Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!att!bu.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!orion.oac.uci.edu!ucivax!gateway
From: w25y@vax5.cit.cornell.edu
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: Who's Exploiting Who? (Was Re: A Moral Question)
Message-ID: <1990Oct23.002616.538@vax5.cit.cornell.edu>
Date: 23 Oct 90 15:18:54 GMT
References: <16098@s.ms.uky.edu> <kaveh.655919781@s.ms.uky.edu> <65210@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu>
Lines: 26
Approved: tittle@ics.uci.edu
Nntp-Posting-Host: alexandre-dumas.ics.uci.edu

In article <65210@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu>, csluder@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (KirK) writes:
> In article <kaveh.655919781@s.ms.uky.edu> kaveh@ms.uky.edu (Kaveh Baharestan) writes:
>>
>>hmm... the fight against porn movies may not be on the agenda of most
>>feminists simply because they are dirty or what ever.  Porn is basically
>>anti-feminist and promotes the objectification, humiliation, control,
>>and hate of women.
>
> Isn't this an objective thing?  I feel that men are downgraded just as
> much in bad pornography as women.  Look at how men are portrayed.  Men
> in pornography are usualy jaded, insensitive piledrivers.  I find this
> to be almost as insulting as its portrayal of women.

   You are both missing a far more basic point.  Whether porn degrades
men or women or sex in general, so far it is not against the law to
degrade a certain group of people.  To ban porn is to ban works based
on content. Once it becomes OK to censor "bad" ideas, you may very
well find that some of your ideas are considered "bad".  First they
came for the pornographers, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a
pornographer...

                   -- Paul Ciszek
                      W25Y@CRNLVAX5               Bitnet
                      W25Y@VAX5.CIT.CORNELL.EDU   Internet
                      UUNET!CORNELL!VAX5!W25Y     UUCP
"The trouble with normal is it always gets worse."  --Bruce Cockburn