Fifty years ago, Lenny Bruce pointed out the same thing; it was acceptable to show minors graphic violence but not graphic sex. He had a routine where Dad took hid young offspring to a movie, thinking it was a violent one, but he misjudged. The dialogue went something like this:
“Look! He’s picking up a pillow and advancing on the girl! Maybe he’ll smother her with it! Isn’t this great, son? Naah, he’s putting it under her ass. You really shouldn’t be seeing this, kid…”
More or less correct. Obscenity (not all “porn”) traditionally has not been considered speech within the meaning of the First Amendment. Something that is obscene is more than merely sexual. It has no redeeming artistic or social value, violates community standards, etc. A huge amount of “porn” and other sexual content is protected by the First Amendment.
There is no similar tradition of excepting violent content from First Amendment protection, and the Supreme Court declined to allow California to create such an exception.
I don’t think there is anything that you can do. All kids have to do is type the word “porn” in Google and they’ll have porn.
Then they’ll get caught by their parents because their parents checked the browser history, and the next thing they’ll search is “how to clear browser history.”
After that it’s pretty much a losing battle.
Then sit him down and tell him that porn is exaggerated.
I have a theory that our pornography laws are there to protect parents from having uncomfortable conversations with their kids, and not kids from the harmful effects of pornography.
yeah, what if he saw a hentai and he was stuck thinking he couldn’t have sex until he found a girl with blue hair and a really high-pitched voice, and of course, until he grew his tentacles!
Why? What do you think would happen to them?
They would be angry because I wouldn’t let them date and I’d lose sleep when they did leave the house. 
Sorry, but boys aren’t men, and porn can have a bad effect on attitudes on sex.
(Sixteen year old girls also think that sex = love, so you can imagine what that recipe does.)
So do you believe that teenagers should basically be limited to their own imaginations when beatin’ off? If so, do you think that the stuff in their imaginations is going to be a realistic attitude towards sex? What if they’re fantasizing about stuffed animals and Harry Potter characters?
Which leads to what, exactly?
A) In what way, specifically, would these bad effects manifest?
B) Cite?
Bit hard to study how many teens are whacking off to internet porn (which is a lot more er, creative, than your parents’ porn), but APA is trying.
You know what? Go survey teenage girls and boys. See what they’re doing, what they’re thinking, what they’re putting on their MySpace and Facebook and then tell me that selling XXXDoublePenetrationXXX to kids is a good idea.
Teenage girls are just as stupid as boys. Look their attempts at sex appeal and early sexual activity.
Yeah, that’s not so true any more. I think you’ll find my generation (born in the 80s) and the next are pretty jaded and cynical about the L word.
Besides, one would think liberal access to porn would also help with the fucking/love distinction.