Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!ut-sally!pyramid!hplabs!felix!daver
From: daver@felix.UUCP (Dave Richards)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,net.legal,net.singles
Subject: Re: Commission on Pornography -- reply to GWSmith
Message-ID: <1570@felix.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 16-Sep-86 21:40:04 EDT
Article-I.D.: felix.1570
Posted: Tue Sep 16 21:40:04 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 17-Sep-86 06:28:50 EDT
References: <1487@mtx5a.UUCP> <15487@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> <1506@mtx5a.UUCP>
Reply-To: daver@felix.UUCP (Dave Richards)
Distribution: net
Organization: FileNet Corp., Costa Mesa, CA
Lines: 53
Xref: mnetor talk.politics.misc:144 net.legal:3584 net.singles:10369

This was a long article, but I'd like to pick out and address a couple of
points.

In article <1506@mtx5a.UUCP> mat@mtx5a.UUCP (m.terribile) writes:
>
>Yes, if indeed it were the only case.  On the other hand, how do you really
>ensure the continued mental health of someone who has sex in front of a
>camera, and can find that film turning up anywhere, any time.  Even years
>later, this film could damage a career or a family.  And how do you decide
>where to draw the line in the work rules for this material?

At the present time, I believe that only adults over 18 can legally appear in
a porn film.  I always thought this was because we assume that someone of that
age is mature enough to take responsibility for their actions.  If that is not
true, then we have other, much larger problems.  When someone believes in their
convictions and is honest about themselves up front, there are no "skeletons in 
the closet" that can be dragged out later, and hence no embarrassments.

[regarding porn magazines as opposed to "outdoor" type magazines] 
>On the other hand, legitimate sports publications stress safety measures and
>risks, and report deaths and injuries that occur.  They are dedicated to the
>welfare of their subscribers (thereby keeping *live* subscribers) rather than
>dedicated to the *addiction* of their subscribers (thereby sucking more in).

In more than one of the "skin" magazines I have read, there are write-in sec-
tions that DO answer questions, address disease protection and so forth, dispel-
ling myths and performing a definite educational function.  Some of the most
comprehensive articles about "safe sex" (regarding AIDS) that I have seen ap-
peared in Hustler magazine.  I guess that those type of magazines are the only
forum where sexual situations can be discussed in *frank terms*. 


>>... You don't need porn for this, just buy a copy of "The Joy of Sex".
>> (Unless sex manuals are ipso facto porn?).
>
>Does ``The Joy Of Sex'' demonstrate whippings that cause bleeding, or provide
>photographic depictions of people being tortured by having their penises,
>labia, or nipples pierced?  Does it depict acts that are difficult, degrading,
>or harmful?  Does it encourage non-consensual acts, or acts under duress?
>
>	from Mole End			Mark Terribile

This is not what I think of when I think of pornography.  I have not been ex-
posed to this type of material, although I'm sure it exists for those willing
to spend the effort to find it.  This seems to be a good place to reiterate my
request to help break the connection between sex and violence.  One way to aid
this campaign is to not use the two terms together.  Try to replace the stan-
dard phrase "sex AND violence", with "sex OR violence" wherever possible.  It
seems like such a small thing, but I don't know of a better way to start.

Dave