> How did society deal with these actions before the internet? We executed criminals in public spectacles to be enjoyed by the whole family. Also, blood sports

> How did society deal with these actions before the internet? We executed criminals in public spectacles to be enjoyed by the whole family. Also, blood sports. It's actually a marvel of modern society that for most people in the Western world exposure to the more gruesome parts of human nature is voluntary and confined to videos and pictures on the Internet. Even if you could prevent all illegal sources of such material -- stop all violent crime, sexual abuse and murder -- how does that prevent legal ones? There are entire websites on the Internet filled with pictures from violent accidents or disturbing results of medical procedures that many might find emotionally scarring. Not to mention what we do to animals we use as food. Also, ultimately what may or may not be traumatic to an individual can very greatly. And a lot of things that might be traumatic to many are necessary to display in some contexts (e.g. medical professions or studying historical events). In some cases witness accounts alone may be horrible enough to traumatise. I don't like slippery slope arguments but I think this train of thought is flawed enough that there isn't even a slope, it's a straight drop all the way down from the onset.