Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site cbscc.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!cbsck!cbscc!pmd From: pmd@cbscc.UUCP (Paul Dubuc) Newsgroups: net.books,net.women Subject: Re: Defining Pornography (reply to Winslow) Message-ID: <4656@cbscc.UUCP> Date: Wed, 23-Jan-85 14:16:50 EST Article-I.D.: cbscc.4656 Posted: Wed Jan 23 14:16:50 1985 Date-Received: Thu, 24-Jan-85 07:50:28 EST References: <4605@cbscc.UUCP>, <201@mhuxr.UUCP> <4616@cbscc.UUCP>, <5026@tekecs.UUCP> Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories , Columbus Lines: 68 Xref: watmath net.books:1293 net.women:4222 }> Just stating that there are counter-studies for every study doesn't }> support the counter-studies if there are any. You can't support the }> status quo with just the fact that there is debate. You have to show }> that the status quo represents the better side of the debate. } }Who among us is qualified to assess the accuracy of these studies? The fact }that experts disagree (especially if they seem to be split about 50-50, }which is the case when there is a "counter-study for every study") is cause }for *extreme* caution when the results will be used to mess with First }Amendment rights. You might say that you are qualified, but from reading }your postings, I have to say I do not trust you. Each may assess the validity of whatever evidence is presented for themselves. If serious flaws are pointed out in a particular study they should be accepted as such. The fact that the results of studies are presented at all implies that they are to be assessed and compared. Studies can be compared. They have to be. On what other basis can we make our decisions? Are you saying that we should do nothing just because there is disagreement without even considering the reasons each side has? Do you apply this principle consistently, or just when the status quo supports your views? }> >I think there is a mixup between violence and pornography. The two }> >are often intertwined, but are *not* the same. Don't give me the }> >"pornography is degrading" line. There has been plenty of excellent }> >rebuttal of it on this net. }> }> Exellent? Let each reader be the judge of that for themselves, OK? } }Give the guy a break, will you? You have made value judgements and }presented them as facts (for example, referring to the Supreme Court }as an oligarchy). Kindly allow others the same liberties you allow }yourself. In presenting my opinions I do not pretend to speak for the whole net. I don't allow myself that liberty. If you read the end of my article you would see that Marcel was doing just that. He made the judgement as to whether an argument stands up to the "scrutiny of the net". As far as I am concerned no one should be able to claim that the readers of this newsgroup agree with his own position. }By the way, I agree with him, not you. I could have guessed. :-) }One more thing - you have accused people of not reading your articles }carefully. I respectfully (really) submit that you could help remedy }that situation with a bit more conciseness, leading to a desirable }net characteristic - brevity. If people do not want to read articles because they are too long, fine. Each person has her own tolerance for that. I did accuse Marcel of not reading my articles because he has been responding to them. I would expect it of him in that case. }But then, you said you didn't think much of the net as a forum... No, I said I didn't think much of the "scrutiny of the net" (as Marcel put it). More brevity could certainly be achieved if people took the time to try and understand what others are saying instead of selectively ignoring peices of an argument to their own advantage. Brevity is certainly a desireable charactistic. I hope integrity whould be even more desirable. I'm used to people disagreeing with me, but I sincerely hope they would at least critique my reasoning and offer their own reasons instead of just saying things like "your argument is so weak" or "don't give me that 'porn is degrading' line". -- Paul Dubuc cbscc!pmd