la1985

What about the double standard of feminists? It is OK for the high priestess of feminism to salivate over adolescent males and for leabians to have lurid articles and photos of women, yet there is feminist tut-tutting about young men looking at Playboy.

Sp why won't the sky fall down when feminists appreciate nude bodies?

There is nothing wrong with the depiction of women in Playnoy (although it is not a subscribe to) and frankly I think that most (alleged) pornography is not unhealthy for men and women consumers.

So to summarise, my objection to the article is that the author is targetting men, otherwise she would choose the myriad of examples much closer to home and consumed by women, not just by young men.

As for models, well from all accounts both male and female models have chosen the employment, quite like the work and get paid. So what? There is nothing wrong with artistic or erotic depictions of mena and women.

However I draw the line at extreme stuff which is favoured by some women and some men. Greer's book (The Boy) is offensive not because of what is included in it but for the her motivations in putting it together.

Were you not offended by her descriptions of her interest in young boys? Didn't you get creepy goosebumps from rteading what she had to say? Did you wonder why feminists didn't take Greer to account for exploiting the boys? Were you concerned that she was doing to the boys what she has oft (wrongly) accused all men of doing?

The word pornography obviously means different things to different people. Is artistic nudity pornographic? Michaelangelo's David for example, or paintings depicting feminine nudity? In the US, there are many examples of genuine artistic nudity being condemned and banned. Is Australia going to go down the same stupid path? These days, photography is cheaper and easier than painting or sculpture, but surely the same concepts apply.

I don't regard a photo of a nude girl as necessarily unacceptable in any way. Or a male nude either, for that matter. It's natural for human beings to admire what they regard as beauty. A landscape or seascape. A mountain, a river or a tree. A fine looking dog or horse. Or a healthy looking, attractive human being, especially a person of the sex which the observer feels drawn to.

But when religion comes into it, we have nonsense like if someone merely has a passing thought about another person being desirable, then that is the same as actually having sex with them.

I was called up in 1952, at the time of the Korean War and spent a couple of years in the Royal Navy. At one time I had a bikini clad Gene Tierney [US film actress] poster inside my locker door. Did that make me a prospective predator?

In 1947, my elder sister, who was a glamourous sort of woman, made herself a bikini. Bikinis weren't on sale in England then, but we could see photos of girls wearing them in European magazines. Horror of horrors! Maybe even on sale at service stations! She had a series of photos taken in her bikini and sent them to her fiance who was then in the British Army. No-one in the family saw this as a problem, in fact I remember my mother referring to the photos as my sister's "come hither" series.

OK, I'm talking about girls in bikinis and not nude, but over 50 years ago some people regarded that as pornographic. I still recall Catholic priests telling girls not to wear them, as if it were any of their business.

Rex if the choir boys wore them,at least half of the priests would have then approved.

Rex "Did that make me a prospective predator?" if you read the article it's even worse than that

"The soldiers are complicit in the international trafficking of women for sex."

Not only were you a prospective predator, you were apparently doing some sex slave trading on the side. It's a wonder you found time for your Navy duties what with getting to auctions and all the other work associated with the slave trade. (Note - I'm not serious in case anybody does not get it).

On the other hand it's more likely you were like most people who enjoy looking at attractive people, you respected the rights of others to make their own choices, have never dealt with any kind of slavery nor been a customer of anyone involved in the sex slave business.

Don't panic, the former scenario has a lot to do with the authors issues and nothing to do with your choices.

R0bert

Another article on OLO http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=4845 on the benefits of pornography raises some interesting questions.

If the points made are valid then is Barbera in some way culpable in the rape of women for her stance against porn - she suggests that porn users are culpable for the sex slave trade so the question is not unreasonable.

There may be other factors but the idea's in that article are worth consideration.

R0bert

Marilyn Shepherd “Col, the women in the photos were not giving their consent for thugs in Iraq to use them as objects.”

The women in the photos almost certainly signed off on a copyright release before they were paid for the photo-shoot.

In accepting payment for the photos (selling themselves for a price) is what defined them as “objects”, not how the pictures were displayed or used by Aussie soldiers.

“The problem is you are all hypocrites.”

And you along with Tankard Reist are deluded feminist ideologues who seem to think that men need to change to fit in with your expectations.

Well the world just ain’t like that, so get used to it or get off.