Actually, I only tell fuckwits to shut up. Eminem is a smart guy, so I don't think he should shut up. Marilyn Manson needs to learn how to sing, but I don't think he needs to shut up either. But you aren't useful in the slightest way whatsoever. I don't think anyone would piss on you to put out a fire.
Oh, and the reason I don't go to the mods or Phade is coz I'm not a forum wimp. No-one here intimidates me in the slightest, or makes me feel like I need to run crying to the mods or Phade.
Hatter vs. Tab: The Codec Grudge Match [SPLIT]
-
SS5_Majin_Bebi
- Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2002 8:07 pm
- Location: Why? So you can pretend you care? (Brisbane, Australia)
-
Onideus_Mad_Hatter
- Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2003 4:48 am
- Contact:
ROTFL...you see, he's doing it again! He wants me to "shut up" and yet he keeps reading every lil post I make. Not ONLY that but he keeps trying to explain himself to me! He keeps trying to "make me understand how he REALLY feels".SS5_Majin_Bebi wrote:Actually, I only tell fuckwits to shut up. Eminem is a smart guy, so I don't think he should shut up. Marilyn Manson needs to learn how to sing, but I don't think he needs to shut up either. But you aren't useful in the slightest way whatsoever. I don't think anyone would piss on you to put out a fire.
Oh, and the reason I don't go to the mods or Phade is coz I'm not a forum wimp. No-one here intimidates me in the slightest, or makes me feel like I need to run crying to the mods or Phade.
*snicker*
*makes some popcorn and sits back to watch the show*
*hands some popcorn to Tab. too*
-
SS5_Majin_Bebi
- Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2002 8:07 pm
- Location: Why? So you can pretend you care? (Brisbane, Australia)
-
SS5_Majin_Bebi
- Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2002 8:07 pm
- Location: Why? So you can pretend you care? (Brisbane, Australia)
-
Tab.
- Joined: Tue May 13, 2003 10:36 pm
- Status: SLP
- Location: gayville
Actually,
Ladies and gentlemen of the class, I present to you a moral dilemma. A dilemma that has risen, like so many other things, from the immense progress in communications of the last century. A moral dilemma who's implementation is vast, who's implication is even more so. That dilemma, is porn. More specifically, the illegal exposure of minors to pornographic materials.
Certainly, the credibility of any thing must be ascertained as a whole before it can be ascertained individually, and thus before asking "Should minors have access to porn?" The question must first be answered, "Should anyone have access to porn?". This question seems to leave little grey area, and its poles most often take on the color of liberal relativism or conservative fundamentalism. Moral fundamentalists, especially when under the blanket of religion, argue that porn is wrong. It demoralizes those filmed and corrupts viewers. Moral relativists state that they are incorrect, and base their conclusions on unfounded assumptions and mistruths. Porn is not demoralizing, nor is it corruptive, it is a matter of personal preference. It is up to each person to decide for themselves which opposing viewpoint holds more weight, more truth. I can only present my case, and that is this: Porn should be legally viewable by minors.
Certainly there would be benefits to this for the average teen. However, how might it also cause problems? Some say that the proliferation of porn and extension of it's consumption to minors would fester an already morally wretched sore. Porn is inherently bad, and only allowed because of man's unholy drive for lust. To extend such things to minors would be an abomonation.
This is, quite simply, entirely wrong. There is no atheistic or phenomenalistic reason to believe that porn is morally detrimental or intrinsically bad. Sexual interest is naturally programmed into our very being. It acts as the most essential drive, as the procreator of the species. Whether or not it exists for a recreational purpose is irrelevant and inconclusive; the simple fact is that it is an integral part of our being, and thus clearly reasonable to take interest in. In that way, it is nothing short of natural for one, especially at an adolescent age, to wish to explore sexuality through a medium such as porn.
Many of the opposing viewpoints to this are based severely on stereotypes and unreasoned fundamental concepts. Society is the backbone for taboos, some reasonable, some not. The aversion to porn and otherwise sexually indulgent material comes entirely from our Western upright Christian background. The great discourses of those who once taught tolerance, have since become corrupt issuers of a rigid society's will. The aversion and disgust many feel are nothing more than sociological standards impacted into our being.
Reguardless of this, some still argue that watching porn perverts the viewer, and causes them to become progressively more sexually aggressive, as they become driven to act out the fantasies. Needless to say, this is complete and utter rubbish. Studies linking sexual attacks to pornography have always been highly biased and have always ignored the fact that correlation is not causation. Nothing suggests that porn is a cause of sexual violence, yet studies say that restricting porn causes more sexual crimes, and that porn can prevent violence (Cothran, 54). As the class witnessed firsthand in the case of the Salem trials, it was not the witchcraft that caused the girls' fits, but the social pressures surrounding the witchcraft. So it is here that pornography is not the cause of sexual aggression, instead it is the repression and moral desecration of such interests, that they then manifest negatively. In countries where pornographic material is repressed, rape and sex offenses are markedly higher than in countries that do not regulate porn strictly (Cothran, 52).
I would be inclined to agree. So far as sexual frustration goes, especially among teens, porn does far more good than harm. As one of my interviewees so eloquently put it, "if porn is presented in a certain way to the minor, they can use it as a positive sexual release. Instead of going out and getting a girl pregnant at seventeen, with porn, the worst Jimmy can do is stain the rug in his room." Porn offers a unique outlet to a thing that is largely inaccessible to the majority of teens. In fact, it would appear to contribute to our social structure, as one cannot be a parent at fourteen through eighteen and remain successful in society. Porn offers an alternative to sex during the years that, undeniably, we are ready for it, but society does not allow for it (sex). In a society where an adolescent, naturally curious and seeking sexual experimentation, is repressed from such exploration, it becomes a stress. Were our moral preconceptions banished and the strain of malignancy lifted from the inquisitive adolescent, sexuality would be a far less stressful and cause far fewer problems. It is in my experience that most minors do seek out these materials at some point, if not continually. This observation was confirmed by the interviewees, as well. "Being a minor myself, I'm not going to lie, I look at porn, hey, big deal, I'm sure that every minor looks at porn at least once in their life."
Ladies and gentlemen of the class, I present to you a moral dilemma. A dilemma that has risen, like so many other things, from the immense progress in communications of the last century. A moral dilemma who's implementation is vast, who's implication is even more so. That dilemma, is porn. More specifically, the illegal exposure of minors to pornographic materials.
Certainly, the credibility of any thing must be ascertained as a whole before it can be ascertained individually, and thus before asking "Should minors have access to porn?" The question must first be answered, "Should anyone have access to porn?". This question seems to leave little grey area, and its poles most often take on the color of liberal relativism or conservative fundamentalism. Moral fundamentalists, especially when under the blanket of religion, argue that porn is wrong. It demoralizes those filmed and corrupts viewers. Moral relativists state that they are incorrect, and base their conclusions on unfounded assumptions and mistruths. Porn is not demoralizing, nor is it corruptive, it is a matter of personal preference. It is up to each person to decide for themselves which opposing viewpoint holds more weight, more truth. I can only present my case, and that is this: Porn should be legally viewable by minors.
Certainly there would be benefits to this for the average teen. However, how might it also cause problems? Some say that the proliferation of porn and extension of it's consumption to minors would fester an already morally wretched sore. Porn is inherently bad, and only allowed because of man's unholy drive for lust. To extend such things to minors would be an abomonation.
This is, quite simply, entirely wrong. There is no atheistic or phenomenalistic reason to believe that porn is morally detrimental or intrinsically bad. Sexual interest is naturally programmed into our very being. It acts as the most essential drive, as the procreator of the species. Whether or not it exists for a recreational purpose is irrelevant and inconclusive; the simple fact is that it is an integral part of our being, and thus clearly reasonable to take interest in. In that way, it is nothing short of natural for one, especially at an adolescent age, to wish to explore sexuality through a medium such as porn.
Many of the opposing viewpoints to this are based severely on stereotypes and unreasoned fundamental concepts. Society is the backbone for taboos, some reasonable, some not. The aversion to porn and otherwise sexually indulgent material comes entirely from our Western upright Christian background. The great discourses of those who once taught tolerance, have since become corrupt issuers of a rigid society's will. The aversion and disgust many feel are nothing more than sociological standards impacted into our being.
Reguardless of this, some still argue that watching porn perverts the viewer, and causes them to become progressively more sexually aggressive, as they become driven to act out the fantasies. Needless to say, this is complete and utter rubbish. Studies linking sexual attacks to pornography have always been highly biased and have always ignored the fact that correlation is not causation. Nothing suggests that porn is a cause of sexual violence, yet studies say that restricting porn causes more sexual crimes, and that porn can prevent violence (Cothran, 54). As the class witnessed firsthand in the case of the Salem trials, it was not the witchcraft that caused the girls' fits, but the social pressures surrounding the witchcraft. So it is here that pornography is not the cause of sexual aggression, instead it is the repression and moral desecration of such interests, that they then manifest negatively. In countries where pornographic material is repressed, rape and sex offenses are markedly higher than in countries that do not regulate porn strictly (Cothran, 52).
I would be inclined to agree. So far as sexual frustration goes, especially among teens, porn does far more good than harm. As one of my interviewees so eloquently put it, "if porn is presented in a certain way to the minor, they can use it as a positive sexual release. Instead of going out and getting a girl pregnant at seventeen, with porn, the worst Jimmy can do is stain the rug in his room." Porn offers a unique outlet to a thing that is largely inaccessible to the majority of teens. In fact, it would appear to contribute to our social structure, as one cannot be a parent at fourteen through eighteen and remain successful in society. Porn offers an alternative to sex during the years that, undeniably, we are ready for it, but society does not allow for it (sex). In a society where an adolescent, naturally curious and seeking sexual experimentation, is repressed from such exploration, it becomes a stress. Were our moral preconceptions banished and the strain of malignancy lifted from the inquisitive adolescent, sexuality would be a far less stressful and cause far fewer problems. It is in my experience that most minors do seek out these materials at some point, if not continually. This observation was confirmed by the interviewees, as well. "Being a minor myself, I'm not going to lie, I look at porn, hey, big deal, I'm sure that every minor looks at porn at least once in their life."
◔ ◡ ◔
-
Onideus_Mad_Hatter
- Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2003 4:48 am
- Contact:
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA `, DSS5_Majin_Bebi wrote:The thing is, hatter, your posts give me something to laugh at for a little while, which is the real reason i reply to them. You actually think i give a shit what you say, too, which is just fucking hilarious.
Look at him folks, he's doing it AGAIN!
Oh and yes, Baby, I REALY think you give a shit about what I say...*snicker*...as if I'd ever make the mistake of assuming you HAD enough collective sense to even comprehend anything I've said. LOL ^_^
-
SS5_Majin_Bebi
- Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2002 8:07 pm
- Location: Why? So you can pretend you care? (Brisbane, Australia)
-
SS5_Majin_Bebi
- Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2002 8:07 pm
- Location: Why? So you can pretend you care? (Brisbane, Australia)