You mean persuasive. Still, read only the factual sentences, then see what you think. The proportion of victims reporting to police has declined (while the self-reported number has drastically increased), and we’re still seeing an increase in the number of rapes reported to police despite this. (If your point is that an increasing in reporting to police isn’t 100% attributable to an increase in incidence, everyone knows that, that’s why I noted the decline in the proportion of victims choosing to make a police report in the recent period.)
Recall also, that it’s the most predictive factor for rape (as well as witnessing domestic violence), and all the quotes from people who work with sex offenders either as researchers or in a law enforcement capacity. The weight of the evidence doesn’t rest on merely the observation that rape has increased steadily and precipitously since 1964, after correcting for a period of deliberate undercounting in the 1990s.
It is not my obligation to discuss the so-called benefits of pornography in an article about sexual violence and degradation. You are confusing sex positivity with being pro-pornography. I’m not sure it was forbidden, Kinsey was doing his work in the 1940s, before liberalisation of these laws. The issue is the current state of pornography: treating women as objects, glorifying violence enacted on women, and providing fertile ground to profit off human trafficking and child abuse.
Mine is an ethical view, rather than one concerned with, say, religious moralising. I’m sure everyone can agree sex doesn’t need to be cloaked in darkness and that sexual education (focusing on consent, health, pleasure etc.) are necessary. I’m not sure pornography shining a light on (rather inspiring and enabling men to masturbate to) practices like double anal, choking, or gagging to the point of vomiting have helped society one iota, beyond facilitating the consumer’s temporary pleasure.
Thanks for reading, and thanks for your thoughts!