how-to block ads
|
k1ll3rdr4g0n
join:2005-03-19
Homer Glen, IL
1 edit | reply to NetAdmin
Re: What!?
said by NetAdmin  :said by anicetoemma :He may have something now that those free speech idiots will have nothing to argue about now. Yeah, now the religious extremists are going to kick and scream about kids being able to access porn and demand that the provision be put back in so the government can do the job of lazy parents. You just can't win.  That's not the governments problem, its the parents. If you don't want your kid to see smut, then put filters on your computer; its not hard at all (and many paid program really make this easy). And if parents want to complain about it, its only their own ignorance and stupidity at fault for not knowing how to use a computer. It's not like the internet came out yesterday. Google is everyone's friend all you really have to type is "how to block porn" and you get a wealth of information on how to do it. If you don't want to sit down and read and figure out how to do it, then don't complain, the only person who is to blame is yourself. You can even ask a local geek, but if you don't something then its just your fault/ your own stupidity.
Personally, I could care either way as its just "art" to me. Who really cares? Oh look its someone naked. Oh look its someone having sex. Are we really that dysfunctional as a society that we disgrace normal human actions? Some of the "smut" out there is a little out there, I will grant you that, but if its a guy and a girl going at it then its ok. Sex is a normal human function, whats next we are going to say that having our faces exposed is obscene? "Oh no I can see his tongue, that is so gross...arrest that man for indecent exposure!" I'm not saying to embrace "smut", but there are things out there a lot worse that I wouldn't even want my own kids to see. Oh trust me, you can't even think of the horrors that are out there. | |
funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC
 ·Verizon Online DSL
 ·Skype
2 edits | I wouldn't go as far as to consider it all "art." While our values about sex are way too puritan, I think that < 5% of adult content is probably art.
The rest is stuff that maybe satisfies or repulses our sexual tastebuds but doesn't significantly add to the collection of things we'd call 'art.' Once the fascination wears off, the ever-present and continuous flow of it makes it no less annoying than spam.
I think it's why people find it easier to justify banning porn. Even if my theory is true, though, I worry that banning stuff has exactly the wrong result.
It's our taboo culture that creates demand (and economic value) for porn. Porn's price isn't high because it's rare -- it's not rare. Its price isn't high because it's difficult to create -- it takes no real effort to make.
Our culture is brought up thinking "nudity" = "sin" and that skin is something that only those with loose morals (and perfect bodies) ought to show. We're the culture that puts robes over the breasts of the statue of Justice and positions our planters to block view of the genitals of our historic Greek statues.
It's not unlike the dichotomy that banning alcohol brings. Our taboo culture struggles with teens who access booze and adults who too-quickly become addicted to it. The world's other cultures who don't ban alcohol seem to have far fewer problems with alcohol-related crimes and illnesses.
As kids, adults in those cultures probably were exposed to such things and its casual commonality meant that a pent-up fascination never got a chance to develop. Each subsequent generation becomes mentally healthier as a result.
-- robb the armchair shrink
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon -- KJ7RL
What you do at Christmas does not matter so much; What counts are the Christmas things you do all year through. | |
-
|
