Commission on Pornography -- *sigh*
Matt Nolan
Survey Time.
How many peole are reading Porn Commission related articles?
How many people "n" them?
I didn't even start reading them because they seem so long. Now
I feel I am missing out, because there are many postings. Are people
argueing with each other back and forth or are new points being discussed?
Suppose I were to start reading them, can someone post what has been discussed,
like a summary article? Also, are there particular people who you recommend
to read as opposed to not reading at all?
Nolan, Matt
Gene Ward Smith
>As far as outcomes being predetermined: if the Commission was set up with
>as right-wing, righteous, and bible-thumping an agenda as some seem to feel,
>it obviously failed, indicating that it felt that there should be *no*
>restrictions on the ``written word'' (so long as it is non-pedophilic) and
>deploring the shoddy state of current research, relying as little as possible
>on it.
What is the basis for this recommendation? It seems to me that the
compelling argument against pedophile material is that it must of
necessity involve the exploitation of children. This is not the case
for "the written word", or for drawings. On what basis would one allow
written depictions of rape, torture of unwilling victims, mutilation
and mayhem, but not of sex with ten year olds? One does not, after all
(or at least *I* do not) wish to even call into question the legality
of Lolita or the pedophilitic poetry in the Greek Anthology (i.e., if
someone wants to translate it, it should undoubtedly be legal, since
the Marquis de Sade would be).
Another question is what sort of visual depictions are being outlawed.
Does "Show Me" count? I read it was popular pedophile material, but it's
just pictures of naked kids. Practically family photo album stuff!
ucbvax!brahms!gsmith Gene Ward Smith/UCB Math Dept/Berkeley CA 94720
"There are no differences but differences of degree
between degrees of difference and no difference"
Rex Ballard
basis: Porn (sexually explicit material) leads to child abuse,
rape, exploitation of women, family problems, and immorality.
Violence in media shouldn't be censored, because it is not as
bad a porn.
Facts used: Testimony of rape and child abuse victims, unwilling
participants in pornographic productions. Research studies.
General attitude: Porn is bad, sexual expression should be
discouraged. Interests other than marital coitus is perverse.
Several reject the commisions findings. Advocate doing nothing.
basis: Porn doesn't cause the bad things. Supression could
spill over into politically oriented material. Readers can
experience positive benifits, majority of those in productions
do so voluntarily.
Violence should be censored, porn should not.
Facts used: Inconsistancy of research, bias of commission,
examples of willing models, research not mentioned in report.
General attitude: Porn is good, sexual expression is a right,
lack of interest is sex is not "normal", relationships can
be enhanced sexually by reading porn.
Side issues:
Moderates: Accept findings, reject conclusions.
basis: Some Porn may involve abuses. Some readers may be abusive.
Some people may be unintentionally offended, not all material
good for all people (5 year olds looking at bondage porn for example).
Feel market has been polarised by existing regulations and statues.
Support advisory measures, lifting of compulsary measures, wider
range of market niches, loosening of some restrictions. Violence
subject to same measures.
Facts used: Commission findings, pro-porn and anti-violence research,
examples of porn available, porn itself, historical perspective,
trends since 1963 (start of MPAA ratings).
General attitude: Porn can be good, but often extreme. Diversity
of sexual interests requires information to reduce conflicts due to
incompatible preferences. People with compatible preferences should
seek each other out. Informed actions required to do this. Porn
provides important information.
Resolution: None.
Benifits of discussion: Open discussion of socially acceptable
means of expression. Each side seeing good points in the moderate
view.
Points of agreement:
Abuses should be prosecuted.
Printed word should not be censored. Some restrictions should be
lifted.
Moderate erotica is over-restricted, some restrictions should be
lifted.
Violence may be under-restricted. Though refining restrictions
in this area may be desirable, it is unlikely.
Mike Rodriquez
I don't generally read any articles where the first page is
all quotes, and/or the percentage read after one page is less than
25%.....just don't have the time or interest.
Mike
(ps, as a backbone SA, I am beginning to wonder whether I have
the money to spend on shipping these articles around.)