[PLUG-TALK] Porn on the Net...

Aaron ke7ezt at gmail.com
Tue Oct 27 21:22:12 UTC 2009


Have you worked in the adult industry to know if there is free choice or
not?  I haven't--I have no idea what it's like. But I know that I have the
freedom of choice to choose if I'm going to watch or not.

As for the abuse..everyone does have a choice about abusing something.  No
addiction isn't usually a choice per se, but the abuser can get help to give
them more options. Rather than saying alcohol is bad and should be banned
and ruining it for everyone else.  Just because one person has a problem
doesn't mean everyone else does.

aaron at kalosaurusrex:~$
Discere docendo - To learn through teaching.
Libera Te Tutemet - You, free yourself.




On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 14:20, Aaron <ke7ezt at gmail.com> wrote:

> Still it comes down to..if you don't like pornography don't look at it.
> Everyone has the right to make the moral judgements of what is right for
> them and their lives. Regardless if we approve or disapprove.  Like I said,
> I'm not a fan of porn in general. Although I have looked at it in the past
> and on rarely from time to time.  People choose to participate in making it
> for some reason or another others view it.  If everyone believed it was bad
> then it wouldn't even happen. But we live in America and everyone has
> different views and can express them.  I do believe that it's not healthy
> when in a relationship and I think too much of anything can be bad.  It
> really depends on how you look at it. I'm 100% sure that many people can
> look at porn and not turn other people into objects. and I'm sure there are
> some people that do.  I don't think that assuming everyone is effected the
> same way is correct.  People have different reactions and thoughts.  But it
> still comes down to people have to make the choice that works best for their
> lives.  If they feel it is bad, don't look at it.  If enough people aren't
> interested it would just fade away--capitalism at it's best.  Porn has been
> around as long as humans have existed and as a society things are much
> better than 100 years ago. I don't believe that porn is the evil that will
> some how destroy everything.  If you don't like it, don't look for it.
> Simple as that.  It is natural for humans to be attracted humans.  Sex is
> not some horrible thing. It's just part of the human experience.
>
> In the end it's up to the person to choose what's right for them and their
> morals.
>
> As for the God bit, you can express your thoughts but you can't speak for
> God.  Everyone has to choose what they want to believe and what is okay for
> them in their lives.  The rest is between them and whatever deity they
> believe in.  We are given free choice for a reason. We live in a country of
> freedom that was designed to be so.  Even if we don't always agree with
> someone's choice it's theirs to make.
>
>
> aaron at kalosaurusrex:~$
> Discere docendo - To learn through teaching.
> Libera Te Tutemet - You, free yourself.
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 13:58, Michael Robinson <plug_1 at robinson-west.com>wrote:
>
>> Consenting adults?  Pornography has nothing to do with "consenting"
>> adults.  With Net pornography, one is never talking about just 2 people
>> in a private encounter.  If someone manipulating your base desires
>> so that you want something you wouldn't otherwise want is consent,
>> then consent doesn't mean much.
>>
>> As far as the Sarah Palin comment Jeme, that was a stupid response.
>> Selling of children in Alaska to the porn industry does happen,
>> but Sarah Palin is obviously not one of the people selling.
>> That is right up there with me saying that Obama is a terrorist.
>>
>> Let's play with this consent idea, because clearly it is being used
>> as an excuse to not do anything about porn among other things.  If
>> you consent to being murdered, is it okay for a person to kill you?
>> When the interest rate on your credit card spiked, did you say that's
>> okay because I consented to it?  If we are talking about addictive
>> agents, doesn't consent kinda go out the window?  People who are
>> addicted to something don't pursue it out of consent, they are driven
>> by addiction.  If they don't get it for a decent length of time, that
>> weakens the addiction.  This is why alcoholics shouldn't drink and
>> pot heads shouldn't smoke.  People addicted to Internet porn shouldn't
>> look at any for as long as possible.
>>
>> As far as the you are healthy if you don't want to look at Internet porn
>> comment, that is ridiculous.  Porn on the Net is designed to be
>> desirable in a highly addictive way.  It isn't healthy to be into porn
>> because it impairs ones ability to form quality relationships and it
>> robs sexuality of it's beauty.  The human psyche isn't made for Porn,
>> we are not meant to look at random people and lust after them.  It is
>> easy to do though if you feel alone, depressed, or you have been
>> sexually abused by someone.
>>
>> In the war on drugs, there is a lot of emphasis on teaching people to
>> leave drugs alone.  Thing is, you have to target the supply or you'll
>> never win this war.  The suppliers of porn on the Internet need to be
>> targeted.  A lot of the "models" on porn sites are forced into it.
>> Porn on the Net needs to be regulated so that free samples are no more.
>> It's not reasonable for sites to display porn without attempting in any
>> way to warn people, which is another thing that should be enforced.
>>
>> Pornography is degrading and abusive.  It reduces sexuality to an
>> exercise in lusting after a picture of someone.  Pornography abuses
>> the model and the viewer.  People because of porn become objects of
>> desire instead of people.  To say healthy people don't look at
>> porn and dismiss the idea that something should be done to reduce
>> the amount of porn on the Net is ridiculous.  Anything that depicts
>> sex as mere recreation is degrading.
>>
>> I'm shocked that people don't bother to respond to the initial post
>> for literally days and then respond poorly.  A just say no campaign
>> in regards to porn is advisable, but if the war on drugs has taught
>> us anything it's that a just say no campaign isn't nearly enough.
>> Curiosity is a powerful thing and porn is very addictive.  Even if
>> you are looking at porn for say 20 minutes instead of an hour or
>> longer, you are still there for 20 minutes.  It's easy to say that
>> porn is harmless if you don't pay for it, but that's not true.
>> Someone is abusing their sexuality for you to have a picture to look
>> at.  If nobody wanted to look at the picture, it's less likely that
>> the person would be involved in producing it.  We can all deny that
>> we are addicted to porn on the Net by saying I only see it
>> occasionally and that is as often as I see it.  For some of us that
>> will be true, but not all of us.  The alcoholic never admits to
>> having a drinking problem.  The pot head insists that it's harmless.
>>
>> I'm not pushing for an outright ban on Internet pornography.
>> I'm pushing for a ban on free Internet pornography.  To say
>> that a just say no campaign is sufficient is ludicrous.
>> I must emphasize, pornography is never truly free.  By
>> viewing Internet pornography, you are involved with it being
>> produced in the first place by offering an audience.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> PLUG-talk mailing list
>> PLUG-talk at lists.pdxlinux.org
>> http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-talk
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.pdxlinux.org/pipermail/plug-talk/attachments/20091027/4d0c77ad/attachment.html>


More information about the PLUG-talk mailing list