Daddycool: the fact that something is not to your personal taste doesn't actually make it morally wrong. People who like SM (which I assume is what you are referring to) understand that this is a very negoatiated way of interacting sexually - it's all about consent. And as to saying that people shouldn't look at porn "in the family home" then I don't recall the OP suggesting that her DH was sitting her and the kids down in front of the computer every night for a couple of hours of Interactive Anal Gangbang from Hell. There are plenty of things in the average household that DCs shouldn't have unsupervised access too, such as cutlery, alcohol and matches.
SHinyhappypeople, with the exception of performers who have been underpaid or mistreated or misled (and anyone who has dropped a full case of R18dvds on their feet), you don't get hurt by porn. You might get hurt by a partner's behaviour, which may or may not be reasonable, but the mag/DVD/website didn't do it.
Many incidences of domestic violence occurr during rows over cooking and cleaning, but no one blames Delia Smith, Jamie Oliver or those gruesome house-cleaning women - or their work - for the domestic unhappiness that can blow up over these issues.
Monkeytrousers, go on then, when is a picture not a picture? Wait, I'll try and get some of it done for you...
Envisage a picture of a person tied to a chair, naked. Is this picture
a) part of a campaign against torture such as Amnesty International
b) a still from some issue-led drama
c) porn?
d) satire on something or other
If you're shown such a picture, uncaptioned, on its own, how would you know? Your choice of what you think the picture would be would depend in part at least on your own circumstances.
Sure, some porn is stupid, unappealing, gross, offensive - but the same applies to some prime time television progammes, song lyrics, books and films - and a whole lot of advertising as well.
But "porn" is too often used as a scapegoat for a whole lot of other social and personal problems.