|
Grex > Coop8 > #10: Web-Page Building on Grex |  |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 382 responses total. |
raven
|
|
response 275 of 382:
| 
Feb 1 04:04 UTC 1996 |
Uh can we get back to the web page discussion? What bothers
me about saying that the Brandy story is obscene is that I'm sure if there
were a very violent story posted there wouldn't be any cry to remove the
violent story. Now I think most psychologists would say that there is
far more proof that exposure to violence is damaging to children v.s.
exposure to sexual content. Why then are certain people calling for
the removal of sexual content from Grex? Is it to appease the christian
right? If so I think that is very sad. Certainly there are no *laws*
against indecent content yet on the books or the alt.sex usenet groups
would have been closed down long ago. There may be a law against "idecent"
content on the net if the telecom bill passes, lets worry about whether
we are going to censor Grex if that comes about, and not beofre it becomes
law.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 276 of 382:
|
Feb 1 06:29 UTC 1996 |
I keep wondering (and saying) the same thing.
|
adbarr
|
|
response 277 of 382:
|
Feb 1 11:39 UTC 1996 |
It may come sooner than you think, according to current news broadcasts
and Farnet.
|
srw
|
|
response 278 of 382:
|
Feb 1 19:57 UTC 1996 |
Why do you think the author of the Brandy story insisted that if you were
underage you shouldn't be reading it? Because people believe that.
I believe it. I don't want grex to be alt.sex.usenet, and I don't want grex
to be the place to come to for sex stories. I think it is wrong to put sex
stories where children can see them. If Grex is going to insist on doing that,
parents will continue to insist that their children not use Grex.
I know some people who are not members of the religious right, they strongly
disagree with the religious right in fact, but they believe that children
should not have access to explicit sexual content until they have the proper
guidance to understand it.
I believe that by placing "Brandy" on the net we are trampling the rights of
the parents of those children.
|
kerouac
|
|
response 279 of 382:
|
Feb 1 22:43 UTC 1996 |
But by disallowing Brandy on the net, you would also be trampling the
rights of the parents of those children as consenting adults.
|
raven
|
|
response 280 of 382:
|
Feb 1 23:56 UTC 1996 |
re # 278 You haven't addressed the violence issue yet, I'm not
kidding about it, do you have problems with violent stories on Grex?
I think stories about violence i.e. those that portray pain, suffering,
and death are far more problematic than those that portray sex which is
a celebration of life. Violent portrayals of sex are I think objectionable
because of the violence, not because of the sex.
In either case I do not support censorship i.e. asking people to
remove their web pages. I would be more comfortable with staff perhaps
sending e-mail to a web author to consider the effects of a violent
story on a small child v.s. the author of a sexualy explicit web page.
|
adbarr
|
|
response 281 of 382:
|
Feb 2 00:31 UTC 1996 |
Raven, I don't get the picture? If sex is a celebration of life and
cannot/should not be censored, that is an opinion. Violence, pain, suffering,
torture, war crimes, death are all part of this world, almost as pervasive
as sex. Bosnia is just a recent example. Rawanda comes to mind. Bombings
in Sri Lanka. Why should we be protected against truthful or fictional
portrayals of what is going on every day in the world. How do you distinguish
the role of the parents? Would you usurp their role in cases of sex, but
join forces in cases of violence? You are confusing me.
|
scott
|
|
response 282 of 382:
|
Feb 2 02:27 UTC 1996 |
As far as I know, there haven't been any violence stories on Grex webpages
yet.
Isn't it supposed to be "Brandi", not "Brandy"?
|
robh
|
|
response 283 of 382:
|
Feb 2 05:58 UTC 1996 |
(Shh, keep telling them it's "brandy", that way if the
story ever reappears nobody will be able to download it. >8)
It was indeed "Brandi".
|
raven
|
|
response 284 of 382:
|
Feb 2 06:30 UTC 1996 |
re #281 I don't think *either* violent or sexual content should be
censored, I am just making the point that IMO violence is more offensive
than sex. I am just saddened that there are many people on Grex who seem
to be jumping on the bandwagon of neo-victorian anti-sexual hysteria.
Would someone give a rational non-legal argument as to why a film like
say Terminator 1 is less offensive than erotica that portrays life
affirming love making? I guess the values of the "moral majority" are
truely puzzling to me.
BTW the Telecom bill has passed both the House and Senate and will
be signed into law very soon, so this is no longer a hypothetical
issue. :-(
Will Grex soon be in the business of censoring web pages with
quotes by James Joyce, Allen Ginsburg and Anais Nin. Is the countries
intellectual development really regressing back to the 1950s? Will
Grex just take it laying down?
<set rant=off>
|
janc
|
|
response 285 of 382:
|
Feb 2 06:44 UTC 1996 |
Fact is, pictures and stories with lots of sexual content are pervasive
on the net. Pictures and stories with violent content really aren't.
That's why one is more worth talking about than the other.
There is a broad consensus in our society that distributing this kind of
sexual material to children is inappropriate. I personally think such
a stance is stupid, because we are telling children something about sex
by hiding it from them, and that message promotes a very unhealthy attitude
about sex. However, although I personally don't think sexual material
should be hidden from children (as opposed to material that depicts violence
as a problem-solving method), I don't think that opinion gives me, or Grex,
the right to distribute pornography to children. We are members of a larger
society and we draw benefits from being members of that community. We need
to come reasonably close to playing by its rules. To say "I don't think
pornography is bad, so I'm going to show it to your kids," is arrogant. If
you don't think pornography is bad, show it to your own kids, or work to
convince other parents to think your way.
That's where I think we are at here. Our opinions about pornography are
irrelevant to the issue. We still have to uphold something resembling
community standards, however undefined that term is.
Well, the CDA is about to become the law. Clinton, the dink, is going to
sign it. The next bloody battle will be in the courts.
|
raven
|
|
response 286 of 382:
|
Feb 2 07:10 UTC 1996 |
Fuck community standards. Community standard did the jews a lot
of good in Germmany in the 1930s-40s. Sometimes you have to take a stand
outside of what your society expects from you. Read a transcript of the
Nuremburg trials to get a clear idea of what I am talking about.
|
adbarr
|
|
response 287 of 382:
|
Feb 2 12:54 UTC 1996 |
Janc said it well. Raven, with all due respect, you are mixing incompatible
issues here. Freedom is not license. You might be able to handle the sexual
content of a book or a web-site. Others, just as reasonalble, may believe
their children could not keep such protrayals or depictions in proper
perspective. Why do we want to disregard their interests? They do have
interests, whether we personally agree with the implications or not. I posit
this to you: sexual maturity and understanding is not as simple as you
have implied and many parents wish to guide their children to better and
more positive understandings. How can we judge them?
|
remmers
|
|
response 288 of 382:
|
Feb 2 13:18 UTC 1996 |
They seem quite ready and willing to judge *us*...
|
rcurl
|
|
response 289 of 382:
|
Feb 2 16:35 UTC 1996 |
Which leads to what has been said before: parents that don't want their
children to have access to "mature" subject matter should take steps
to do that, and parents that have no such inhibitations should not be
subjected to the same actions.
|
janc
|
|
response 290 of 382:
|
Feb 2 16:37 UTC 1996 |
So Raven, how about we print out a couple thousand copies of "Brandi," go to
the local elementry schools, and start passing them out to kids? Let's assume
we are stealthy and don't get caught. Would you honestly consider this
appropriate behavior for an organization?
|
janc
|
|
response 291 of 382:
|
Feb 2 16:41 UTC 1996 |
Rane slipped in. How would you advise parents to go about preventing their
children from accessing sexual material on Grex? Stand over the kid watching
what he does every moment? Ban him from using the computer at all? Isn't
it appropriate for Grex to provide some way for parents who don't want
their children exposed to sexual material to still allow their children
to use Grex?
|
raven
|
|
response 292 of 382:
|
Feb 2 17:26 UTC 1996 |
I have to agree with Rane if parents are so concerned it seems
like they have to take the responsibility to monitor their kids use
of computers. We are not a baby sitting service. We are one of the
finest discussion boards in the world. Why does it fall on us to limit
topics of conversation for people we don't agree with? There is ofcourse
the legal threat, but cowardice in the face of tyranny is *always* a weak
response.
|
scott
|
|
response 293 of 382:
|
Feb 2 19:48 UTC 1996 |
It's going to fall on us because the law will say that we *have* to
be a babysitting service.
|
kerouac
|
|
response 294 of 382:
|
Feb 3 01:08 UTC 1996 |
does somebody have the Brandy story in their home directory? I'm
curious to read it and see what the fuss is all about.
|
robh
|
|
response 295 of 382:
|
Feb 3 01:30 UTC 1996 |
Nope, I try to keep my directory under one megabyte. >8)
|
ajax
|
|
response 296 of 382:
|
Feb 3 09:10 UTC 1996 |
Jan, I don't think it's appropriate to hand out sex stories
on a playground. However, I consider that very different
from providing Internet access to sex stories to those who are
interested.
Dharma, from what I read of it, the Brandi story itself was
nothing special, just a story about various people having sex.
It was quite long...I skimmed through maybe 10% of it, and
things were still just warming up. I don't think reading it
is important to see why it raised this fuss.
|
srw
|
|
response 297 of 382:
|
Feb 3 22:00 UTC 1996 |
I don't see any difference between handing out sex stories on a playground
and putting them on a world wide web server.
|
adbarr
|
|
response 298 of 382:
|
Feb 3 22:43 UTC 1996 |
Or offering them in your local drugstore.
* raven -- no one is a coward in this discussion. Calm down a bit.
|
kerouac
|
|
response 299 of 382:
|
Feb 3 23:07 UTC 1996 |
The difference SRW is that if you are handing them out on a
playground you are encouraging kids to read them. Offering them on a
web server or on-line service is not giving anything directly to them.
Playboy and Penthouse are sold at Borders, kids shop at borders and
could look at the magazines, but they arent being forced or encouraged to.
What someone does with information is their own business, you cant
make moral judgements about people who provide info, only on those who
misuse what is provided.
|