AJC.com > Opinion > Woman to Woman > Archives > 2006 > January > 13 > Entry
Do pornography college courses have intellectual merit?
Diane Glass, a left-leaning columnist, writes the commentary this week and Shaunti Feldhahn, a right-leaning columnist, responds.
Diane Glass, a left-leaning columnist, writes the commentary this week and Shaunti Feldhahn, a right-leaning columnist, responds.
Commentary
Pornography is no longer taboo. It’s a trendy new college course. You may think porn in the classroom is the idle exercise of college kids looking for an easy ‘A.’ But that’s only to the untrained eye.
Without a doubt, academia can take itself a bit too seriously. But isn’t analyzing trends better than being ineffectual bystanders?
As a survivor of a feminist theory class, I can attest to both the silliness and the merits of such classes. In a discussion with as much depth as Joseph Conrad’s “Heart of Darkness,” my class explored the terrain of Madonna’s music videos. Our first observation: Madonna exposed her breasts. No surprise there. But she did it while wearing a tuxedo jacket. Hmm. The professor’s analysis? Madonna was deconstructing masculinity and femininity.
Years later, I still think Madonna was simply exposing her breasts. But the professor’s point wasn’t without merit. She was attempting to uncover the reasons why Madonna’s videos are popular, taking her class beyond the ‘duh’ factor.
This is what Film Studies Professor Linda Williams and author of “Porn Studies” would like us to consider in her film classes taught at UC Berkeley. “Pornography is the most popular and enduring of all the movie genres,” she told me. “That alone, aside from all the other issues of sexuality that it raises, is reason to consider it academically.”
And consider the staggering facts: Pornography is a multi-billion dollar a year industry in the United States alone. New cultural forms of pornography flood the market every year. There are the varying forms in gay pornography and the myriad international influences informing our cultural imagination. You can’t watch television, surf online or walk down the street without seeing pornographic images, be it via through the “female-friendly” pages of Cosmo or the blinking neon sign atop your corner topless bar.
Penetrating pornography with a critical eye could teach us how pornography manipulates, distorts, and colors our perceptions. Because the more someone understands pornography’s social implications and manipulative tactics, the better someone can deconstruct these cultural messages. Knowledge is power. Without it, we are hapless puppets to any industry keen on seducing us.
Rebuttal
If an ‘academic’ pornography class includes the viewing of any actual porn — which nearly all do — it simply legitimizes a degraded industry that itself has no merit.
The National Coalition for the Protection of Children and Families, an anti-pornography think tank, estimates that fifty universities around the country have classes studying pornography. And we’re not talking about Uncle Joe’s University here; Berkeley Wesleyan, New York University, MIT … numerous esteemed institutions are legitimizing this type of ‘study.’
The problem is that students aren’t just studying porn academically. They are watching it, soaking it in, letting those harmful and degraded images and experiences impact their psyches and bodies … all under the guise of academic discipline. As these classes are currently structured, students aren’t studying porn because it’s “the most popular and enduring of all the movie genres” (a characterization I disagree with, by the way). They’re studying porn to get a thrill for college credit. And it is unforgivable that a university would sanction the intake of something so harmful.
If these classes did focus exclusively on the impact of porn on people or our culture, then students would indeed learn something very valuable. Because every research study on this has demonstrated how radically harmful the use of porn is to individuals and relationships, as users gravitate toward more and more shocking material, desensitization to it, and an increased tendency to “act out” what they see — and expect the same of their sexual partners. Mary Anne Layden, the prominent co-director of a sexual trauma program at the University of Pennsylvania, testified before congress in 2004 that pornography’s addictive brain effects mirror those of heroin.
National Coalition president Rick Schatz explains the fallacy of thinking that porn-watching could have intellectual merit. “Do schools offer classes on alcohol in which part of the course includes drinking? No, partly because we all know there’s a certain percentage who have drinking problems. Instead of actually studying the legal, political and moral issues associated with porn, the vast majority of these courses are validating it and showing addictive pornography to students, even requiring them to produce it. There’s absolutely no academic basis for that type of course.”
Comments
Commenting is now closed for this entry.
By Just Being Me
January 13, 2006 04:55 PM | Link to this
Hey, it’s still Friday, Jan. 13th! How the heck did I end up in here? I just clicked refresh… I’m not ready for this yet. It’s Friday! I’m burned out!!!!!!!! I need a weekend!!!!!!!!
Hey, it’s kinda fun being in here all by myself. No one can hear me. I can talk to myself… this is fun! I should do this more often…
By blablabla
January 13, 2006 04:58 PM | Link to this
somehow i got here too. weird…
By Brian Curtis
January 16, 2006 07:39 AM | Link to this
Well, no surprises here. As usual, Shaunti starts with the assumption that porn is inherently wicked, and then “proves” that any attempt to study or discuss it simply exposes impressionable youth (including those over 18) to its Harmful Soul-Destroying Rays.
I believe that’s called “begging the question,” i.e., assuming what you set out to prove.
By Denise Noe
January 16, 2006 08:10 AM | Link to this
For colleges to show actual pornography to students is as outrageous as it is ridiculous. If showing porn is considered necessary for a class on the subject, then there is not excuse for offering such courses. Without pandering to the lowest common denominator however, it would be possible to have a course examining the issues around the legal concept of obscenity and the questions of harm that surround pornogrphy. But only a course that sticks to these academically relevant issues and doesn’t display titillating material should be considered for college classes.
By Billy
January 16, 2006 08:27 AM | Link to this
Can you truly examine its effects without seeing it for a frame of reference? It’s a primary source. Excluding it from the course would be stupid.
And Shaunti’s list of colleges (And we’re not talking about Uncle Joe’s University here; Berkeley Wesleyan, New York University, MIT …) actually reassures me more than it worries me. It’s not being taught at Bob Jones or Liberty. It’s not even a class at UGA or Tech. You’re going to find it in colleges in NY and California. You’ll see it in relatively liberal (socially speaking) universities. Universities that like to look at tough social issues. Universities that didn’t require the threat of military force before allowing Blacks to enroll.
By Lyrazel
January 16, 2006 08:44 AM | Link to this
Lump it with that valuable Ceramics 101 course or let students get a humanities credit, whatever. One thinks enrolled students will attend it despite being out binge drinking all night, certainly enrolled athletes will get higher GPAs and actually show up for class. I can see the rigorous test for the final grade: What purpose do fluffers serve? Prof. Someone saying: Please keep aware of the plot for discussion groups…
Wonder if anyone except me would fall asleep during the movies? Porn is incredibly boring… Sure would not want to use the auditorium AFTER Fundamentals of Porn 101 class is over.
By Renee
January 16, 2006 08:57 AM | Link to this
Actually “Ceramics 101” would be a valuable class to someone majoring in the Arts.
A porn course could very well have intellectual merit. I think a lot depends on the instructor and how the course is handled. I think Billy’s first sentence in his post hits it on the head. Additionally, it wouldn’t be a required course, so if it’s not in agreement with someone’s moral, ethical, or religious standards then don’t take it.
Personally, the class would serve no purpose for me, but that’s not because I think porn is evil etc.
By Rich
January 16, 2006 09:39 AM | Link to this
Using Diane and Billy’s line of thinking, to study the effects of heroin and crack cocaine, medical researchers must use them in order to understand their effects. That is ludicrous and so is studying porn. Instead research the victims and see the effect it has on their lives and relationships. It enhances neither and is destructive to both. And by the way, Diane, I don’t have a “corner strip bar” anywhere near my neighborhood. Don’t treat porn like its normal or trendy. It isn’t; it is still “taboo” and its trash!
By Chilao
January 16, 2006 09:41 AM | Link to this
As a survivor of a feminist theory class
starting off with humor are we? LOL And Madonna was just showing her breasts, nothing DEEP in that. LOL
and all this time I thought porn reflected what viewers wanted to see and could not see at home, it being fantasy after all. You mean I wanted my wife to wear crotchless panties because I saw it in porn? All this time I thought it had appeal because I could see crotchless panties, hassle-free. Not to imply she was no fun, indeed she was, just making a point.
And the ‘increasingly more bizarre porn needed’ argument, while perhaps valid for a small segment of the population of porn viewers, is itself bizarre. Kinda like most heroin addicts started off drinking mother’s milk, so let’s ban mother’s milk.
Okay, back to class: Sure, as an elective class, like any other. Lots of “interesting* classes out there, why not add another? And with the very wide availibility of porn, doubt any actually shown in class will be exposing young innocents to something new.
I would be real curious as to the DEPTH of the class, for example, would it be studied as art as well? Not arguing that it should be called art, however, there is a wide variety of genres out there and one COULD argue that.
By Brian Curtis
January 16, 2006 09:48 AM | Link to this
Rich: Its “victims”? Drug and alcohol abuse cause actual damage; porn is simply another medium of words and images. Do we talk about the “victims” of action movies, sonnets, or documentaries?
Do some disturbed individuals get obsessive about it and do harm to themselves and others? You betcha… just like the Bible, or political fringe groups, or sock puppets for that matter. But for normal, sane individuals, it’s simply another category of entertainment. If it doesn’t interest you, you don’t have to take the course.
By Renee
January 16, 2006 09:49 AM | Link to this
Don’t treat porn like its normal or trendy. It isn’t; it is still “taboo� and its trash!
All your opinion. While others may share it, it still remains, your opinion.
By Renee
January 16, 2006 09:52 AM | Link to this
Shaunti’s comment The problem is that students aren’t just studying porn academically. They are watching it, soaking it in, letting those harmful and degraded images and experiences impact their psyches and bodies … all under the guise of academic discipline.
Harmful and degraded images and experiences. Too funny!!! Shaunti comments are really humorous this week. So as the porn soaks in, what then happens???
By Renee
January 16, 2006 09:53 AM | Link to this
I agree Brian. Who are the porn victims????
By Greg
January 16, 2006 09:56 AM | Link to this
You don’t get into Berkeley Wesleyan, New York University, or MIT by being stupid and unable to think. I’m confident these students, whom Shaunti seems to credit with the emotional maturity of toddlers, can handle an exotic film class.
I was exposed to pornography in college when my dorm had “porno night”. I found it pretty boring after about five minutes…personally, I like the real thing more than watching someone else…but that’s just me. I certainly didn’t become addicted to porn though.
Shaunti needs to learn that there are thousands of free thinking, emotionally stable adults in the world who are much more intelligent than she is.
By Chilao
January 16, 2006 09:59 AM | Link to this
Samford University in Birmingham Alabama is one of the Southern Baptists flag-ship universities. About 3-4 years ago, they published a Student Handbook and on the cover was a young attractive coed, her profile made up of a collage of very small pictures. Coming to find out, if you looked at the pics enlarged, the collage was made up by a graphic artist working there from hundreds of p*rn thumbnail pics. Funny, and yes, he got fired and they recalled all of the handbooks, I think they had been distributed though.
By Randy
January 16, 2006 10:01 AM | Link to this
I use to think that Brian C. made intelligent posts, I didn’t usually agree with them, but they weren’t stupid. However, with these opinions this morning Brian, you have shown just how uncaring and out of your mind you really are. I don’t have the studies and don’t care enough to do the research but someone will and the studies will show how porn leads to rape, incest etc. You have told us alot about you this morning Brian. Goes to women’s safety.
By Renee
January 16, 2006 10:07 AM | Link to this
porn leads to rape, incest etc.
Too funny!!! So if porn was removed from our society, then rapes and incest would end???? It couldn’t be that these are disturbed individuals committing these crimes. Contrary to that belief, porn is not the driving force behind a rapist or a child molester. So if this is listed as a college course, the people taking the class are more likely to have an incestous relationship or rape someone soon after class lets out???
By Chilao
January 16, 2006 10:08 AM | Link to this
So all those rapes and incests from years ago were the result of people watching wood-cut prints prn? Maybe it was because the table cloth did not go to the floor, some guy saw the sexy calf/leg at the bottom of the table, the table leg, and his mind wandered, and he had to leave the dinner party and go on a raping rampage. Could be, maybe the Victorians had a point with the floor-length table cloth. After all, some of those wood-workers were real good with *form.
By Jack
January 16, 2006 10:11 AM | Link to this
The victims of porn are the starlets who are forced to do it against their will. Just like guns, porn doesn’t hurt people, people hurt people.
By Walker
January 16, 2006 10:31 AM | Link to this
Some women are actually forced into p!rn and prostitution. I thereby declare all sex bad and evil.
Some people die every year from car accidents. I thereby declare all motorized vehicles bad and evil.
Some people die every year from buggy accidents. I thereby declare all horse-pulled buggies bad and evil.
Start walking folks and don’t trip and hit your head on a rock, I might have to declare all walking-traffic bad and evil.
By Randy
January 16, 2006 10:37 AM | Link to this
The problem with porn is simple, where does it end?? Do you stop at incest, beastiality, snuff films??? Porn is a road you go down and some people want more and more. It may be OK until it’s your daughter, mother, sister that’s victimized. This column shows just how selfish, self-centered and out of touch you liberals are. It’s OK, Alito, will be confirmed and you nuts will be in check. Again, liberals want to play GOD. How many times does a society have to learn the evils of Porn, before we look back and say, hey, that type of behavior destroyed that natiion.
By southerncal
January 16, 2006 10:38 AM | Link to this
As a male who struggles seriously with issues of porn addiction, this is a very real discussion for me. And in my first hand experience, porn has been a more difficult addiction to break than cigarette smoking. Porn has never led me to rape someone or even to think about incest. I can with complete honesty assure you, however, that after periods of using porn, there is a very real change in the way I look at the women I pass on the street or in the office. And, contrary (I think) to Chilao, it definitely affects the quality and health of my sexual relationship with my wife. I don’t know if I am an average guy. But I am at the least willing to acknowledge that porn has a negative impact on my social interactions and my interpersonal relationship. That is not my opinion. That is a fact in my life.
That said, I think that very aspect of porn is definitely worth a college class. I think it is the reality of porn that even many of the commenters on this post refuse to acknowledge.
Honestly my only fear of such a class would be that, even if for only a small portion of the population, it would open the door to addiction. It would have been for me, like giving crack to a recovering drug addict, for the sake of studying crack.
On the other hand, you are a naive fool if you don’t at least recognize that probably every person in such a class has seen countless porn images on their home computer since they were in middle school.
Feels like I needed about 8 hands to state my case.
By southerncal
January 16, 2006 10:46 AM | Link to this
I just went back and re-read Diane’s column. In all honesty, this left leaning conservative actually agrees with her whole heartedly.
I don’t think the conservative right has much help to offer for folks (potential or real porn addicts) who they want to “protect”. Telling someone just to avoid is, well, it just doesn’t help. I think the academic study of the effects of porn on social institutions and personal interactions is exactly the kind of thing that can help folks actually deal with an addiction.
By Renee
January 16, 2006 10:47 AM | Link to this
Well I’m not a liberal but it seems to me, that if you want to do away with porn that you are trying to play God. It’s the mentality of “I think it’s bad and evil and against all morals therefore nobody should take part in it”.
Porn is a road you go down and some people want more and more.
The key words - some people. Yes, some people will watch porn and want more and gasp call up someone they know and engage in sexual encounter. Or they may turn over to their husband/wife and do the same. And yes there is a select few who may do something stupid. These people are neither the norm nor the majority, so why is porn related to these individuals? It’s simple. I don’t agree with it, let the government get involved and police the distribution, manufacturing and enjoyment of it. Please don’t try to push your views on me, I’m not interested.
And calling someone a “nut” for clearly stating an opinion is not right. Opinions don’t always agree, but what has anywone said to make them a “nut”.
It also amazes me how when the word porn or gay is used it is immediately followed (or soon thereafter) by the words incest and beastiality.
By Mara
January 16, 2006 11:10 AM | Link to this
One wonders what kind of porn they study. After all, JOhn Ashcroft was offended by the bare breasts of Juistice and the art of Rob Maplethorpe almost brought federal fine arts funding crashing down because of his “pornographic” subject matter. Some foreign films (and some foreign commercial advertisements too!) could be considered “porn”, so what difference does it make whether you study the inferior “artistry” of pornography or the iconic art of film noir? Are our 18-20 year old chil’dens so sheltered and chaste that even an academic look at pornography is going to corrupt and poison thier views to the point where sexual violence becomes inevitable?
By Brian Curtis
January 16, 2006 11:29 AM | Link to this
While we’re at it, we may want to outlaw doughnuts, since some people use them too often and to an unhealthy degree.
By Grant
January 16, 2006 11:32 AM | Link to this
If its deemed bad by people like Shaunti then it should be ignored. Universities where ADULTS study should sweep such amoral topics under the carpet.
Its also the same stupid argument that smoking marajuana will lead to the use of heavier drugs… Shaunti and those that think like her should go bury their head back in the sand.
And to Randy’s comment about “Again, liberals want to play GOD.” I think its the other way around. Giving grown adults the opportunity to choose what they want to learn about is hardly playing GOD. Restricting availability on what you deem as wrong is playing GOD.
There’s nothing like a little porn to add a little spice back into a relationship!
By Walker
January 16, 2006 12:07 PM | Link to this
It also amazes me how when the word porn or gay is used it is immediately followed (or soon thereafter) by the words incest and beastiality
When you need to demonize something different than you or something you do not like, it helps to go all-out. LOL
By War Eagle
January 16, 2006 12:15 PM | Link to this
Ms. Feldman, Get a grip! Most damage is done by OVER CHURCHING and over Religionizing kids! They rebel! Case in point-Colorado! The kids were forced to go to church and the parents allegedly beat them over the heads with Bibles! Religion is a personal thing and should not be paraded around. that is what the USA was founded on-getting away from the “Wicked” church of England so that they could worship in their own way, without torturing anyone or bible beating them. Religion, not pronography is the problem. Another case-see fanatical Muslimism! Islamic Muslims are calling for the deaths of all non Muslims. I don’t recall anyone in the porn industry calling for the heads of non porn watchers (aka puritains). Ms. Feldman, you and your husband need to chill out and maybe watch a good one. Make sure you bring your pill/condom. We don’t want you to put yourself at risk!
By Jack
January 16, 2006 12:28 PM | Link to this
The quality of the weekly subject of the blog is in direct proportion to the number of posters.
By The72John
January 16, 2006 12:30 PM | Link to this
As with anything else, some people are addicted to porn and it ruins their lives. Just like there are people addicted to work, to gambling, to internet chat rooms, to video games, to television, to alcohol, to eating…
It’s called an addictive personality. Because one may become addicted to something doesn’t make that something inherently evil. Only the Randys of the world with their narrow-minded, puritanical hatred of sex buy into this nonsense that anyone who views porn, or even MOST people who view porn, are going to become addicted, sleep with their family members, bugger the sheep or go out and rape someone. It’s idiotic.
And yes, I’m sure that there are porn stars who are “forced” into the profession, and taken advantage of, and that’s sad, but there are also a lot of people who do it because A) It pays well and B) They enjoy it. All women (or men, for that matter) are not innocent victims under the thumb of some porn-kingpin lothario.
As for the academic value of a class in porn, I agree with the earlier poster who said that it’s impossible to study something without having a frame of reference. You can’t study art without looking at it. You can’t study music without listening to it. You can study literature without reading it. If a professor is able to develop a course that explores the societal issues of pornography from an academic standpoint, then yes - students are going to need to watch it.
Frankly, it’s ridiculous to suggest that these are poor, innocent people being exposed to smut against their will. It’s been 10 years since I finished my undergraduate degree, and trust me, even 10 years ago there were very, very few “innocent” college students, and I highly doubt that anyone signing up for a college course in porn would be one of them.
Yet again, Shaunti is imposing her overly morallistic and self-righteous attitudes on her subject matter without having any idea of what she is talking about.
Big surprise.
By Jolene
January 16, 2006 12:36 PM | Link to this
Like it or not, sex and pornography is a part of this culture and the study thereof is of social scientific significance in understanding the culture that produced it.
It is not taboo to read the text of the Kama Sutra and is actually encouraged for many therapists to reccomend in order to help couples or individuals in regards to their own sexuality and issues regarding the opposite sex (and I would hope for same sex couples as well).
Studying the impact, the structure, and the consequences, good and bad with pornography can only increase awareness of the human psyche and socialology of the current era. As a society, we go through ebbs and flows of conservative and liberal standards, by the inspection of the taboo can we find ways to strengthen our communities for both tolerance and law.
How can anyone make a difference when they have no idea of the subject matter? A little knowledge is dangerous. I would rather people know the whole truth before laying down judgement.
What exactly is the sylabus? Is it just the film itself or the production in a whole? Does it explore the social changes that have occured since “The Green Door”? Facts are not here, this is just an assumption, based on what the title of the course is.
It suprises me how people can rail against pornography and then look into their houses and see at least one example of obscene materiel therein. The two sides of the coin have to be uncovered to make a difference.
By Vern L. Bullough
January 16, 2006 01:00 PM | Link to this
As one who has taught courses on human sexuality in which pornography plays a part, and who has presided at a university sponsored conference on pornography, I am surprised at the emotional response of those speaking aginst such courses. Pornography is a significant part of the culture of many people, and I do not know how one can understand the United States without realizing the existence of pornography and its influence. I agree there is a major fear of him, and I myself was investigated by the legislature for my part int he discussion of the issue, but after a few crazies had tstified against me, the investigation was dropped. Pornography is part of our culture and it is important that people be aware of it and how they themselves should deal with it.
By Jack
January 16, 2006 01:13 PM | Link to this
If one doesn’t want to look, don’t sign up for the course. DUH!
By The72John
January 16, 2006 01:17 PM | Link to this
But Jack…according to Shaunti those poor, innocent Berkley students don’t have any choice! They are being drawn in against their better nature by the sheer addictive power of Gang Bang Boobies VI! They have no choice in the matter, and before you know it they’ll all be wearing leather gimp masks and demanding that they be called Mistress Heather!
By Jack
January 16, 2006 01:39 PM | Link to this
I don’t ever bother to read what Shanti or diane have to say. I only care about the opinions of the good folks who post on this blog. Why haven’t Randy or Zack come on to tell us that porn causes the number of abortions to increase? After all, when finished watching a good film, it makes on want to have sex with anyone or anything.
By Jack
January 16, 2006 01:40 PM | Link to this
My grammar & spelling is lacking today. Sorry.
By Renee
January 16, 2006 01:47 PM | Link to this
No need to apologize Jack!! How r u doing?
By Jack
January 16, 2006 01:52 PM | Link to this
OK. Monday is not my favorite day. How’s the frozen North?
By Renee
January 16, 2006 02:02 PM | Link to this
Frozen says it all! We went from 50 Saturday afternoon to 5 degrees that night with 6 inches of snow and a windshield factor -15. Sure makes me miss red clay Georgia!
By The72John
January 16, 2006 02:10 PM | Link to this
Obviously you don’t remember red clay as well as you should, Renee. No one misses trying to get THAT out of clothes O-o!
Jack, obviously until you get your spelling and sentence structure under control, I can’t be bothered to read your posts. You’ll just have to be old-fashioned for someone else.
By Jack
January 16, 2006 02:23 PM | Link to this
I want 12 inches of snow (and not ice) to fall in Georgia starting about Noon on Thursday after stopping by the liquor store and maybe the grocery store. (not to get bread and milk)It should melt sometime Sunday night enabling us to go back to work after a long weekend of fun and frolick.
By Renee
January 16, 2006 02:28 PM | Link to this
yeah, I remember the days of snow = no work. It would have to be a full fledged blizzard/ice storm taking down power lines before we wouldn’t have work here. What’s funny is everyone here is telling me this is a mild winter. If this is mild, I hate to see a real winter.
By The72John
January 16, 2006 02:30 PM | Link to this
I mean, what’s up with the bread and milk? I’ve lived in Georgia off and on most of my life and I’ve never understood that. Why do people thinking they are about to be snowed in develop a sudden craving for sandwiches?
Personally, I want some gin, some tonic, a few big steaks, a couple of bottles of wine, and for the power to stay on so that I can enjoy them!
By Jack
January 16, 2006 02:33 PM | Link to this
You got that right John. Why have bread and milk when you can have wine & steak? Do people sit around and eat bread and drink milk everytime it snows? (does the body good but not very much fun)
By Viewer
January 16, 2006 03:19 PM | Link to this
I’ll have to make sure I spend alot of time tonight getting ready for class. Never know what adult film that teacher will be asking about next. hehehehehehehe
By cynic
January 16, 2006 03:19 PM | Link to this
the72john, a few steaks? a couple of bottles of wine? don’t you know that in excessive quantities those are bad for you? shaunti would probably label you an anti-family, baby-killing heathen and then propose outlawing steaks and wine.
By Viewer
January 16, 2006 03:22 PM | Link to this
People with addictive personality traits do have to eliminate all addictive material. Now those of us who can more properly do many things in moderation, for example do not have to drink the full case of beer each time we have a beer, can enjoy the visual affects of adult films.
By The72John
January 16, 2006 03:33 PM | Link to this
Hey, the last time I got snowed in (That would be the bliz of ‘03, obviously) it took a couple of days to dig out, adn the only means of cooking that worked was the grill. You never know when that extra steak or bottle of wine will come in handy!
Hmm. Maybe next time I get snowed in I’ll try steak, wine and porn!
By Ben
January 17, 2006 08:08 AM | Link to this
When is the writer of the rebuttal Shaunti Feldhahn going to grow up? The adult enternaiment industry is a multi-billion dollar industry enjoyed by millions of normal and healthy consenting adults world wide. The reasons why colleges offer classes in the study of porn is because it is an accepted form of media just like film or videogames. She needs to get up off her high horse and holier than thou attitude.
By cynic
January 17, 2006 08:38 AM | Link to this
In the good old days-the ones Shaunti dreams about going back to-when 90% of the population lived on farms (and the slave trade was going strong, or at least, the KKK), most children growing up on farms were exposed to every kind of natural and unnatural sex act imaginable. Including beastiality (as in farm animals mating!). There was enough incest, any trip through the Appalacia range would prove that out. Where were the porn movies or classses that forced people into this behavior? They lived in one room cabins, with families of 6 or more were the parents having sex at some hotel on the weekends?
Conservatives like shaunti live in a world that never existed, bellieve in things that don’t exist and when you read some of the crap they write-soaking it in?-makes you wonder if they are not only missing a few cards in the deck but are wired so tight that there must be some really nasty garbage going on in their little brains. Dare I mention that the BTK killer was very conservative and religious?
Porn is a social phenomena and social scientists will study it. Shaunti is opposed to science, as she is opposed to any intellectual pursuit in her ilk’s battle on reason and thinking in society. Nothing threatens a democracy more than learning and being exposed to the real world, and if it’s anything the right wing hates more it’s thinking for yourself and real democracy.
By Chris
January 17, 2006 09:17 AM | Link to this
Sometimes I agree with Shaunti and sometimes I don’t but it is unfair to pit someone with her analytical mind and gift for expression against someone like Diane. All Diane can do is regurgitate the shallowest of liberal thinking and she doesn’t demonstrate original thought. The “Liberalâ€? side does have an important contribution to the dialogue but for this forum to work properly the “Liberal” side needs someone a whole lot smarter than poor Diane.
By dylan
January 17, 2006 09:33 AM | Link to this
I love how the lady keeps talking about how damaging porn is to people and society and then doesn’t provide one shread of evidence this is true, the closest she comes is with a doctor comparing the addictiveness to heroin which is absurd when you come off of heroin there is such a physical addiction the withdrawals can be deadly name one recorded case of someone dying from porn withdrawals.
By matt
January 17, 2006 09:46 AM | Link to this
Isn’t it interesting that Shaunti is opposed to academic study of porn, but in making her point she cites “research studies?” Don’t cite research studies if you are opposed to studying it in the first place.
By Steve
January 17, 2006 09:47 AM | Link to this
Kudos, Diane!
And shame on you Shaunti for championing ingnorance over academics. The line between degrading, exploitative pornography and erotic art is blurry indeed and we won’t get any better at recognizing it by burying our head in the sand.
By Renee
January 17, 2006 10:03 AM | Link to this
Funny Matt!
By Ben
January 17, 2006 10:04 AM | Link to this
As a matter of fact this will really tick off Shaunti the conseverative writer of the rebuttal. Just this week I ordered some XXX rated dvds, I am also a college student and no I do not have any sexual or mental issues.
By Jack
January 17, 2006 10:26 AM | Link to this
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!
By Ken
January 17, 2006 10:30 AM | Link to this
Like it or not, pornography always has been and always will be part of human culture.
I wonder why Shaunti is so opposed to the study of pornography. I assume she and others would like to see pornography eliminated all together. Well, the only way to eliminate it, is to understand the need for it’s existence. and eliminate that need. It exists for a reason and the only way to understand that reason is to study it.
By Viewer
January 17, 2006 10:41 AM | Link to this
Professor, sorry I am late for class and appear like I have not slept. I spent all night last night reviewing all the p@rn I could find, so I would be ready for class. hehehehehehehe
By Boscoe
January 17, 2006 10:42 AM | Link to this
Drug and alcohol abuse cause actual damage; porn is simply another medium of words and images.Brian Curtis. And to think at one point I thought you were capable of intelligent and lucid ideas. Pornography is harmful to everyone. Eighteen separate studies have shown pornography desensitizes all viewers, and may lead to extremely violent behavior. All pornography—soft, hard, and even so-called ‘neutral’ sex-education materials, desensitize the viewer, enabling him to be conditioned to sexual acts, violent and nonviolent, as an essential part of human behavior. This conclusion has been reached in 26 separate studies. Leading sexual violence researchers Neil Malamuth, Ed Donnerstein, and Dolf Zillman state that, in general, “Pornography desensitizes. Exposure to these materials, whether violent or nonviolent, coercive or noncoercive, experimentally increases male aggressive behavior against women, and decreases both male and female sensitivity to rape and the plight of the rape victim. Both males and females, after viewing this material, judge the female rape victim to be less injured, less worthy, and more responsible for her own plight.” Several studies have shown that all persons, normal and unbalanced, who view pornography develop a craving for ever more deviant materials. Many persons even begin to employ more violent methods in their sexual relations. As with drug users, those who use pornography seek more and more deviant materials to maintain their previous level of sexual arousal. You don’t think it’s addictive? Try not looking at it for a month. Go cold turkey and see how you do. Pornography also degrades marriages. Pornography users generally view material that shows attractive women performing almost any type of act with any number of men, or animals, for that matter. The users begin to expect that their wives should also perform acts that are at least a little more ‘adventurous’ or ‘experimental’ that those they are used to, and will become dissatisfied when their non-using partners will not live up to their porn-induced fantasies. They even become dissatisfied with their wive’s physical imperfections. Pornography increases crime in dangerous offenders. More than 65 studies have shown that dangerous offenders (child molesters, killers, rapists, incest fathers) are not only more likely to commit their crimes if they employ pornography, they are likely to precede their violent acts with the extended use of deviant materials. Male sex offenders soon begin to display addictive and compulsive behavior when using porn. Their mechanisms for relieving stress soon all become related to deviant sex. They offend more and more often. About two million pedophiles, rapists, child molesters, sadists, and those who solicit teenaged or child prostitutes commit more than two million crimes annually. This number accounts only for those incidents that are reported—the total number is obviously much higher. Those who naively cling to the belief that pornography is ‘victimless’ should wake up and look at the facts. Thousands of persons have been tortured, raped, and murdered by warped human beings as a direct result of pornography. There are thousands of such cases cramming police files all over the nation. Ted Bundy, an infamous serial killer responsible for the murder of as many as 36 to 50 young women and girls, granted an interview the day before he was executed. Ted Bundy stated in this interview, “In the beginning, it [pornography] fuels this kind of thought process … Like an addiction, you keep craving something that is harder, harder, something which gives you a greater sense of excitement—until you reach a point where the pornography only goes so far, you reach that jumping-off point where you begin to wonder if maybe actually doing it would give you that which is beyond just reading or looking at it.” Arthur Gary Bishop, who was executed in Utah in 1983 for sodomizing and killing five boys aged 4 to 13, stated that: “Pornography was not the only negative influence in my life, but its effect on me was devastating. I am a homosexual pedophile convicted of murder, and pornography was a determining factor in my downfall.” The Miami Pillow Case Rapist. FBI scientists at Quantico, Virginia, commented on the role of pornography and its effect upon the Miami Pillow Case Rapist: “He collected Playboy, then Penthouse magazines … and dreamed of rape. Then he slipped over the threshold of fantasy into the reality of sexual assault.” The Federal Bureau of Investigation found that eighty percent of recent mass murderers used pornography extensively and used it as an integral part of their murderous sexual activity, which often included serial rape-murders. Some of these killers photographed their dead victims and pasted cutouts of their faces on hard- and soft-core pornographic pictures as preparation for their next ‘kill.’ The FBI and police nationwide have reported finding extensive pornography collections in the homes of virtually every mass-murderer and child molester that they arrest. Chapter 18 of the Attorney General Pornography Commission’s study noted that the eight major men’s magazines (Playboy, Penthouse, Hustler, Chic, Club, Gallery, Genesis, and Oui) have a circulation rate five times higher in Alaska and Nevada than in North Dakota. It is very significant that the rape rates in Alaska and Nevada are eight times higher than in North Dakota!
By Jack
January 17, 2006 10:43 AM | Link to this
See no evil, hear no evil, have no fun.
By Ken
January 17, 2006 10:44 AM | Link to this
dear cynic… Shaunti’s (and many conservatives’) ideal world may not exist, but doesn’t the “other side” want an unattainable ideal as well?
Do you really think there will every be a world where the “liberal” ideal exists?
Definitely not. Humanity will invariably oscillate between the two, swinging from one side to the other and occaisionally, though rarely, settle directly in between. For humanity to ever hit either ideal, it would require us to completely reject our individuality for the betterment of the whole. This will never, especially in America, ever happen.
By Renee
January 17, 2006 11:11 AM | Link to this
So using that logic, one would be to believe that if Ted Bundy had never been exposed to the horrors of pornography that he might be an upstanding citizen in the community. Additionally, I don’t doubt that pornography can be found in the homes of mass murderer. I assume that is not the only thing found. Rope, knives, guns etc are found too. In addition to porn movies, they have movies depicting violence. A movie that a normal person can watch and move on. Should we then ban all violent movies, video games, rock and rap music. If most serial killers are found to eat chocolate do we then ban chocolate. See how insane this can get?
These killers, child molesters are not victims of the pornography takeover. They use pornography as a step within in their crimes, it was not the ultimate driving force.
Most murders are committed with a gun. Should we then ban firearms (I’m sure someone here will say yes).
By Viewer
January 17, 2006 11:15 AM | Link to this
Ban ROPE, Ban ROPE.
Bundy’s Blame it all on p!rn routine, which he did not even start discussing until just before his death, has been thoroughly discounted by, also, many studies. I guess that got missed by the anti-p!rn crusaders.
By Renee
January 17, 2006 11:16 AM | Link to this
Additionally, interviewing a crazy person such as a serial killer seems kind of dumb to say the least. While on one end, it may seem to provide more information into the mind of a killer, who’s to believe anything a nut like this says. This person has just killed people for no particular rhyme or reason, yet we are to believe that in these interviews they now see the light, and can comment on what made them this way. Yes, the analytical ravings of a serial killer should be taken very seriously, lol.
By RF
January 17, 2006 11:18 AM | Link to this
Good 10:43 Jack! You just summed up the entire fundamentalist argument for the week! Either that or you met my ex-wife somewhere along the way.
By FatMoose
January 17, 2006 11:33 AM | Link to this
Was sick friday and happend to watch Opra (always a bad idea).
She had the wife of a serial child molester on; and the ONLY advise the mother and Opra could give on warning signs that your husband/wife may be into was “He browsed a lot of porn.”
Way to hit the topic and warning signs on the head Opra! (srczm!)
People like this keep the bs info that porn is unnatural alive and kicking. I wonder how many husband heard some type of rant when they got home?
By The72John
January 17, 2006 11:33 AM | Link to this
I wonder how many cases of murder, rape, torture, abuse, etc. have been committed in the name of religion, or inspired by religion?
A lot more than those inspired by porn, I guarantee.
Why do I have the suspicion that any “study” cited by Shaunti and her fellow religious fanatics was probably conducted by biased “family” groups who pre-supposed their findings?
By liana
January 17, 2006 11:45 AM | Link to this
cynic, your 8:38post…. take a bow, applause, applause.
By Jack
January 17, 2006 11:46 AM | Link to this
Hey FM. If you want to get a bunch of ladies riled up, say something bad about Oprah. (then take cover)
By The72John
January 17, 2006 12:03 PM | Link to this
helps Jack put on some flame-retardent outerwear
By lozen
January 17, 2006 12:04 PM | Link to this
How do they come up with these earth-shattering topics each week for this forum? I work in a liberal university and have never even heard of pornography courses until now. In other words it hardly seems as if it’s wide-spread and I doubt anyone will ever try to teach such a class here in the bible-belt! Meanwhile, a man who does not believe women have the right to choose for themselves when it comes to our reproductive rights, is sliding right onto the supreme court. Let’s make some “what illegal abortion was like” films and show them in college classes. Start saving those coat hangers, ladies!
By Scalia
January 17, 2006 12:05 PM | Link to this
Being a linguist, you have to look at the wording of the study. “Eighteen separate studies have shown pornography desensitizes all viewers, and may lead to extremely violent behavior.”
That doesn’t mean that it does. I can say that crossing my eyes several times a day, as my Grandmother told me, may lead to my eyes becoming constantly crossed. I can also say that reading this blog every day, several times a day, may lead to addiction.
By NowIzeSkared
January 17, 2006 12:09 PM | Link to this
I seen those kinds of movies my whole life, and dat a long time. used to be in black and white. when am I expected to start raping little kids and doing it with the dog? ize skared about dat. will i have to join a church first, go into youth ministries or something like that?
By Jack
January 17, 2006 12:14 PM | Link to this
After a while it just reminds one of oysters on the half-shell.
Someone please pass the cocktail sauce.
By The72John
January 17, 2006 12:15 PM | Link to this
As always, a good Googling of Boscoe’s cut-and-pastes reveals that his “sources” are fundamentalist Christian websites. The text of the article from which he pulled is also distinctly anti-gay, and attempts to draw the same tired connections between homosexuality and pedophilia, linking porn in their somewhere. It even refers to Dahmer as an “admitted homosexual”.
On a scary note, it also pulled up this very blog, and the very post he made earlier today…Google is spooky.
By Jack
January 17, 2006 12:24 PM | Link to this
That is spooky.
By The72John
January 17, 2006 12:29 PM | Link to this
I stand corrected - Google actually pulled up an OLD blog where Boscoe cut-and-pasted the exact same thing. LOL.
By kimberly
January 17, 2006 12:34 PM | Link to this
I was on a video conference call this morning, and I had a strange, growing urge to unbutton my blouse — even though I have never unbuttoned my blouse in front of a camera (or in a meeting) before.
BAN VIDEO CONFERENCING!
By Jack
January 17, 2006 12:35 PM | Link to this
What was that conference bridge number?
By The72John
January 17, 2006 12:35 PM | Link to this
That’s not a porn problem - that’s just a sign that your video conference is really boring. I have that urge anytime our CEO wants to get in a little coast-to-coast face time with us. That man could put a meth-head to sleep.
By kimberly
January 17, 2006 12:38 PM | Link to this
Oh good. Thanks. For a minute there, I was beginning to think I was a pervert. {;->
By Viewer
January 17, 2006 12:39 PM | Link to this
See, we have people right here on this blog who want to be in the movies(wink, wink) LMAO
By Viewer
January 17, 2006 12:40 PM | Link to this
I get it, it’s the BLOG’S fault, coming up with such a suggestive topic.
By SUZAN
January 17, 2006 12:42 PM | Link to this
Religion aside it is a disgusting industry full of nasty creepy, people. It may be a multi billion dollar industry but that does not give it real legitimacy. Truth be known here Im sure all here speaking up for porn would love to see thier sister, daughter and wife starring in one of these movies sleeping with countless people and never really know what thier taking home with in the form of diseases. would you not love to see your mother starring in something like this. How wonderful would that be. How how about a family epic…..
By FatMoose
January 17, 2006 12:45 PM | Link to this
As for studies have shown pornography desensitizes all viewers; I would take arguement with whether that is bad.
Try to follow: I used to find it exciting to look at playboy; then hustler; and finaly mags that had sex acts in them. In the end, I had a revalation: A ch=oochie is a coochie is a coochie! What turns me on now is WHO the coochie is part of - otherwise there is no fundimental difference bw it and my, um..hand. I appericiate my GFs “flaws” {uniqueness to me} bc all the stimulation of “perfect” bodies with fake boobs now bores me. Now, does this neccesitate being with someone that is fun and adventurous in bed as part of their being? Yes, yet who does not want that?
Where-as my dad chacked out one of my hustlers (he was a doctor) and plainly stated “Reminds me of my medical school years.” I do not hear anyone warning people against becoming a doctor; much less an OBGYN. Why? BC of the same reasoning above. A doctor would have a very hard time operating on his wifes/sons heart (although a heart is a heart is a heart to him) bc this heart was different - there is emotional attachment bc of the PERSON it belongs to.
So, in short; porn can LEAD to the appreciation of a mates uniqueness.
As for SOME people taking it to the nth degree and still not understanding it comes down to the uniqueness of an individual? SOME people are idiots! And that has nothing to do with porn;)
By Netbanker
January 17, 2006 12:45 PM | Link to this
Ohhh Man! Oysters on the half shell! SLURP! They always make me think of Thanksgiving and my Grand Daddy.
By kimberly
January 17, 2006 12:47 PM | Link to this
Actually, Suzan, I was thinking of showing some to my daughter when she’s a little older, to DE-glamorize it for her. Like the “girls gone wild” videos… before she takes off on Spring Break when she’s 18. Let’s look at how drunk those girls are. Let’s look at how embarrassing that is. Let’s look at how PERMANENT that is. Those girls can NEVER ever ever take it back. Do you think they’re PROUD now? How do you think they feel, now that they’re out interviewing for jobs and finding a mate? Do they always wonder who has seen their stuff? Do you think they wish they hadn’t done that?
We all know the forbidden has a mystique, because it’s forbidden… Any thoughts?
By Viewer
January 17, 2006 12:51 PM | Link to this
SUZAN - if you search in google, you may be able to find that, the family epic.
There are so many aspiring actresses who want to be in the movies, fully, and many do not consider sexual activity creepy. Jenna Jemison(sp?) comes to mind, a host of other names as well.
By Netbanker
January 17, 2006 12:56 PM | Link to this
I’d like to know WHO is buying all that porn. I’m placing my bet on religious conservatives causing the explosion in the growth of the industry as porn became available online. Who else could it be? The net made it available to the all those folks who also couldn’t be caught in the liquor store.
Let’s face it…this country has MAJOR hang ups on SEX which are primarily religion-based! That which is forbidden is the most desired. God made everything and in HIS own image, but bodies aren’t to be looked at much less discussed. That could lead to understanding and informed decision making! Which in turn leads to questions being asked. Can’t have questions because that’s bad. But blind faith is GOOD and leads to the creation of more sheeple…and Sheeple are easy to lead.
By Scalia
January 17, 2006 12:57 PM | Link to this
Fatmoose, I agree about the desensitize. Would any woman want to go to a male gynecologist knowing that it might be exciting them to see what is below the waist or what is part of their torso?
By FatMoose
January 17, 2006 01:00 PM | Link to this
Religion aside it is a disgusting industry full of nasty creepy, people.
No longer the case in general; you must still be watching 70s porn!
It may be a multi billion dollar industry but that does not give it real legitimacy.
Not a point anyone has made or would condone - evangelical churches are a multi billion dollar industry but that does not give it real legitimacy as well.
Truth be known here Im sure all here speaking up for porn would love to see thier sister, daughter and wife starring in one of these movies sleeping with countless people and never really know what thier taking home with in the form of diseases. would you not love to see your mother starring in something like this. How wonderful would that be.
Well, they do that “dirty stuff” already - I personally do not care to watch them & and if they had a movie, I simpley would not rent/buy it. Makes me wonder why people feel the NEED to picture what other people are doing in bed when they clearly find it unappealing. You do the same thing with gay people - not once have I walk up and met someones grandma and choose to picture her having sex with the Mr. Should we ban old person sex because it grosses some people out to imagine it?
As for diseases: The industry is pretty incredible at regulating itself. You are providing more untrue bs.
How how about a family epic
Now you are just being sick. I have watched tons of porn, but those thoughts are no-where in my head; yet they are in yours durring your first post. Makes me wonder what makes you think like that; maybe sexual suppression by the hand(no pun intended) of religion?
By Jack
January 17, 2006 01:00 PM | Link to this
LMAO @ NetB and his Grand Daddy.
By Jack
January 17, 2006 01:01 PM | Link to this
What is that saying? Forbidden fruit is the sweetest. :)
By kimberly
January 17, 2006 01:02 PM | Link to this
You mean…. That really IS a banana in the doctor’s pocket?
By Jack
January 17, 2006 01:05 PM | Link to this
No it is a crotchfruit.
By kimberly
January 17, 2006 01:09 PM | Link to this
Hahahaha! The real problem with porn is that your man watches that and then thinks it would be perfectly NORMAL for you to perform the same stunt. Yeah-huh…. Hold your breath, I’ll get right on that one. Hahaha!
By Jack
January 17, 2006 01:18 PM | Link to this
Condemn the man for wishful thinking.
By The72John
January 17, 2006 01:18 PM | Link to this
Ah, Suzan. What would the rest of us do with you members of the morality police telling us how we should live our lives?
You must know a lot of porn stars, to know that they are all creepy people. Actually, there are a lot of gay porn stars and producers who are very active in the gay community and who have AIDS awareness foundations and other charitable organizations, so - shows what you know, Ms. Self-Righteous Christer.
And the porn industry is VERY stringent about its anti-disease measures. Again - shows what you know.
By kimberly
January 17, 2006 01:25 PM | Link to this
I’d never condemn the man for wishful thinking, only for continued nagging or prodding. Of course, he’s always free to persue that elsewhere. “Really? Millions of women do that? Well, certainly SOME of those nice women have phones, so feel free to call THEM.” Hahaha!
By Jack
January 17, 2006 01:29 PM | Link to this
We’re pretty good at prodding. LOL
By FatMoose
January 17, 2006 01:29 PM | Link to this
Really? Millions of women do that? Well, certainly SOME of those nice women have phones, so feel free to call THEM.
And the punchline will be; okay hun, but you are going to have to perform like them also!
And in the end (again - no pun intended) it is not that big of a whup. Same goes for threesomes - lots of things are much better in fantasy.
By kimberly
January 17, 2006 01:33 PM | Link to this
HAHAHA! Y’all are killing me today! You’re right FM. Everybody has a wish list! {:-D Yes, Jack. Now you know my terrible secret. No one loves me, ‘cause I’m frigid. HAHAHAHA!
By blablabla
January 17, 2006 01:33 PM | Link to this
for some reason all this talk of porn has me thinking about prostitution. why is prostitution illegal if porn is fair game? in one scenario i’m paying somebody to screw me. in another, producers are paying people to screw each other for film. how are the porn stars not selling their bodies for sex? i digress.
as for the question, do porn college courses have intellectual merit: not really. should it be studied by social scientists, sure, but if i’m a parent paying for MIT’s annual tuition, i’d be pretty p** that my kid was getting credits in porn. either that or i got hosed by not having the chance to take porn classes in college myself. LOL.
would it be a bad thing if i graduated with a minor in porn? can that go on my resume?
By Brian Curtis
January 17, 2006 01:34 PM | Link to this
Boscoe: Aside from your snide insults, I appreciate the fact that—unlike Shaunti—you’ve at least ATTEMPTED to provide some actual evidence in support of your beliefs.
Unfortunately, the heavily biased researchers you cite—Zillman, Malamuth, and Donnerstein—are what are called “advocacy researchers.� They have very little publishing credit outside of this particular topic; their methods are suspect; and their conclusions far too generalized and broad to be valid. In addition, they’re ONLY cited by anti-porn activists. No one else references their work in any area of sociology or psychology.
Several, more reputable, scholars have addressed and largely debunked them—not their methods, mind you (which are passable), but their broad and unfounded conclusions.
Here’s an excerpt: “Comparative studies, which typically find no consistent link between circulation of pornographic materials and sex crimes or gender inequality, are of two sorts. The first sort of study reveals that societies in which there are high levels of pornography experience low levels of sexual violence (Denmark, Japan). … it seems that high levels of pornography in a society do not ensure higher levels of sexual violence against women.
“The second sort of study shows that societies in which there are relatively low levels of pornography experience high levels of sexual violence or gender inequality (Singapore, the American Southwest)…. it seems that relatively high levels of sexual violence and gender inequality can occur in the absence of high levels of circulation of pornography, likely as a result of other factors.�
Read the rest at http://www.marciapally.com/harm.html
Additionally, “The research disproving the claim that sexual imagery triggers aggression would exhaust the remainder of this volume. The best overview can be read in The Question of Pornography: Research Findings and Policy Implications, where authors Daniel Linz and Steven Penrod conclude, “Should harsher penalties be leveled against persons who traffic in pornography? We do not believe so…as we have noted, the existing research probably does not justify this approach” (p. 172).
“Neither the overview of the research prepared by Dr. Edna Einsiedel for the Meese Commission nor the Surgeon’s General Report found a causal link between sexual material and anti-social behavior. When the Meese Commission, ignoring its own research, recommended restrictions on sexual material, two commissioners — both women — issued a dissenting report (Becker & Levine) saying, “No self-respecting investigator would accept conclusions based on such a study” (p. 4, 7). A number of studies over the last 20 years show that nonviolent pornography reduces aggression in laboratory settings.â€?
http://ptw.uchicago.edu//Eaton01.htm
Finally, read this information at http://www.fiawol.demon.co.uk/FAC/harm.htm http://www.wendymcelroy.com/topics.html
And aside from a lack of provable causality, all that’s left is religious zealotry and a general censorship principle of “better safe than sorry.� The religious impulse we can dispense with immediately; the entertainment and media doctrines of a single sect can, and should, have no effect on the rest of our pluralistic society.
That leaves the “why take chances?� crowd. The underlying notion there is that government is justified in censoring forms of expression that MAY cause harm, or that simply CONTRIBUTE to a group’s inequality.
That’s a view I cannot agree with. Freedom of expression has no meaning if it’s used to protect popular ideas only, or if it serves the interests of everyone equally. Unpopular, discriminatory, even outright bigoted ideas likewise deserve protection from the hand of government. That’s why we have public-opinion blogs, for example, like the one we’re posting on right here.
By Jack
January 17, 2006 01:39 PM | Link to this
I doubt that Kim. You ain’t no ice-princess. :)
By Just Being Me
January 17, 2006 01:43 PM | Link to this
Hey there, Everybody!
I think Jack hit the nail on the head with his 10:26a.
Y’all have a nice day, now.
By Scalia
January 17, 2006 01:43 PM | Link to this
Porn does not make somebody want to run out and do bad things. Some of the stuff that I’ve seen grosses me out beyond belief. Spit isn’t meant for everything, or usage. And some things weren’t meant to go in some places.
To be honest, I am more offended by somebody getting their head cut open by CDs (He!!raiser 3), and having their bald head bitten into by a vampire and stuff flying out of their head (The Lost Boys) than porn.
By The72John
January 17, 2006 01:45 PM | Link to this
Scalia, don’t go messing with The Lost Boys!
Brain Curtis - you are my new hero.
By Renee
January 17, 2006 01:47 PM | Link to this
heyyyyy JBM
By kimberly
January 17, 2006 01:48 PM | Link to this
The Lost Boys were all HOT. One of them later went on to work for the government, in a counter-terrorist unit. That one is REALLY hot.
By Netbanker
January 17, 2006 01:56 PM | Link to this
BTW…I WAS talking about real oysters. Family tradition is to have them as appetizers for Thanksgiving Dinner. I can recall sitting outside in the cold with my Grand Daddy while he shucked the oysters and put them on a tray of ice to keep them fresh for dinner. Of course, we always had to test a few out to make sure they met our quality standards.
By The72John
January 17, 2006 02:06 PM | Link to this
Kimberly…I don’t know how to break this to you…but Keiffer Sutherland was neither really a vampire, nor does he actually work for a counter-terrorist organization…
;-)
He is kinda hot, though.
By Scalia
January 17, 2006 02:09 PM | Link to this
Um…Michael Patric, Michael from the Lost Boys. Now he is hot.
Does anybody remember the song with the children singing? “Thou shalt not…”
By blablabla
January 17, 2006 02:10 PM | Link to this
does anybody else hate president logan? what a loser.
By Jack
January 17, 2006 02:10 PM | Link to this
Hot is in the eye of the beholder.
By kimberly
January 17, 2006 02:17 PM | Link to this
Scalia, was that song titled “Cry little sister?”
Yes, Logan is a whiny loser.
By useless info dept
January 17, 2006 02:20 PM | Link to this
The song you refer to, Scalia, is “Cry Little Sister” by Gerard McMann. I used to crank that tune along with a ton of Nick Cave & the Bad Seeds around Halloween during my days as a campus bus driver at UGA.
Speaking of which, it’s about time someone tackles the really important issue with porn (and far and away the most offensive part of porn) — the awful music! Please! Can’t we just have a natural soundtrack without the hiddeous circa-70’s faux-funk crapola? It’s totally killing the mood for me, seriously.
By Renee
January 17, 2006 02:24 PM | Link to this
It’s better than those low budget black porn. The straight ones are on dirty mattresses in junky apartments, the lesbian ones, the women look real “interesting” to say the least. There se