Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!njin!princeton!phoenix!vnend
From: vnend@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (D. W. James)
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Illegality of alt.sex (WAS: Re: USSR International Computer Club
Keywords: illegal activities
Message-ID: <6006@phoenix.Princeton.EDU>
Date: 31 Jan 89 23:19:38 GMT
References: <825@afit-ab.arpa> <24302@apple.Apple.COM> <2393@cuuxb.ATT.COM> <5735@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> <2421@cuuxb.ATT.COM>
Reply-To: vnend@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (D. W. James)
Organization: Princeton University, NJ
Lines: 147

In article <2421@cuuxb.ATT.COM> dlm@cuuxb.UUCP (Dennis L. Mumaugh) writes:
)In article <5735@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> vnend@phoenix.Princeton.EDU 
)(D. W. James) writes:
)> In article <2393@cuuxb.ATT.COM> dlm@cuuxb.UUCP (Dennis L. Mumaugh) writes:
)> )[Not that it is true but much of alt.sex is illegal and considered 
)> )obscene by several states.]
 > 
)> 	Can you provide evidence to back this up, both parts?  I just
)> recently looked into alt.sex for the first time since its creation,
)> and havn't seen anything that would be either (though the obscene
)> part is admittedly *very* much open to debate.)  But I haven't seen
)> anything that could be construed as illegal per se...
 
)My comment was in reference to several things.  It is illegal to
)allow persons under 18 access to "pornography".  Hence, per se,
)alt.sex is "illegal" if a person under 18 has access.  Datum: how
)many University undergraduates are under 18?  How many university
)machines that support the undergraduate comp sci 1A have alt.sex?

	Uh...  That assumes that alt.sex is pornographic.  This 
assumption is, in fact, false.   Read:

 
      Attorney General's Commission on Pornography (1986).  Final
                                                            _____
             Report.  Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, U.S.
             ______
             Government Printing Office.
      Donnerstein, E., & Linz, D. G. (1986, December).  The question of
             pornography.  Psychology Today, pp. 56-59
                           __________ _____
      Garry, A. (1978).  Pornography and respect for women.  Social
                                                             ______
             Theory and Practice, 4, 395-422
             ______ ___ ________  _
      Hovland, C. I., Lumsdaine, A. A. and Sheffield, F. D.. (1965)
             Experiments on Mass Communication.  New York: John Wiley
             ___________ __ ____ _____________
             and Sons.
      LaBelle, B. (1980).  The propaganda of misogyny.  In L. Lederer
             (Ed.), Take back the night:  Women on pornography.  New
                    ____ ____ ___ _____   _____ __ ___________
             York: William Morrow.
      Lederer, L. (1980), Take back the night: Women on pornography.
                          ____ ____ ___ _____  _____ __ ___________
             New York: William Morrow.
      McGuire, W. and Papageorgis, D.. (1961).  The Relative Efficacy
             of Various Types of Prior Belief-Defense in Producing
             Immunity Against Persuasion.  Journal of Abnormal and
                                           _______ __ ________ ___
             Social Psychology 62:327-337
             ______ __________
      Steinem, G. (1980).  Erotica and pornography: A clear and present
             difference. In L. Lederer (Ed.), Take back the night:
                                              ____ ____ ___ _____
             Women on pornography (pp. 35-39). New York: William
             _____ __ ___________
             Morrow.
      Weaver, J. B. (1987) (In press),  A summary report on the effects
             of portrayals of female sexuality and violence against
             women on the general perception of women.
      Wyer, R. S., Jr.,  Bodenhausen, G. V., & Gorman, T. F. (1985)
             Cognitive mediators of reactions to rape.  Journal of
                                                        _______ __
             Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 324-348
             ___________ ___ ______ __________  __
      Zillman, D. (1985, September).  Effects of repeated exposure to
                                      _______ __ ________ ________ __
             nonviolent pornography.  Presented to the U. S. Attorney
             __________ ___________
             General's Commission on Pornography in hearings at
             Houston, TX.
      Zillman, D., & Bryant, J. (1984).  Effects of massive exposure to
             pornography.  In N. M. Malamuth & E. Donnerstein (Eds.),
             Pornography and sexual aggression (pp. 115-138). Orlando,
             ___________ ___ ______ __________
             FL: Academic Press.

And then say the same thing.  Or, if you like, I can send you the
paper that this is the reference list to, it presents evidence that
the material in soc.singles (this predates alt.sex) not only *not*
pornographic, but in fact could be a valuable tool in fighting the
effects of pornography.  Basically, your arguement is fundimentally
flawed, and your posting alarmist.


)The US of A has laws prohibiting "pornography" involving
)"children" under 18.  This has been construed [in one case] to
)include a father taking the picture of his 18 month old child in
)the nude.  Hence, if an article on alt.sex talks about two
)teenagers boinking that can be construed to be illegal per se.

	Again, (and I'd like to see a reference to that court case,
either you aren't telling us everything or there is something silly
going on in some courthouse) there is a fundimental differnce between
a photograph and an article, particularly if the article is discussing
personel experiance.

 
)Also, some states consider various explicit descriptions
)"illegal".  Also, Canada has some rather harsh laws regarding
)importation of "obscene material".  In this sense alt.sex could
)be so considered.

	There are other riders on those 'explicit desciptions'
clauses, such as no social value etc., that make them there as an
aid in defining 'obscene' material.  I think you'll find it is the
obscenity, not the explicit descriptions, that are illegal.  And
Canada's laws on obscenity are as vague as our own.  *If* the
Canadian laws would consider alt.sex illegal (which I doubt) then
it is the SA's job to not accept that news group, in which case no
law is broken, eh?

 
)Then of course, there is the S&M digest. {It IS rot13 but that's
)a minor point}.

	Actually that is a major point.  The Law (in its infinate
wisdom) says that that is encrypted data, and as such in another 
catagory.  Again though, you would have to prove that the material 
in S&M Digest is obscene for it to be illegal, not easily done.

 
)Some countries have laws that prohibit encyphered communications.
)Technically rot13 is a cipher.

	As someone else pointed out, so is ASCII.  And, in any event,
American sites are not legal liable for foriegn sites recieving these
communications, only the sites inside that jurisdiction are.  Straw man.

 
)Of course, none of the above has ever met a recent court
)challenge and "Free Speech" considerations are very much
)involved.  The point is that only one crusading States Attorney
)or southren[sic] High Sheriff[sic] is all that is required to
)make a stink.
)=Dennis L. Mumaugh

	Agreed.  The question is, would he have a federal foot
to stand on?  I don't think so.


-- 
Later Y'all,  Vnend                       Ignorance is the mother of adventure.   
SCA event list? Mail?  Send to:vnend@phoenix.princeton.edu or vnend@pucc.bitnet   
        Anonymous posting service (NO FLAMES!) at vnend@ms.uky.edu                    
             Love is wanting to make N (N>1) people happy.