RE: A Porn Primer

RE: A Porn Primer (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

GADomCpl -> RE: A Porn Primer (10/17/2005 3:02:05 PM)
John, Thanks for the run down. I knew about parts of what is going on, but definately didn't know all of that. I am really sad to say, but I can only see things getting worse in the immediate future. I would almost laugh at the idea of bootleg porn and speakeasy play areas if I didn't think it might actually happen eventually. Someone made the comment about us heading closer and closer to the standards set in the middle east, where you can cut off someone's head but can also go to jail for having a copy of Stuff. With the way that the court looks like it will be heading for the foreseeable future, this could be a very long fight. Troy

sjacket -> RE: A Porn Primer (10/17/2005 6:47:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thetammyjo I recommend the book edited by Maureen Harrison and Steve Gilbert entitled "Utterly Without Redeeming Social Value" -- it tracks cases and gives the written up decisions from the US Supreme Court from 1933 to 1998. Another good book is Peter McWilliams' Ain't Nobody's Business If You Do from Prelude Press.

mystictryst -> RE: A Porn Primer (10/17/2005 8:10:05 PM)
Not sure if anyone can answer this, but does anyone know how this relates to laws elsewhere and getting that info via electronic means? If Canada's obscenity laws were such that allowed said obscene material, couldn't these sites that are shutting down just host the site from a Canadian provider? (Or UK, Germany, Asian country) Is it against the law to view or write obscene material? On another note, 1984 is studied in high school here... I read it and wrote my diploma exam on it my last high school year (in Alberta)...

JohnWarren -> RE: A Porn Primer (10/17/2005 8:48:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mystictryst Not sure if anyone can answer this, but does anyone know how this relates to laws elsewhere and getting that info via electronic means? If Canada's obscenity laws were such that allowed said obscene material, couldn't these sites that are shutting down just host the site from a Canadian provider? (Or UK, Germany, Asian country) Is it against the law to view or write obscene material? Actually, the Supreme Court has ruled that mere possession of obscene material in one's own home is not actionable (not including kiddy porn). However, the suppliers can't avoid arrest by having the server in another country when they are present in the US.

Evanesce -> RE: A Porn Primer (10/17/2005 9:09:46 PM)
quote: This doesn't come as much of a surprise, as they pulled all the copies of 1984 out of the county library a couple of years ago, claiming it was brainwashing (ah, the irony) or some such nonesense. This is very interesting, considering that 1984, read with an eye on our world today, is a terrifying tale. The first time I read it, some 30-plus years ago, I thought it was disturbing and didn't think anything like that could ever take place in this country. I read it again a few months ago, and now I'm convinced it's already in progress.

JohnWarren -> RE: A Porn Primer (10/17/2005 10:11:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Evanesce quote: This doesn't come as much of a surprise, as they pulled all the copies of 1984 out of the county library a couple of years ago, claiming it was brainwashing (ah, the irony) or some such nonesense. This is very interesting, considering that 1984, read with an eye on our world today, is a terrifying tale. The first time I read it, some 30-plus years ago, I thought it was disturbing and didn't think anything like that could ever take place in this country. I read it again a few months ago, and now I'm convinced it's already in progress.[/color] For an older, and even more chilling, view, read In Sinclair Lewis's 1935 novel "It Can't Happen Here," a conservative southern politician is helped to the presidency by a nationally syndicated radio talk show host. The politician runs his campaign on family values, the flag, and patriotism. He portrays advocates of traditional American democracy as anti-American. When Windrip becomes President, he opens a Guantanamo-style detention center and makes laws that make it illegal to criticise the president. It's also interesting to read about the psychological experiments by Philip Zimbardo (mock prison) and Stanley Milgram (killing on order from authority figure). These were American college students, not some third world thugs.

NakedOnMyChain -> RE: A Porn Primer (10/18/2005 12:38:09 AM)
quote: This is very interesting, considering that 1984, read with an eye on our world today, is a terrifying tale. The first time I read it, some 30-plus years ago, I thought it was disturbing and didn't think anything like that could ever take place in this country. I read it again a few months ago, and now I'm convinced it's already in progress. Exactly. It's an unfortunate circumstance, as it happens to be one of my favorites. It's interesting though, how looking deeply at books such as "1984", "Anthem", or "Brave New World" we can draw such striking comparisons to our own society.

ExistentialSteel -> RE: A Porn Primer (10/18/2005 3:15:27 AM)
1984 is a good thesis to remember no matter what your political persuasion. Orwell warned of the possibility of Big Brother government, but it doesn’t have to come to pass. I don’t think Orwell foresaw the backlash of those of us who desire freedom and want to run our own lives instead of having things programmed by the state. Political diatribes aside, not many would want to live in Orwell’s Dystopia where there was only one party and one line of thought allowed. Of course the line of thought praised Big Brother and was carefully orchestrated through all components of society.

wipmebeetme100 -> RE: A Porn Primer (10/18/2005 9:06:37 PM)
quote: If Canada's obscenity laws were such that allowed said obscene material, couldn't these sites that are shutting down just host the site from a Canadian provider? I have known some folks who use Canadian providers to host their web sites. They could still be slapped with an obscenity charge because they reside (or do business) in the United States. At least that is how i understand it.

Wolfie648 -> RE: A Porn Primer (10/18/2005 9:57:39 PM)
quote: I don’t think Orwell foresaw the backlash of those of us who desire freedom and want to run our own lives instead of having things programmed by the state. I believe absolutely he did. It was the point of the movie/book. D (owner of j)

JohnWarren -> RE: A Porn Primer (10/19/2005 12:01:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Wolfie648 quote: I don’t think Orwell foresaw the backlash of those of us who desire freedom and want to run our own lives instead of having things programmed by the state. I believe absolutely he did. It was the point of the movie/book. As was his recognition that desire for freedom isn't enough when faced the the repression of the modern state. "The good guys always win" isn't always enough An interesting note was his working title was 1948, the year he was writing and he changed it only at the insistence of his publishers.

frenchpet -> RE: A Porn Primer (10/19/2005 12:25:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JohnWarren An interesting note was his working title was 1948, the year he was writing and he changed it only at the insistence of his publishers. According to what I read, the working title was "The Last Man in Europe". Back in 1943 he had thought about the "Two Minutes' Hate", which now seems prophetic... Let's nuke the others, dammit !

ExistentialSteel -> RE: A Porn Primer (10/19/2005 10:29:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Wolfie648 quote: I don’t think Orwell foresaw the backlash of those of us who desire freedom and want to run our own lives instead of having things programmed by the state. I believe absolutely he did. It was the point of the movie/book. D (owner of j) You are absolutely right. I worded that poorly. Of course he felt that man would rise up against the Dystopian state. It was a warning. It is also interesting that book has almost become a cliche in almost any political philosophical argument.

Morgaine289 -> RE: A Porn Primer (10/20/2005 9:01:34 PM)
There is a press release concerning the topic in the News Section: http://www.collarchat.com/m_185999/tm.htm If this link does not work the title is as follows: NCSF Alert 10-20 You'll want to read this...

McWhips -> RE: A Porn Primer (10/21/2005 2:05:55 PM)
Actually now in the UK they are trying to make it punishable by 3 years in jail and a sex offenders record for viewing 'violent pornography'. No joke.

pinkpleasures -> RE: A Porn Primer (10/21/2005 3:22:19 PM)
quote: In short this is not an easy thing to deal with. The enemy has bottomless pockets, the rules are written to make it easy for them, and most people really don’t care until it is too late. JohnWarren John Warren is correct....i won trials where multi-millions were at stake and a battery of high-priced lawyers opposed me because i represented the regulatory agency and did have endless resources...and we could use other regulatory tools during the litigation...like witholding a rate increase for an insurance company in litigation. The Florida legislature passed various statutes as to what an agency could and could not do without a rule but you could drive a truck through the loopholes and contradictions, and admin judges never ceased jurisdiction. i actually had to reminded i was not there to extinguish the insurance business in Florida, LOL. pinkpleasures

Detmastered -> RE: A Porn Primer (10/21/2005 6:25:37 PM)
I would like to congratulate you all for coming so close to the truth. One moment please......... OK now that the last transaction has been completed and the Republican party now owns the last porn company we can now proceed in making it illegal so we can charge two three four times the price for lower quality products. Welcome to America and us Republicans aren’t really all that bad we just love to make money the old fashion way. Screw someone else for it. Could be worse we could be Democrats who leave there dates drowning in the river while we walk home drunk.

JohnWarren -> RE: A Porn Primer (11/1/2005 10:18:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: McWhips Actually now in the UK they are trying to make it punishable by 3 years in jail and a sex offenders record for viewing 'violent pornography'. No joke. Please cite a source. While the Home Office seems to be going after "violent images" I haven't heard of any potential law similar to what you are stating.

MsDemmie -> RE: A Porn Primer (11/1/2005 1:46:01 PM)
You might like to take a look at the Backlash site - the umbrella group co-ordinating the oppositon to the Proposed new laws. Backlash can be found here http://www.unfettered.co.uk/backlash/index.html There are links to the proposal document - draft responses and letters to MP's. There is also a link the the Smart Group which is co-ordinating responses, research and information. The four areas targeted specifically are " 1. intercourse or oral sex with an animal 2. Sexual interference with a human corpse 3.Serious violence in s sexual context 4.Serious sexual violence. So far requests to the Home Office for clarification on points 3 & 4 have resulted in a " we are unable to comment at this time " - ie we do not know where they are going to draw the line. Kind regards MsDemmie

JohnWarren -> RE: A Porn Primer (11/1/2005 1:50:28 PM)
I checked the site but couldn't find the text for the proposed laws. Don't they have to put them in some sort of written form to submit to Parliament?

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875