![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Stupid, stupid, stupid.
Protection from Pornography Week?!?!?
I don't.... understand...
But I'm glad there's a showing of Rocky tomorrow. It'll feel good to shove a symbolic stick up this proclamation's ass and say SEX IS A BEAUTIFUL THING! BEING SEXY IS NOT SHAMEFUL! If pornography is harmful to a relationship, there was something wrong with that relationship already that should be dealt with. What's next? Laws forbidding the exposure of a navel or shoulder in public? Classification of the female orgasm as a mental disorder?
Pornography, in my opinion, doesn't by itself objectify women. Pornography shows off human sexuality, yes, and I think that both the male body and the female body are attractive. The problem is that the ones who pay for the majority of porn prefer to ogle simply the female form, and by simple economics, more female porn is produced. Honestly, take a look around the Louvre. There's a bunch of paintings and statues of naked women, in some pretty lewd poses by the standards of the day. There are actually depictions of PEOPLE HAVING SEX! Even some gods! This is art, this is a celebration of the beauty of the human body!
Honestly, people, if you're going to say that God created Man in his image, you might as well take some pride in that image.
Maybe sometime tonight I'll take a trip to Sensations to buy some porn in protest. I won't show it in the lounge, but I might in my room. Anyone with me?
click
I don't.... understand...
But I'm glad there's a showing of Rocky tomorrow. It'll feel good to shove a symbolic stick up this proclamation's ass and say SEX IS A BEAUTIFUL THING! BEING SEXY IS NOT SHAMEFUL! If pornography is harmful to a relationship, there was something wrong with that relationship already that should be dealt with. What's next? Laws forbidding the exposure of a navel or shoulder in public? Classification of the female orgasm as a mental disorder?
Pornography, in my opinion, doesn't by itself objectify women. Pornography shows off human sexuality, yes, and I think that both the male body and the female body are attractive. The problem is that the ones who pay for the majority of porn prefer to ogle simply the female form, and by simple economics, more female porn is produced. Honestly, take a look around the Louvre. There's a bunch of paintings and statues of naked women, in some pretty lewd poses by the standards of the day. There are actually depictions of PEOPLE HAVING SEX! Even some gods! This is art, this is a celebration of the beauty of the human body!
Honestly, people, if you're going to say that God created Man in his image, you might as well take some pride in that image.
Maybe sometime tonight I'll take a trip to Sensations to buy some porn in protest. I won't show it in the lounge, but I might in my room. Anyone with me?
click
no subject
That's right, we'd be inches away from those dirty foreigners who don't even know how to deny their poor people health care and other basic social services. Look at the moral degradation! I'll be damned if I let my country fall to that level.
< /sarcasm >
In all seriousness though, I am kind of glad that this protection week thing isn't limited to "Marriage Protection Week." It does kind of make you wonder what Bush has against sex though. Suppose somebody cut off his penis when he was a little boy? I think that could explain his attitude.
no subject
Honestly, if Dubya wants to "protect" marriage with one hand, and protect those who are married from the saving grace of some marriages...
... I think he's nuts.
But I'd really rather not think about his nuts, because that isn't pr0n.
no subject
no subject
no subject
But yes, there are definitely bits in there that are too broad (so to speak).
I'd be up for a Sensations run. I also hear it's on the way to Denny's. Pr0n and greasy food: a winning combination! Or something.
*exposes shoulder*
no subject
no subject
no subject
> and say SEX IS A BEAUTIFUL THING! BEING SEXY IS NOT SHAMEFUL!
That's your lifestyle choice, then; you celebrate your sexuality in a free, expressive fashion. On the other hand, a great many societies on this planet restrict displays of sexuality in some form or other, usually by wearing clothes. It is possible to believe in the beauty of the human body, and yet choose to reveal that body only in select circumstances.
That being said, Protection from Pornography Week is obviously not for you, and I would have a serious problem with it if it placed any restrictions upon you.
I really do have a problem with child pr0n . . . I'm also nonplussed with the prospect of children accidentally discovering pr0n. I think a certain level of maturity is required to make the choice you've made, and that pre-pubescent children aren't there yet.
> There's a bunch of paintings and statues of naked women, in some
> pretty lewd poses by the standards of the day.
True, though a lot of paintings and statues of naked women have choice bits covered. The trend seems to favor the concealment of those parts of the body that truly *signify* sexuality--again, it is a gift that may or may not be given freely.
no subject
no subject
It's a telling mark of what is considered proper and customary public exposure by the artist and the exhibitors. (By "exhibitors", I meant of the painting/scuplture, not the original model). Frankly, if an exhibitor thinks that a particular piece of art is too open for the exhibitor's tastes and the culture's tastes, the exhibitor can either not display it, modify it (a prospect of which I'm not exactly happy, especially if the artist is not alive to give permission), or put up a TMI filter--which may not be an available option.
no subject
And as nobody is forced to view porn, and in general nobody is forced to make porn, then why do people need to be protected from it? I agree that the child porn issues are important ones, but if they are the main focus of this as the proclamation is trying to suggest, then why isn't it "Protection from Child Pornography Week" or something?
There's a sort of implication in the title that your average adult doesn't have the capacity to make their own decisions about something, and therefore need others to protect them from it. That's what I find the most dangerous about this.
All that said, it does concern me somewhat that quite a number of folks in the sex industry and pornography industry aren't there because that's what they really want to do or be (though some certainly are) but because they need the money to accomplish other things (basic necessities, or paying for school, or supporting their family). In that sense, I find it problematic that some people might be compelled to do things or act in ways that they really wouldn't want to if their pornography were really a product of free sexual expression. But I don't think that's a morality issue, so much as a failure to help people who need it.
do have a problem with child pr0n . . . I'm also nonplussed with the prospect of children accidentally discovering pr0n. I think a certain level of maturity is required to make the choice you've made, and that pre-pubescent children aren't there yet.
With respect to children accidently discovering porn, I'd like to remark that porn was actually quite instrumental to me being able to figure out some important sexuality issues that were causing me significant trouble when I was a kid. And we're talking age 12 to 14ish here. I dunno if you'd count that as pre-pubescent or not (maybe the assumption is that having those kinds of desires implies sufficient age). While one might argue that pornography would increase sexual activity, I would suggest that having pornography as an outlet to understand and express my desires actually prevented me from going out and doing something really stupid like getting involved with someone a lot older than me.
And while perhaps some young children really are traumatized by accidental viewing of pornography at a very young age (though I've never heard of a case), I have at least a little anectotal evidence that there are people who it didn't make one bit of difference to. It was just, "Huh? Those people are naked... that's wierd..." and it wasn't until they were older and understood a bit about sex and sexual desire that they really realized what they had seen when they were younger. So yeah.
no subject
no subject
On another note, I believe pride is one of the deadly sins, yes?
no subject
And I don't think pride is a sin - is it really wrong to take due credit for your accomplishments? - but I do think arrogance is. It's a thin line, and I'm not trying to hint that you've crossed it.
I guess a second post is in order, clarifying my position with rationality.
no subject
Force others to abide by moral stances that the others don't subscribe to, no.
no subject
So my real point here is that sex and naked bodies and whatever else are beautiful because of the emotions and intimacy behind it. Most mainstream porn does not highlight love, intimacy, or anything emotional. This is unfortunately due to the audience that the industry is trying to cater to... people who don't care about the beauty of making love. I'm not saying that people who watch porn don't care about it, I'm just saying that the industry doesn't cater to that idea.
Honest, I'd watch romantic porn if I could find it, but I've been sorely disappointed. I don't have a problem with porn or people watching it. It's their own choice, and if they are able to get something out of it, more power to them. I just don't think you can compare the mainstream stuff to art which is celebrating the beauty of the human body. I just don't see most porn as doing that.
(As I final note, does anyone have any suggestions for beautiful romantic stuff? I've never been able to find any.)
no subject