Brian, I can agree if you can show me what the downside is to people expressing their sexuality as they see fit? There are limits, of course, but we need to define what they are. Do we define them according to the hypocritical zeitgeist we have now that forces people into such states of repression that they'll proclaim to the highest mountain how we need to stop exploitation of children while doing so through congressional e-mail? Where we insist on not telling kids not only the risks and dangers, but what it even is?! Great plan, that's why we have a nation of children who believe you can only get pregnant by making out with a boy while wearing a bikini...and even then it won't happen the first time.

I say enough. We set obvious limits on it (children, non-consensual), and allow people to decide the rest and how they live their own lives. It's up to parents to decide what their kids see on TV and the Internet, it's their job to filter it. There's more than sufficient tools to do so across the board despite what our now-emasculated leader has to say about it. *I* should not be restricted because *your* repressed kids might see it. It never ceases to amaze me how the US believes it's some kind of "enlightened" society, yet an accidental boob slip during the super bowl drives the whole country into a tizzy. Yeah, how many serial killers were born that day? And yet other countries, who don't have the same levels of sexual crimes (or the fictional sexual "addiction"), have what we'd consider hardcore porn running on their broadcast TV.

The downside to sexual freedom are those who can't handle it and insist on sexual repression. They're the ones that cause the real sexual problems in the country, not the ones who enjoy it.

Posted by: Upstate Guy on November 9, 2006 10:56 AM

Upstate Guy - Why do you think "there are limits" and what should they be? It is always easy to argue against existing limits but much harder to define what the new ones should be. And your Mark Foley reference is the sort of argument I would expect from a clever high school kid. I could just as easily refer to any number of rapists or serial killers who consumed loads of porn and make that an argument for banning porn altogether.

As to who is causing the "sexual problems in the country", I guess that depends on how you define sexual problems. Your biggest concern seems to be that someone out there isn't getting enough porn but I would argue the rate of illegitimacy creates far more problems than repressed sexual desires.

Posted by: nola on November 10, 2006 11:17 PM

At least some work shows that increased availability of porn reduces the incidence of rape: rape rates go down when cable TV comes in.

Posted by: Mike Snider on November 20, 2006 4:33 PM






Post a comment

Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember your info?