Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!apple!motcsd!xdos!doug
From: doug@xdos.UUCP (Doug Merritt)
Newsgroups: comp.graphics
Subject: Re: Any thoughts on "comp.graphics.images"?
Message-ID: <323@xdos.UUCP>
Date: 22 May 89 14:53:59 GMT
References: <13998@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> <4489@alvin.mcnc.org>
Reply-To: doug@xdos.UUCP (Doug Merritt)
Organization: Hunter Systems, Mountain View CA (Silicon Valley)
Lines: 21

In article <4489@alvin.mcnc.org> spl@mcnc.org.UUCP (Steve Lamont) writes:
>In article <13998@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> aoki@faerie.Berkeley.EDU (Paul M. Aoki) writes:
>>Discussions of the morality or political correctness of a given image
>>would still go to talk.religion and soc.{,wo}men, of course.  [...]
>
>responsible practitioners of the art of computer graphic we should take
>some care to mitigate the social consequences of our work.  [...]

Sounds good, except that there'll never be any agreement on the subject.
Some people think that pornography is sexist and furthermore causes a
Jekyll & Hyde transformation of normal people into axe murdering rapists.
Others believe that porno doesn't &$#* people, people &$@* people, and
that it's all much ado about nothing.

So unlike easy ethical issues like theft, you won't be able to define
an accepted standards for the social consequences, let alone how or even
whether they should be mitigated.
	Doug
-- 
Doug Merritt		{pyramid,apple}!xdos!doug
Member, Crusaders for a Better Tomorrow		Professional Wildeyed Visionary