Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!mit-vax!mit-eddie!mit-amt!garp!henry
From: henry@garp.mit.edu (Henry Mensch)
Newsgroups: news.admin,alt.sex
Subject: Re: Newsgroup content and our ethics/morals/values
Message-ID: <2418@mit-amt.MEDIA.MIT.EDU>
Date: 2 May 88 21:51:16 GMT
References: <442@white.gcm> <3880@medusa.cs.purdue.edu> <974@unmvax.unm.edu> <4919@chinet.UUCP> <604@flatline.UUCP>
Sender: usenet@mit-amt.MEDIA.MIT.EDU
Reply-To: henry@garp.mit.edu (Henry Mensch)
Organization: The Temple of St. Todd the Incontinent
Lines: 12
Keywords: This *does* belong in both groups.  Probably in misc.ethics too.

erict@flatline.UUCP (eric townsend) wrote: 
->The question is brought up of why rec.guns is acceptible while
->soc.sex is not.

That's an easy one: it is socially acceptable to talk about ways to
kill and mutilate people, while it is considered tacky to talk about
making love to them.  

Talk about screwed-up priorities!

# Henry Mensch  /  <henry@garp.mit.edu>  /  E40-379 MIT,  Cambridge, MA
# {ames,cca,decvax,harvard,lotus,mit-eddie,rochester,soft21}!garp!henry