Pornography!, Yes Or No?

[4th gen]

I voted 18+. I don't see why pornography should be banished. I don't agree with appearances of porn on this forum though. If people want porn they can look elsewhere.

[CoolMac]

long live porn

[Biggles]

Interesting collection of ideas here, although I disagree with Fugely - I like the prons, the sauce can be bit strange unless it is real mayonaisse.

The depiction of sex and sexual activity appears to have been submerged in discussions relating to criminal acts on minors and exploitation of unwilling models. All aspects of human activity are subject to crime, violence and exploitation. Land is stolen in the third world to grow cash crops. Should we avoid showing children pictures of jars of Nescafe or starving children?

By the time children have reached an age when they wish to look at, for want of a better term, porn, the hormones have exploded and no amount of tutting and moralising will stem their curiosity. Children who have not reached this age will either giggle or say yeuch and move on to the Gundam Wing site they tried to find in the first place. I am not sure I see the connection between static library pictures and predators or inducement to become a porn star. Whilst everybody deplores these things they are not particularly pertinent to the question.

Consequently, I think that sites that display such images should have an opening page stating the contents therin. Nothing more is required. I would not be in favour of random images popping up willy nilly as this is an imposition on those who choose to not look at such things.

As to specific ages, it is difficult to determine. In Scotland 16 year olds can marry without consent of the parents. It would seem rather bizarre to say they are too young to see what they can do in practice.

I don't think this is age issue to be honest. Neither is any protection from exploitation - we all need it, from the granny stuck in the money grasping granny farm, to the poor farmer who finds someone has used dodgy legal means to take his land, to the child in the play park left to play alone.

I do lecture my kids about security and safety on the web but I don't try to police their every activity. I do encourage debate on matters relating to sex, morals, science or religion. There are no "no go" areas and I enjoy finding out what they think without censure and prejudice.

To somehow try to cocoon them till they are 18 seems unnatural to me - but that is simply my opinion and I accept that others might feel very uncomfortable doing anything other than that.

Fugely, I do agree that King Prons are a tad unnerving - neither pron nor lobster, bit like Julian Clary.

[J'Pol]

RUN

[h1]

I have to agree with J'Pol and j2k4. A decision cannot be made the definition of pornography is established.

[Yogi]

Originally posted by j2k4+3 February 2004 - 20:09--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (j2k4 @ 3 February 2004 - 20:09)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by SensualGardening@3 February 2004 - 12:47
<!--QuoteBegin-j2k4

@3 February 2004 - 18:41
Not pointing only at pedophiles, Yogi.

Without getting into it further right now, my point was that NAMBLA seeks a legal backstop for their activity; the activity of predatory priests, while hideous, wasn&#39;t an attempt to take a judicial "end-run" to legality.

Okay.



Still i&#39;d rather deal with sick people trying to get legallity(wich they won&#39;t get), than

the priests etc. who just take that "right" and wanna make us believe how holy they

are........

That was my point.


Yogi

It is difficult to quantify the breech of trust anent the priests.

We should be able to expect certain things to remain sacrosanct.

Priests are human, but they are supposed to be exceptional humans. [/b][/quote]
Not by me, sir&#33;&#33;&#33;

I just hold their offences beyond any other, while they abuse(d )their position as

a.o . priests. I blame the church for covering up for ages.

And please try to write in "english"; Anent and sacrosanct.........


Yogi

[superdude]

Its good to know that my poll was posted and it has really picked up some controversy.

The poll was posted wrong. Nothing like posting youself&#33;

There were some other comments i wanted to add, but i didnt add them when i PM&#39;d bot.

Pornography is explicit pictures or videos of sexual activity, or nudity.
Some consider that nudity is ok. I think so myself. But try to walk around the street naked. Go the nearest Starbucks and see if you will get a coffee served... AH&#33; we dont really agree now? do we?

Oh yeah&#33; i think that i missed some options. There should be a 15+ option.
i that you reach an age where you can handle tougher stuff.
i remember the first porn movie i watched, i was like 13, i was shivering... i dont know why... still, anyway, i got over it. now i laugh when i see that.

They might take you to perversion, the images that is.

Thanks to all replyers&#33;

[Marius24]

Originally posted by superdude@5 February 2004 - 08:08
i that you reach an age where you can handle tougher stuff.
i remember the first porn movie i watched, i was like 13, i was shivering... i dont know why... still, anyway, i got over it. now i laugh when i see that.

yea when i was younger i didnt like watchin bad stuff, but now i find it ok

[evildon]

I would define porn as:

Any depiction of an act that is designed to illict an erotic response upon the viewer.Actual success is not neccessary but motivation is..hence an artwork of a nude is not porn unless the artist himself actually intended to arouse a sexual response from you howere a really bad erotic cartoon is..even if it is so bad that it doesn&#39;t affect you...the intent was there..

wow..thast kinda deep..

i voted for 18+..and I agree thata teen looking at porn is not the end of the world..however if I was a parent and I was trying to brainwash?raise? my kid I would want to be able to have more control on the images he/she might see at a young age espicially if I am trying to instill my own social morales into the minds and souls of my children...

[j2k4]

Originally posted by evildon@6 February 2004 - 01:57
...my kid I would want to be able to have more control on the images he/she might see at a young age espicially if I am trying to instill my own social morales into the minds and souls of my children...

evildon-

Are you aware of the efforts, through legislative and legal means, to prevent you imbuing your children with anything?

It would seem you have the correct idea as to parental responsibility and influence; be advised the liberal establishment has a different assessment as to your role in raising children.