a programme that needs to be watched by everyone.

I find nothing surprising in the article and would be surprised if anyone does. I have seen the author on TV a few times and never taken to him due to his 50s-man attitude and lads' mag background. I am pleased he can now see how corrosive porn is an interested to see what activism against it he will now undertake. But this article, for all its merits, fits the standard DM agenda and does not change my general view of the utter vileness of the rag and its attack-dog contributors.