Subject:
|
Re: More LP S P A M : (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 13 Jul 2001 09:33:18 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1111 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
>
> > > I think pornography is a good tool for parents to demonstrate sex when
> > > they're too shy to do so in person.
> > >
> > > It sounds like Scott objects to the commission of certain acts or
> > > certain production aspects of popular pornography. I certainly agree that
> > > children shouldn't be subjected to bad porn. But if they can keep their
> > > story line together, what's the problem?
> >
> > The stereotypical porn movie is demeaning to woman.
>
> How so? Consumer demographics are highly male. Thus, the adult cinema is
> geared toward the satisfaction of male sexual fantasy and desire. To whatever
> extent the activities depicted are less than perfectly representitive of norml
> life (that is the point, after all) they will be geared to appeal to men,
> rather than women. But I'm not sure about it being demeaning in any analysis.
>
> > If I were to teach
> > anyone sex education, it would be more than a functional analysis.
>
> By this, do you mean that it would include a functional analysis and then some?
> Or do you mean, that like most sex ed, it would completely neglect the
> functional analysis? (I'm assuming that functional analysis means the
> mechanics of the thing; "you put this part here and do this with it" etc.)
>
> > Sex
> > education should, at the very least, be in the context some sort of well
> > formed mutual relationship
>
> What exactly does 'well formed' mean? I'm thinking you mean, that they know
> each other well..? Would you assert that it would be somehow improper for me
> to drive to New York City (about an hour away) to visit a sex club where I
> would meet and copulate with strangers? What makes it so? Why does _your_
> vision of what appropriate sex is count more than mine?
>
> > – not a liaison with the plumber. But perhaps
> > Chris was right to call me a prude.
>
> If your plumber is apealing and game, then why not? perhaps so.
>
> > > > > > Perhaps the US's fascination with gun culture would be
> > > > > > lessened if the movies depicted the full horror of what they can do -
> > > > > > rather than depict the usual band-aid type wounds.
> > >
> > > I wish that movies would more acutely depict what happens to societies when
> > > violence becomes the norm. Maybe then, all the personal violence in the UK
> > > would start to recede and you folks would be able to live more safely. I'm
> > > sure glad that I don't have to worry the way y'all must.
> >
> > Trouble maker.
>
> Obviously my goal was to tweak you (in a friendly way), but that doesn't change
> the fact that I am also serious. Since I dug up the statistics published by
> the government of the UK that the chance of being violently victimized is much
> greater over there (England and Wales, actually) than it is here, I've been
> milking it every time someone makes one of their wisecracks about the US gun
> culture.
I expect you mean this:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_810000/810522.stm
It is worth noting that in some areas of the UK tossing a stone at a window
counts as attempted burglary.
Scott A
>
> Chris
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
189 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
