dance like this

Google Remains Strong for Their Customers

katerr22 — Mon, 01 May 2006 05:26:49 +0000

I came across a website that further discusses the Bush administration and children viewing porn. Bush calls for major search engines to turn over search data so that the administration can estimate how many times porn is being searched for by children. Upon completion, the administration hopes to “revive a child protection law.” The issues with this is as follows: the administration calls for data from one million random searches, which is obviously a tremendous amount of data to sort through. Not only that, but porn can be searched for under various other names other than porn. Also, as the article mentions, there is no possible way to determine that a child has searched for porn, as “ the data is divorced from user info.” I think the result will be bias, because when conducting research one cannot go looking for something they want to find. Obviously the Bush administration thinks they are going to find a high number of porn searches performed by children, otherwise they wouldn’t seek out this information. In other words, they already have their answer, they just want some data to support it.

This “research” also wavers on the line of privacy issues. Is it an infringement of one’s rights to request information on what they have been looking at online? Of the major search engines, Google has not complied for privacy reasons on part of their customers. The Department of Justice has actually subpoenaed Google to comply to turning over 2 months of search data information in which “ Google stated that to disclose this information would be a betrayal to its customers, which could harm Google’s business. Google said that its search users expect two things from the company: relevant search results and privacy with regard to their queries. The government’s demand ‘would undermine that trust, unnecessarily burden Google, and do nothing to further the Government’s case in the underlying action’.” (digital media asia) Google then goes on to say that the information the government receives from their data will be used to merely support an argument and not used as evidence. I completely agree with Google’s argument, they should not be forced to comply just because the government wants to make a statement, at this point their legislative action remains vague.

Questions for Mr. Lucas

katerr22 — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 05:42:25 +0000

As learned in class, there is a large percentage of male gay porn stars who are straight in “real life.” This was also portrayed by a video clip we watched I believe in an HBO special. Mr. Lucas states that:

“I know my models enjoy their choice because a man cannot fake his sexual pleasure.† If he is aroused, he will have an erect penis.† If he is having an orgasm, he will ejaculate”

The video perceived the message to be that straight men are involved in gay porn because it pays more, and they are by no means aroused by it. If this is the case, how can one say that “a man cannot fake his sexual pleasure?” Obviously, there is some degree of faking; either one’s sexuality or their arousal. Hypothetically, if their arousal is “fake,” ie their erection, is this due to medications like Viagra? Even so, if one is not aroused at all by engaging in gay porn, does a medication like Viagra maintain an erection despite low levels of arousal?

Mr. Lucas also mentions that “gay porn is a great educational tool who have never had sex but are gay, or for a man who wants to try something different.” In his opinion, is straight porn also a great educational tool? Why or why not? Personally, I believe his argument could also be used for the straight porn industry as well.

Other blogs of interest

katerr22 — Sun, 23 Apr 2006 05:41:55 +0000

This blog from right on the right discusses the news that Italian porn star Cicciolina is willing to “give herself” to Osama Bin Laden if he will stop terrorism. The author states that this is just ridiculous, as Osama has 72 virgins promised to him in paradise. What’s even more ridiculous to me is that this 55 yr. old woman believes that a terrorist will end a multi-billion dollar organization with thousands of members, whose sole purpose is creating “positive change,” all for one woman?! Perhaps this is more of a attention grabbing statement than a serious proposition. If terrorism could be so simply solved by giving terrorists porn stars, the world/society as a whole would be pretty backwards.

This blogger, aka “Boogie,” reacted to the Bush’s proposition that “Web site operators posting sexually explicit information must place official government warning labels on their pages or be imprisoned for up to 5 years.” I agree with Boogie that the law is taking it a little far, for example one can be imprisoned for not posting a warning label on a close up of a fully clothed genital region. Boogie pokes a little fun at the proposed law, as he posts a nude picture of a woman, with the following statement that he could be jailed for five years because of it. I believe the law sounds beneficial for child protection laws, although at the same time other major problems of the nation should be addressed. Since this law is something that can be processed rather easily, than let’s say solving the Health Care crisis, more laws such as these are slapped in place, presumably “helping our nation.” I’m not underestimating the positive effect of these laws, and neither is this blogger, however it does reach a point where how much is too much? Is incarcerating people who didn’t post a warning on a porn website really the answer to our problems? Personally it seems like it would act as more of a financial drain on the economy, than reconstructing social values.

The Story Behind Nudists

katerr22 — Mon, 17 Apr 2006 07:33:11 +0000

Nudist colonies/ camps are often seen as obscene, but from the perspective of a nudist they are far from “indecent.” As stated in this article, Americans are fearful of such camps/ colonies because they equate nudity with sex. However the differences between porn and nudist camps, are that they are not sexualized. In fact, one site reports that any public display of sexual activities, will follow with removal from the property. In fact, the website includes nude photos of some of the vacationers, which I found to be slightly odd. Since the photos are not presented in a sexual manner, it is acceptable to post them? What constitutes acceptable nudity versus pornographic images?
From a nudist’s perspective, being naked among other people is seen as a natural state since everyone is born naked. People participate in nudity for various reasons; Wikipedia lists positive health effects as one reason, stating that sunlight and Vitamin D is good for the body. (true, yet I’m sure one can get their daily requirement clothed) Nudity also has positive mental health effects, as some report they feel more accepted regardless of body shape, size, and age.

But what about child nudist camps?
The American Association for Nude Recreation states that “You don’t have to worry so much about where your kids are and what they’re doing. Because you know that they’re at home no matter where they are here, ’cause we are one big family. It’s comforting, it’s relaxing, and we feel that they’re safe.” One would assume that child molesters would run rampant on such properties, but the results of my fruitless searches proved otherwise. I found an article in which a man was found guilty of taking children from a nudist camp and then assaulting them. It can happen, it does happen, although it’s not as prevalent as one would think. Most nudist camps are family oriented, think of it as a regular vacation, only you or the rest of your family are not wearing clothes. Also, due to Megan’s Law, members and potential members are “checked” for history before coming into the camp.“The Sequoians has between 120 and 150 members, and applicants must do more than just clear a sex offender list. “You have to jump through the hoops of going through the board,”(The Village News)

40 minutes of porn a day keeps the doctor away.

katerr22 — Sun, 16 Apr 2006 05:04:37 +0000

Pamela Paul talked about how the average time men spent on the internet looking at porn was 40 minutes. That’s not to say that’s a national average, but the facilitator made it seem like that was a long time. Looking up porn on in the internet is a lengthy process. First one must find a site that either they have want to join and have membership access to, or find a site that they can download enough free clips off. Anyone who has ever looked at porn knows that it’s a trial by error process. Meaning, not every video or photo is appealing, it takes time to find and settle on one that works for an individual. Include the viewing time, and whatever else the person decides to do while viewing it, 40 minutes seems like a very average amount of time. Although I did think Pamela tried to make a point, although somewhat vague; the time spent looking at porn has increased with the introduction of the internet. It would be unlikely for one to thumb through Playboy for a full 40 minutes. Perhaps that is just due to a high quality, literally at your fingertips product. Playboy is also very homogenous in that it’s somewhat safe and predictable. The internet however, provides a much larger array of porn, fetishes, etc. to suit one’s desires. Also, 40 minutes out of one’s day is a small chunk of time, if the average was two hours then she would have a more convincing argument that porn interferes with one’s daily activity.

I also agree with Mary Ann Layden in that children viewing porn increases sexual behavior and shapes their beliefs about sex. If I had children, I couldn’t imagine them watching porn, and yet at the same time I don’t think porn is completely at fault for negative attitudes. Porn may shape beliefs about sex, but as does every other media outlet such as tv, magazines,and ads. Porn is just more graphic than these other forms of media. I remember watching porn at a young age online, and yes it shaped my beliefs about sex to certain extent, but not negatively, or positively for that matter. I’m not saying that parents should condone porn, but if one catches their child watching porn, like the woman that called in, it’s her job as a parent to distinguish right from wrong. With a strong value system, and family support porn won’t necessarily alter perceptions drastically. It’s difficult to make generalizations because each case varies, speaking for myself viewing porn has not had a significant negative impact on how I view sex. In the cases where parents don’t offer support or interact with their children on a regular basis, porn will probably increase the risk of developing certain attitudes about sex. For example, Mary Ann Layden mentioned that some children didn’t know that the internet was used for purposes other than sex. It’s not the porn industries’ fault that those children thought that, the parents or other significant adults in their lives are to blame for not informing their children.

Ban on Sex Toys

katerr22 — Mon, 10 Apr 2006 06:37:38 +0000

Conservative southern states such as Mississippi, Alabama, Texas, and Georgia all have laws in place to prohibit the selling of sex toys. There is a line between pornography and sex toys, and banning such toys seems like an infringement on our freedom as citizens. Porn encompasses countless subtopics, all of which include interaction among people. There is always a producer, actor(s), and the type of porn produced varies film to film, photo, etc. Like for porn, sex toys are used for personal pleasure or with a partner. However, no one is scathed in producing/selling porn. Porn is notorious of pushing limits in the sexual world, legalities are always an issue. So what is the issue with purchasing a vibrator from the store, for some quality, fun in the privacy of one’s home?

According to this website, strip clubs and selling porn were both banned in Alabama, as well as sex toy shops. The harm in selling a vibrator is apparently very risky, as an owner of a sex store was fined $10,000 and to a year of hard labor. The ban is not in effect for possession of, but for selling, although this does make it more difficult for citizens who wish to purchase such toys. If sex toys aren’t seen as a national problem, the ban should be lifted. Who are we to judge what one does in the privacy of their home, as it is not hurting the public.

I was unable to find an argument in favor of the ban, however this issue has been taken to court under various cases. This website stated that “Alabama had a right to police the sale of devices that can be sexually stimulating.” Which makes me question what sorts of rights are we allowed to as citizens? As far as I know, sex toys aren’t a large contributing factor for sex crime rates such as rape, abuse, molestation etc.

Timeline of Obscenity and Censorship

katerr22 — Thu, 06 Apr 2006 22:14:35 +0000

411 BC – Lysistrata
Play outlawed ;soldiers abstain from sex to achieve peace. Topic was considered too risky prior to 1920, when it became legal in the U.S.

Circa 400 BC – Roman Censors
Regulating public morals to decide who can be a part of the elite governing class. Senator was not allowed to kiss his wife in public as it violated morals.

1549- Index of Forbidden Books and Authors
List of books used to eliminate and eradicate heresy, as they were offensive to the Catholic Church.

1644-Areopagitica
Book that argues that in order to embrace democracy, “heresy” should be legal or free speech.

1791-First Amendment
Granted freedom of speech.

1857- Lord Campbell’s Act
First act created by Parliament to control obscenity.

1872-1964 Alexander Meiklejohn
Absolutist on political freedom of speech.

1873- Comstock Law
Allowed for the censorship of obscene material through mail. Used in pornography prosecutions.

1868-Henry Scott, The Confessional Unmasked.
Pamphlet that was used to shock the public as it unveiled questions that priests asked women regarding sex and pornography during confession. First legal obscenity case.

1898- Havelock Ellis; Sexual Inversions
Behavioralist prosecuted for publishing book on homosexuality, as it was seen as pornography.

1918- James Joyce;Ulysses
Published in The Little Review, co-editors were charged with producing pornography.

1932- Bennet Cerf
He arranged for Ulysses to be printed in the U.S. at Random House publications.

1957-Felix Frankfurter
A Supreme Court Justice suggested that outlawing obscene material to protect children would infringe on the rights of an adult granted through the first amendment.

1957- Roth v. U.S.
Published and distributed many obscene materials; the Roth Memoir test which was later replaced by the Miller test.

1966 – “Banner Year”
Three cases emerge: Fanny Hill (later proved to not be obscene), Mishkin (S&M seen as obscene), Ginzberg’s book Eros (noted as obscene, not necessarily because of material, but through his advertising methods)

1970- Johnson Commission
Pornography does not pose a clear threat to the public and restriction should be limited.

1978- Venue Act
If obscene material is sent to a specific area that has local obscenity laws, the production company can be charged for selling pornography by the local government, even if it is legal elsewhere in the country. Demonstrates that specific local laws apply to companies/people outside of the area.

Pro Porn Myths

katerr22 — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 07:14:48 +0000

The porn industry promotes feminism as it provides women with opportunities and serves as an outlet for self expression. It is imperative to note that women who are forced into prostitution, brothels, etc. do not fall into this category. The expansive porn industry invites women of all backgrounds to a stable, and financially secure career. The option is out there, and women either choose to engage/refrain from porn. Feminism focuses largely on breaking down class, sex, race which porn does. There is not a specific criteria that one must uphold to become a porn star regarding looks, background, or what one wants to get out of the porn industry.

Women who are involved in porn are choosing to do so based on their own free will and individual expression.The argument that a woman should be able to choose what she does with her body runs parallel to a pro choice abortion argument. Empowering women with the choice to choose what they want to do, makes the female sex stronger as a whole. Choices are liberating. For years women have fought to be treated as equal with men, choosing to engage in porn for whatever reason is an individual decision. Women participate in porn to further their own goals, and do so not as a submissive act.

Males are often seen as highly sexualized, more so than women. Porn is an outlet for expressing one’s sexuality, it sends the message that both men and women are sexual creatures; women should not be penalized for expressing their individuality.

The porn industry also allows women to climb the corporate ladder. Many porn stars have found success in launching their own websites, companies, merchandising, and becoming producers. A great example of this success is Jenna Jameson who started out stripping, then making movies, and now has launched her own successful company “ClubJenna.”

Masturbation is Good for Your Health!

katerr22 — Sat, 01 Apr 2006 06:44:58 +0000

Contrary to popular myths and old wives’ tales, masturbation is good for one’s health, particularly for men. Men in their twenties who ejaculate 5+ times per week, were “1/3 less likely to develop aggressive prostate cancer later in life.” The study did not separate masturbation and sex related ejaculations. If it had, the protective effect is predicted to be even greater, as “infections caused by intercourse my increase the risk of prostate cancer.” (Fox, 2003) The researchers predict that the frequent “flushing out” of the prostrate prevents carcinogens from building up and causing damage.Self reports have shown that masturbation relieves stress, tension, and helps one to fall asleep. It is also helpful in relieving pre menstrual cramps.(McKinley Health Center)

Overall, the benefits of masturbation outweigh the cons which are few and far between. Excessive masturbation can develop into an addiction. Addiction would imply that masturbating is interfering with other aspects of one’s life such as work, school, social activities etc. Even so, the effects of excessive masturbation pose a greater threat to one’s mental health than their physical. This particular website argues that masturbation addiction affects one’s physical, emotional, and spiritual state. Their argument states that the brain is “high” on masturbation and the addict “trains himself to climax quicker and more often.” They also state that repeated masturbation desensitizes one for sex. The website isn’t completely legitimized, as these statements aren’t cited. It also has a religious affiliation, which presents masturbation with an extreme bias.

Cline’s Four Steps to Sexually Deviant Behavior

katerr22 — Mon, 27 Mar 2006 07:34:05 +0000

As mentioned in my previous post, pornography has the ability to impact select members of the population more so than others, concerning sexually deviant behavior. To further expand on that subset of the pornography-viewing population, sex criminals typically follow a specific path as described by Dr. Victor Cline in this article. (http://www.obscenitycrimes.org/vbctreat.cfm)

The first step is addiction, in which the consumer is “hooked on porn.” Their motivation to view the porn increases, as he noted that one of this patients could not refrain from watching porn for 90 days even for $1,000. The second phase of this slippery slope is escalation. The individual has an increasing desire for “kinkier, more explicit” types of pornography to achieve the same effect. He likens this to drug addiction, as one needs more of a drug after they’ve developed a tolerance for a specific dose. His third phase, desensitization goes along in part with escalation, as porn that may have aroused him before, no longer shocks him. The social norms begin to break down, as the boundaries between right and wrong become weak. The last stage is acting out sexually, including all forms of sexually deviant behavior.

Cline’s steps have some gray areas, for example his comparison of porn addiction to drug addiction is weak. The individual may not seek out more explicit types of porn to become aroused, as they may increase how much they watch. He also does not mention in which stage porn interferes with daily functioning, or if it even does for that matter. There is a difference between obsession and addiction, which he fails to make clear within the article. Not every person falls into these categories, his theory is not as black and white as it's portrayed to be. Sexually deviant behaviors are considered disorders according to the DSM, and should be approached in that manner. Given the studies presented in lecture, pornography appears to facilitate attitudes and behaviors, although the direct connection is vague.

In an article in Psychology Today about Sexual Masochism, the main listed cause of the disorder is “childhood trauma.” Nowhere in the article does it mention pornography as a contributing factor. My perspective is that pornography seeking behavior may be a result of childhood trauma. More longitudinal studies need to be done in order to develop a stronger correlation. (http://www.psychologytoday.com/conditions/masochism.html#Causes)