vague

Will mandatory web labeling law actually work?

vague — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 18:59:02 +0000

After reading the “Gonzales calls for mandatory Web labeling law” article, I was left wondering if this new law could actually work. According to the article, “The Bush administration's proposal would require commercial Web sites to place "marks and notices" to be devised by the Federal Trade Commission on each sexually explicit page.” Sexually explicit is defined in the article as “depictions of everything from sexual intercourse and masturbation to "sadistic abuse" and close-ups of fully clothed genital regions.”

I think that if Internet service providers are forced to keep records of their customer’s online activities and they comply when asked to help the government in any investigates deemed necessary, then this may work. However, it did occur to me that some people might consider Internet service providers keeping records of their activity to be a violation of their constitutional rights but at this point in time, people must be aware of the fact that nothing that you do on the Internet is secret. There are paper trials and cookies left anywhere you may go, any site that you may visit, even if it is for a split second.

At the same time though, I feel that if websites are labeled, it can only do so much to prevent a child or individual from accessing the website. They may see the label and get curious and enter the website regardless. It may spark curiosity. Also, while browsing the Bacardi website, I noticed that it asked for my age upon entering. Anyone can lie about their age as they choose from a drop down menu the year of their birth. This method does not prevent people under 21 from entering their website. It was just a thought, something I had noticed.

Re: Parental Control

vague — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 14:27:30 +0000

After reading this blog on parental control and doing my own blogging these past few weeks, I can't help not being unsure of which position I take on the issue. I feel that the government should be filtering and monitoring internet pornography so it does not reach children. However, I also feel that parents should be the ones to monitor their children to prevent them from viewing pornography and indecent material at a young age. While saying this is my problem, because I agree that parents should tell their children not to view indecent material and pornography but I also agree that parents should consider showing their children some pornography at an acceptable age and explain why they should not watch it.

I say this because I know that there are some children that will do exactly what their parents tell them not to do. So if their parents tell them not to watch pornography, their mentality will be that their parents don't want them to see it for a reason and they will go and see what the reason is. Of course, there are children who will listen to their parents right away and trust them that they are just helping them out and completely avoid pornography.

I don't think there is any correct way to approach the situation of parental control with children concerning pornography and indecent material. It depends on how open the parents are with conversing with their children about the topic at hand and how responsive and obedient the children are. I believe that in the end, those are the multiple factors that ultimately contribute to whether or not children listen

Re: Why does indecency have to be a bad thing?

vague — Mon, 17 Apr 2006 18:13:40 +0000

Coming across this blog made me think about the topic of indecency in a way I hadn't previously. It might actually make sense that instead of hiding our children from indecency, exposing them to it at an appropriate age might keep them away from indecent material as they get older. It is true that when parents tell their children not to do something, they feel a stronger urge to go and do it because their parents tell them not to. Although I am not sure if it will be necessary to show their child indecent material, it should be explained by the parents why it is indecent and why their children should stay away from it.

The writer also brings up a very valid point in comparing this to the sex/drugs talk. “It might not stop of from doing it, but at least we will be a little bit more careful and have a better understanding of what we actually might be doing.” I agree with this statement. Once being a child myself and listening to my parents explain the drugs talk to me has thus far worked in keeping me away from drugs. I am just one example of how my parents explaining drugs to me kept me away. And you never know, parents explaining why a movie is indecent and not appropriate may prevent a child from watching it.

Help the children!

vague — Fri, 14 Apr 2006 19:38:27 +0000

As I was reading the Congressional hearing, I could not help but hope that the goal of keeping really filthy material out of the hands of children gets accomplished. One of the main ways that seems to be emphasized for doing this is by having parents take a more active role in regulating what material their kids are exposed to on the internet. The hearing mentions software that allows parents to know what their children see on the internet (page 150). It is a valid point that I agree with, that “there is some responsibility on the part of parents, not on the part of the U.S. Congress to tell children exactly what they should do and read and see and talk about as they are growing up” (page 150). I believe that ultimately, it is a child’s parents’ decision what to allow their kids to be subjected and exposed to and to what extent of content they are allowed to see. It is possible that there are parents in this country that do not agree with what the U.S. Congress wants, as hard as it is to believe.

The debate further states that if pornographers are out there, prosecute them (page 151). If pornographers are guilty of a crime then they should in fact be prosecuted for them, especially child pornographers. Personally, I think they are the worse offenders because they prey on children who they know are the most susceptible. In regards to the Internet, I think that regulating the linkage and exposure of pornographic websites would definitely decrease what children are seeing. It just seems like it is something that will be hard for the government to monitor and track down. Ultimately, I believe that stopping children from being exposed to pornography early on will help them in the future.

‘Ulysses’ is obscene

vague — Mon, 10 Apr 2006 04:10:59 +0000

In Lecture 26, there was a discussion about how an excerpt from Ulysses was considered obscene, and the writers were fined $100 and given time because they were considered to have produced pornography. A judge read the book and didn’t get turned on. When he passed the book to two of his friends that were also judges didn’t get turned on when they read the book as well, he ruled that the book Ulysses is okay and is not considered to be erotic material. But, as the lecture had stated, these judges were all old, rich, white guys. Under the rule, it does not matter if the book turned on these old men. However, if a young girl gets a hold of Ulysses and reads it, if it perverts the weak minded, then the book is considered to be obscene.

The argument here is that obscene material may affect adults, not just young people who are weak minded. How can the Supreme Court rule that it is constitutional to regulate the sale or transmission of obscenity, but say it is unconstitutional to pass laws concerning the personal possession of obscenity? To regulate sale or transmission of obscenity is indirectly passing a law concerning the personal possession of obscenity. If you do not allow an individual to pass along something obscene, you are saying that you do not want individuals to have it. And passing a law that regulates the sale or transmission of the material is keeping a watch on who has the material and who spreads it.

Re: Fellatio in Puma Ads!?!?

vague — Fri, 07 Apr 2006 15:45:06 +0000

I was browsing through the aggregator and came across this blog. I didn't know what advertisements they were talking about so I followed the link they provided and was surprised when I saw the ads they referred to. I must agree with them because I don't see the correlation between giving fellatio and Puma sneakers. When I first got to the website, there was an advertisement which depicted a man sitting on a bench. We are looking from behind, and if you look carefully you can see the girl's hands on his butt. It took me a few seconds before I noticed this. When I saw it I realized that she was performing fellatio on him, and the advertisement was for Vodka. To me, this is more understandable than Puma sneakers and fellatio. People do things when they're intoxicated so fellatio in a Vodka advertisement is more acceptable and understandable than in a sneaker advertisement. Although I am not quite sure if it is appropriate for any advertisement to hint a woman performing fellatio, since society has a way of degrading women who perform it.

Re: Of burger and steamed buns

vague — Fri, 31 Mar 2006 20:25:30 +0000

I came across this blog recently and I felt like I had to say something when I read "I was, and still am trying to see if there’s a relationship between westernization of the Asian society and decline in morals." But I couldn't help but laugh after I read what immediately followed this statement ("Wait, stop! Don’t shoot me yet.") Then I realized that the blog was talking more about South East Asians than countries that I most think about (China, Korea, Japan, Vietnam, etc). After reading the blog, I realized that it brings up a good point.

I want any readers to keep in mind that what I say is in regards to Asian Americans because I have never been to Asia and do not know what the lifestyle and culture may be there when it comes to pornography and sex. But in American society, it is often a stereotype that Asians are submissive and not sexual at all. In media, Asians are typically portrayed as either oversexualized or not sexualized at all, and not to mention portrayed in a way that reaffirms numerous Asian stereotypes but I won't disgress on that topic now or here. Even in schools, Asian youth are considered "quiet." I always wondered why this was. I agree with this blog that it seems Asians are becoming a little more sexually adventurous. I think that also has to do with American culture and openness to pornography and sexual content available to anyone over the internet. I believe that it is not only Asians but youth in general that is becoming more sexually adventurous. However, I don't think it should be worded that Westernization is leading to Asians' declining their morals. In the aspect of pornography, it can be said that Western culture is leading to the decline of morals of our youth generation being exposed to porn and not just Asians in general. Also, whether or not they chose to allow themselves to be exposed is another question.

Consistency is Key

vague — Fri, 31 Mar 2006 20:09:05 +0000

I think that one of the most consistently well written blogs is Josephine's (Strawberry PEZ). I chose this blog because I often find myself reading her blog entries and having to comment, whether I agree or disagree with her point of view on a certain topic.

Another blog that I enjoy reading is Ehwong2 (Sex & Shoes) because of the forwardness and directness of her blogs and how she states her opinions.

Porn Myth Exposed.

vague — Fri, 31 Mar 2006 20:01:20 +0000

Pornography is not just a fantasy to every individual. While reading through some of the Porn Myths, one of the myths I did not agree with is "Everyone knows porn is just a fantasy, so no one would try to apply it to real life." In some of the article clippings also shown on the website, it is clear that some men do in fact apply porn fantasies to real life.

One article reads, "I'm dating a guy who treats me like a princess, but when we're in the bedroom, he treats me like a prostitute. He spanks me (lightly), pulls my hair, and says things like 'You're so, so dirty. Someone needs to take a shower, she's so nasty.'" This is an example of a man reinacting a fantasy he most likely has seen in a pornographic movie. Some porno movies portray women as liking to play a "naughty" role, getting spanked and having their hair pulled by their partner. Another articles asks, "What foods are good for producing a large volume of semen, enough to shoot a number of copious jets as seen in porn films?" This is an example of how a man watching pornography will take scenes from the movie to apply to real life. If this man had not seen another man shooting jets of his semen, would this man want to know what foods are good to produce more semen so he could shoot copious jets as well?

What men see in pornographic films is, in a decent amount of cases, making them believe this is what women want. They see women reaching orgasms so quick in porn that they imitate what the men do to get their partners to orgasm just as quick. Men are getting aroused by watching what they see, they apply it to reality to get aroused as well. Perhaps they feel they will get more aroused because they are participating in the sexual activity.

There have even been cases where men have applied porn fantasies to more real life, harmful situations like rape. Sometimes men rape women in ways that they have seen in pornographic films. Referring to Morgan's text, "rape is the perfected act of male sexuality in a patriarchal culture – it is the ultimate metaphor for domination, violence, subjungation, and possession" (page 138). It s not out of the question that men are taking what they see in porn films and applying their fantasies onto women who are unwilling to participate, which results to rape.

Sexually Explicit Content

vague — Sat, 25 Mar 2006 09:10:39 +0000

Fisher and Barak’s article refers back to the term erotica which was discussed in Lecture three. It was then defined as “the good stuff” then and now is defined to us as material which “involves sexually explicit, nondegrading, and noviolent portrayal of consensual sexual activity” (page 115). We as viewers and an audience are being exposed to degrading pornography, that which material is “sexually explicit and degrades, debases, and dehumanizes people, generally women, in a fashion that endorses such degradation” (page 116) and violent pornography, that which material is “sexually explicit and depicts and endorses the utilization and normativeness of sexual violence, usually directed by men against women” (page116).

However, even with these three different types of sexually explicit materials and definitions of each, people are still constantly left wondering what constitutes each clearly. For example, a study by Malamuth and Spinner in 1980 found that there was a steady increase in violent pornography in Penthouse and Playboy. However, another researcher studied the same magazines for violent pornography and reported almost no increase at all.

The Sexual Behavior Sequence makes sense in that “experience with Internet sexually explicit material as a choice made by an active perceiver and interpreter of such material. Fisher and Barak state that “contact with Internet sexually explicit material as a self-regulated event which will occur or not occur.” Individuals are propelled by curiosity and arousal to view pornography on the Internet. When they expose themselves to the pornography on the Internet, they are setting judgement based on their own beliefs about sexuality and expectations as well. However, I don’t think that because people are more motivated to seek Internet pornography, they are more likely to relive any experiences they view, such as rape or fantasy. I believe that sometimes individuals seek Internet pornography to view such sexually explicit content that they would not engage in themselves.