The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > The perils of pornography > Comments

The perils of pornography : Comments

By Peter Sellick, published 18/7/2005

Peter Sellick discusses the values pornography can portray

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. Page 9
  10. 10
  11. All
Di,
I would think a healthy mind is important, and no matter how porn in the adult world is accepted or excused (eg as art, a substitute, an aberration etc), when there is too much porn in the adult world, it tends to overflow down into the world of children.

If someone mentions porn, then many people would think of dirty old men in raincoats, (or boys on buses), but the most common porn in literature by far is with women’s magazines which sell vast quantities. The adult women’s magazines such as Marie Claire have their “younger sister” brands also, such as Girlfriend, Dolly etc.

My daughter’s grandmother kept buying my daughter TotalGirl magazine (which is targeted at the pre-teen girls). One day I finally got her to actually read what was in the magazine, and she immediately stopped buying it, and I would hardly regard that particular grandmother as having a closed mind
Posted by Timkins, Saturday, 6 August 2005 8:42:03 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Suffering from insomnia the other night I watched one of those movies that has Peter Sellers place about six parts. It was set in WWII Paris in a brothel and was full of that awful English, post war slap and tickle attitude to sex. It was pornography in which no body parts were seen but a school boy purile attitude to sex was dominant. The beautiful young maid of the brothel earned her stripes by seducing a Japanese general, much to the amusement of all. I guess it was made in the late 50s or early 60 at the beginning of the sexual revolution in which we found ourselves liberated from Puritanism and prudery. The result was awful kitch in which dreadful acts were passed off as amusing. A differnt kind of porn.
Posted by Sells, Saturday, 6 August 2005 2:35:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I find this a strange article indeed – it actually criticises pornography without suggesting

A How or that it even should be banned

Or

B How it could be improved.

It whines on about the “truth” and suggests “pornography” is some sort of Lie

Sells even says

“The reason we avoid looking at pornography is the same reason we should avoid going to the casino, because we know they represent unreal worlds that are dangerous because they appeal to universal appetites.”

Avoiding or participating in the “temptations” of pornography is the same as the casino – they certainly are – and it is not up to Sells to direct us “libertarians” on our indulgence in either.

Further his responses include “My argument with liberalism is that it takes a stand against any moral position that limits the freedom of the individual as long as nobody gets hurt.”

If no one gets “hurt”– is it any of your business?
What right do you have to criticise the actions of people who hold no fealty to your view or social position?

Sells – FYI I often meet friends for dinner at the casino and never bother to risk a cent on tables or poker machines.

What you might consider “pornographic”, I manage to ingest, by way of both word and image, with modesty and without harm to my psychological well being. (WOW first time I have ever managed to get "pornographic" and "Modesty" into the same sentence)

Having read what you had to say – I find it unimpressive, full of platitudes and devoid of anything of substance or value
Posted by Col Rouge, Tuesday, 9 August 2005 3:01:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Col, pretty much in agreement with you but I am hoping that you have misunderstood Sell's.

Unlike some of his co-faith posters I think Sells does not favor christian rule of law in the land. If I am understanding him he is trying to make us aware of the perils we face in exercising our liberty rather than seeking a change of law.

A legitimate role provided such commentary does not become intrusive (we could have some fun devising warning labels for the covers of pornographic products - excessive use of this product may ?).

I disagree with the accuracy of the findings Sells uses to base his views on. A study over 2000 years old is not a good place to start.

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Tuesday, 9 August 2005 4:01:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Now this is going to offend you, Timkins, but I agree with you. Women's magazines horrify me. The soft porn Sex and the City wannabe stuff is foul. The "Change Your Entire Body to Get a Man" rubbish is worse. But the celeb "Baby Bliss" "Break-up" and "Body Image" triumvirate is virulently pernicious tripe which would be the very first thing I would opt to ban were I (a) in a position to do so, and (b) not inclined to regard censorship on the grounds of taste as the slipperiest of slopes. I trust you don't read Woman's Day, No Idea and the rest of the garbage (and I certainly don't recommend you do so). But the SMH has a feature on "What the Gossip Mags Say" every Wednesday, should you want a taste of what's on offer. It's vile reading, but of a certain macabre anthropological interest. What is published in these scandal-sheets is patronising, cheerfully fictional, and vanishingly petty-minded. And women read it in droves. I look at it and, I fear, occasionally begin to wonder if universal suffrage was such a good idea. Why is there no brain dead equivalent for males which sells in anything like such numbers?
Posted by anomie, Thursday, 11 August 2005 3:46:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
RObert, The bible is hardly a "study 2000years old" it is rather the account of the struggle of one small nation with religion, community, nation, death, suffering etc. It can speak only tangentially on modern subjects of which it had no experience. It is more a map of the human heart than a handbook as is the Quoran. As such it is wonderfully broad as my article on Lot and his daughters makes plain.
Posted by Sells, Thursday, 11 August 2005 4:11:47 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. Page 9
  10. 10
  11. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy