Let’s Talk About Sex

Maybe this is why pornography has a bad name?

Almost every day we see stories like this in the news.  I saw when I looked at my home page today at dell.com.  The first thing that came to my mind was this class.  Throughout the semester we’ve been discussing why pornography has such a bad name, and how many believe that it leads to rape, even though there is no factual proof of this.  Stories like these that are published for all to see are what give pornography a bad name.  No the girl in the article wasn’t raped, but simply shown pornography and in a sense forced to “perform” for these guys.

However, I’m guessing that if you ask most of the public their opinion of why these guys did this, their answers would be something to the effect of, “they did it because they like to watch pornography.”  Is this really the case?  I don’t have know, but because many people would believe that this is the cause, pornography appears to be something bad, and that should be avoided.

This was a short blog, but I just wanted everyone to see this article, because I thought it was a good way to end the semester.

Nothing’s safe today…

“What is pornography to some people may be simply mainstream advertising to others; what is morally wrong to some may be entirely acceptable to others; what is legal to show to minors in one community may be regarded as wholly inappropriate by those in another community; and what counts as responsible choice according to one set of values may be irresponsible behavior according to a different set of values.  Approaches taken to protect children should be flexible enough to honor that diversity” (Halavais, 191).  This is a quote from chapter 11 in the book, which states why it’s so hard to regulate the Internet.  However, these are also the problems when attempting to regulate other widespread material.  Overall, many question what the “right” way to protect our children is.  I believe that in order to protect them we need to draw lines between acceptable and unacceptable material for children to view by taking views that lay somewhere in-between extremely liberal and extremely conservative, if we are going to attempt to regulate the Internet.

However these extreme lines become very blurred when it comes to children viewing what could be inappropriate material.  Even extremely liberal people would take more conservative views when it came to deciding what was appropriate for children.  And these lines would draw even more towards the conservative side if the adult had a younger child.  Therefore what seems to be a good solution isn’t the right solution after all.  It’s been suggested that educating parents so they can educate their children is an alternative to setting community standards online.

If we teach parents how to talk to their children about what is, and could potentially be on the Internet, they should be able to relay a strong message to their children about what’s right and what’s wrong.  This would not only eliminate the guessing of whose community standards the internet should be based on, but would also allow parents to determine what their children should and should not view.  This is somewhat done by parental filters today, but to be realistic we can’t filter out everything.  Therefore an educated parent and child would be the best solution to this problem.  This could also be aided by filters in order to help children determine what is right and wrong.  However, parents shouldn’t solely rely on technology in order to protect children.

With any technology there are glitches.  Maybe a site that spells Disney the wrong way would bring up pornography, and maybe filters aren’t advanced enough to catch the misspelling yet.  Or maybe filters are better than that.  Maybe that would catch the misspelling and realize that this was an inappropriate site.  However, how do these filters even determine what is allowed and not allowed?  My guess is that they have people go online and search for things that children would typically search for and then view most of the top results; any of the results which allow access to porn would be placed on a list and then this list would be put into the parental filters.  But this is not fail proof either.  If parental filters work this way then parents are forced to continually get updates, especially since many new WebPages are created a day.

With all this in mind, it seems like there isn’t a solution to this problem.  However, a combination of a couple of the different solutions would allow for a safer internet for our children, although this internet wouldn’t be completely safe, because there are very few things that are completely safe today.

It’s ok for kids to see it in the stores everyday…just not online!

When reading this blog, I thought about something I had never really considered before.  If we can put certain things in and on magazines shouldn’t these things be allowed on the web? How many times have you walked into the grocery store and see a Cosmopolitan magazine sitting in the magazine holder?  This is perfectly acceptable, although some chains such as Wal-Mart are beginning to put plastic “covers” over these magazines so that children aren’t able to read what’s written on them.  However, these “covers” fail to cover the very seductively dressed female that’s on the front.  In the web labeling idea these pictures would clearly get a rating that would require a warning, but if you think about it, a child is much more likely to view these images on store shelves with their parents than online.

This is a very scary thought.  We’re looking to control the Internet so much that things such as magazines and newspapers are being neglected.  Everyone’s trying to limit what children can view on the Internet but no-ones even considering what their children are seeing when they walk into Wegmans with their parents every week.  Why is the Internet getting so much more attention than these magazines which children see on a regular basis? 

Maybe because the Internet is a new technology and therefore our government believes that this should be more regulated in order for people to support it.  However, in our day in age we couldn’t live without the Internet.  Without the Internet we couldn’t even be taking this class.  We couldn’t ask our teachers questions and get answers in a split second.  However, without magazines we would be able to move on.  We could subscribe to these magazines online, which would prevent children from viewing “half-naked” people on magazine covers, since a warning site would precede these pictures. 

My opinion on this is that we shouldn’t attempt to block things on the Internet that are mainstream things in real-life.  Why is it ok for children to view these images in a store, but as soon as they see them online it alarms adults everywhere.  Maybe everyone needs to take a step back and look at what we’re really trying to regulate on the Internet: lots of stuff that children can see in typical stores such as Wegmans and Wal-Mart.

“What’s whispered in the closet shall be proclaimed from the house-tops” -Warren & Brandeis

With any new technology the question of privacy is always brought up.  With camera phones came the issue of guys following girls up stairs and taking pictures up their skirts without their knowledge.  Although most of the time the person who took them was the only one who used these pictures, sometimes these pictures are shared between friends, and sometimes even sold on the Internet.  In lecture 34 the issue of privacy was discussed.  The thing that I found most interesting in this lecture was the fact that poorer people used to sneak into the rich people’s parties and enter rooms “accidentally” where the rich were having sex with their maids, or other lower class individuals.  They would then sell this information to the newspapers in an attempt to ruin the upper classes image.  When considering that this was taking place when newspapers were first being printed, what is really going on today?

We know that there are people who go to spring break locations during spring break and encourage girls to do things they normally wouldn’t do for movies like, “Girls Gone Wild.”  We also know that there are guys who will get girls drunk and take advantage of them and take movies of them doing this and putting these movies online.  I was recently reading an article in a magazine, and it was discussing how a couple of teenage girls lives were ruined simply because of the stupid things that they did when they were drunk.  Many of the girls had to switch high schools, and some of them even moved out of state, all because of what technology has allowed people to do.

Although I think that technology is a great thing, and it allows us to do more and more things we were previously unable to do, it also brings danger where they didn’t used to be.  We now have to watch everything we do, especially when we’re under the influence of drugs or alcohol.  Previously, only words could be printed and would only be delivered to those who paid to receive the newspaper.  However, today an image can go online and be email to millions of people within a couple seconds.  I can only image how much we’ll have to watch what we do as technology advances even further.

What’s your website rating?

When reading over the new website rating proposal, I began thinking about the .XXX domain proposal.  It’s pretty much the same thing.  Just like the .XXX domain proposal the rating proposal cannot be required, and it can’t be enforced in other countries.  Another reason why I don’t necessarily believe this is the best proposal is due to the fact that even our blogs for this class would probably receive a pretty high rating; therefore people have to click through warning screens in order to read our blogs, even though almost all of them are educational.  Not to mention that although they can be warning screens many will simply click through them.

If the website rating proposal is being discussed to protect children I think they need to consider many facts.  The first one being that children are going to read a warning and most of them will click through it just to see what’s on the next page.  Yes it will help prevent children from finding pornography when they are doing research for their projects, but if they’re searching for pornography they will see the warning screen and know that they’ve found what they were looking for.

In order to effectively protect children from viewing pornography we need to use the adult verification system on the warning screens of these websites.  However, even this isn’t fail proof.  If adults are given a special number when they become old enough to view adult material, that number can be easily seen and found by children who are not of age, which defeats the purpose.  Many adult verification systems use credit cards as proof that the viewer is of age.  However, I’ve had a credit card since I was in 8^th grade.  Not one of the reloadable ones, it was a regular Mastercard.  I wonder if I would’ve been able to view material when I was only in 8^th grade.  Another problem with the credit card verification process is that its very easy for children to get access to their parent’s credit cards, therefore all they need to do is type in the numbers and name and they’re in.

Like stated in many places that discuss protecting children from pornography, in order to do it effectively more than one method must be used along with intervention and supervision from parents.  Sometimes I wonder if within our technologically advanced world is there ever going to be a completely fail proof way to protect our children?

What’s in that brown envelope?!?!?

Most of the time when you see a box or envelope without much on the outside it is assumed that the contents inside are pornography or something related to pornography, even though when it’s sent to you the sender claims that it will be “discretely” delivered.  In lecture 33 it was discussed how although adult direct mailings are difficult to send, due to legal issues, they are sometimes sent in brown envelops which contain more envelopes inside of them, each with a warning of what will be contained within the final envelope, in order to prevent people whom don’t want to view the information from seeing it.  Although I think that this is a good approach to protecting people from not viewing pornographic material, I question how effective it can possibly be, and I also wonder how these adult distributors get their mailing lists.

If a child were to receive an envelope with warnings on it of what was contained within the last envelope I believe that they would be more apt to open the envelope, because they would want to see what was really inside of it.  Therefore this approach is probably not protecting children.  But then again, children shouldn’t be on these mailing lists.  And even if it were sent to an adult, they would potentially open it because they wouldn’t want their neighbors or mail carrier to see the brown unlabeled envelopes and assume that they were receiving pornography.  Therefore, who do these envelopes really protect?

I believe that they simply protect the companies that are sending the advertisements, because the fact that there were a couple of warnings about what was inside would almost always dismiss any lawsuit that a person would try to bring against them.  Therefore spending the extra money on more envelopes would be a worthwhile cause.  However, could a lawsuit be filed on the company for sending them unwanted information?  Which brings me to my next question, where do these mailing lists come from?  Can an adult distributor pick names out of phone books? Do they have to find people who have previously bought adult material online?  Do they get names from somewhere else?

Com 497- class review

I recently had an appointment to meet with my advisor in order to plan my fall and spring semesters next year. When we went over what classes I was taking she was shocked when I mentioned this one. Her response was similar to, “You’re in a porn class? You’re a girl! Mostly guys take that class. What do you do in it anyways?” Obviously since I’m a business major most of the business advisors aren’t very aware of what goes on in Com classes. When I explained to her what we did and what the class was about she understood why I was taking it. I managed to shatter her impression that we only watched pornography in our lectures. Actually her response was similar to the response that I got from most of my friends when they found out I was taking this class. They had been told about this class by some of their guy friends, however, apparently their guy friends had mislead them and made them believe that in this class we mainly watch pornography. Another misconception that I heard about this class was that for our final we would have to produce our own pornography movie. I’m sure there are many other variations of these misconceptions about this course.

My friend initially convinced me to take this class with her, because she said that it sounded interesting. I didn’t think that it would necessarily be that interesting because generally I don’t watch much, if any, pornography. However, after the first couple of lectures I was hooked. This was one of my favorite classes, not only because it expanded my view on the world but also because it left behind many of the typical academic rules and regulations while still teaching us important information. I learned more in this class than all my other classes combined mainly because it was taught in an interesting and educational way. I also liked the fact that I could watch the lectures whenever it was convenient for me, which made me watch all of them from start to finish.

This class defiantly exceeded my expectations. I didn’t think that I would learn nearly as much as I did, or that we would touch on so many interesting topics. I not only learned about how pornography has helped shape the technology that we have today, but also about how laws work. I even learned, to some extent, how laws were formed and enforced. I would defiantly recommend this class to my friends that have never taken it, but I know that it won’t be offered in the future. Thanks for an amazing semester!

“Sorry I have to be at least 2 feet away from you!!”

“I can give you a lap dance, but I have to be at least two feet away from you,” can you image hearing that from a performer in a strip club? One of the topics discussed in lecture 32, was the law in California that performers couldn’t be any closer than two feet from their clients. This made lap dances illegal. When thinking about this issue it seems a little absurd that lap dances should be outlawed. Yes, it would help protect the performers from being touched when they didn’t want to be. But wouldn’t it also decrease cliental for strip clubs? Not many guys are going to want to go to a strip club simply to watch girls take off their clothes, many go there for other “services” as well, such as lap dances. Not to mention that many of the performers want to give their clients lap dances in order to earn some extra cash. In a recent issue of Generation, it discusses how a strip club in Canada kept getting in trouble with the law because they allowed their performers to give clients blowjobs in private rooms. I believe that if we’re going to attempt to regulate what can go on at strip clubs we should be more concerned with things such as blowjobs than harmless lap dances.

Lap dances are often done in the main room of strip clubs, whereas blowjobs would most likely take place in a more private room. This would leave the performers at more of a risk of being raped or injured by their clients than by giving their clients a lap dance in a room with many other people present. Lap dances don’t have the risk of transmitting any sexually transmitted diseases, nor does it have any risk or pregnancy. So I wonder why exactly did the state of California outlaw lap dances?

Maybe they felt that some of their performers were being violated even in front of many other people. If this was the case, I believe that the state of California should’ve made laws that required strip clubs to have more bouncers to watch and help protect the performers. By making lap dances illegal, it will make clients of strip clubs want them even more, therefore cliental from strip clubs in California is likely to travel to other states where it’s legal to get lap dances. And strip clubs are more likely to break the law and allow lap dances to take place in secluded rooms in order to generate more revenue. I think that the law that outlaws lap dances in California will end up hurting the state more than it will help whatever they believed they were going to control.

How are we supposed to protect our children when we have no idea what’s out there?

If you accidentally view child pornography you can go to jail; click the wrong link and you get locked up even if you weren’t looking for child pornography you saw it therefore you broke the law.  Is this really fair?  I don’t think so.  Any law or restriction on our first amendment right should require a lot of research in order to ensure that the law is fair. (Although very small minorities of people believe that child pornography should be allowed, we don’t have any idea how prevalent it is, or where most of it is located on the Web)  However, there is no way that anyone can study child pornography on the Internet without potentially going to jail.  Lecture 30, discussed that dangers of even accidentally viewing child pornography, lecture 31 went even further and warned us not to look for websites regarding teen modeling, because these are the newest child pornography sites.  What if you were looking for a teen modeling agency and came across child pornography?  To jail you go, simply by choosing the wrong link.  In a society that is trying to protect children by eliminating child pornography we aren’t doing a very good job to ensure that the proper research is done regarding it, in order to truly protect our children.

Maybe one of the reasons that child pornography is so prevalent, if it is, is because of the fact that most parents don’t know how to protect their children from it.  No parent that is even semi-aware of the child pornography laws would dare search for anything containing the words “child pornography” because of the fear of being arrested.  This fact prevents parents from truly learning where child pornography is on the Internet, in order to keep it away from their children.  Not to mention, if it can’t be studied then how can the parental filters possibly keep child pornography off of their computers?

I think that laws regarding child pornography are essential in order to protect our children.  However, I believe that both law officials and other professionals in this area should work together to study child pornography and where it’s located and exactly how widespread it is.  This will allow the laws regarding child pornography to be straightforward and actually allow them to do what they’re set out to do—protect children from both viewing child pornography and being involved in it.

Questions for Mr. Lucas

1. I find it very surprising that a gay magazine would shun you from their website, because it is a known fact that our society today views pornography, and the editors of the magazine should understand the great need, especially in the homosexual community, for these types of films.  Do you think that the editors of the magazine will eventually grow to accept pornography as more mainstream, like the heterosexual community does today?

2. You refer to your male actors as "models," and viewing your blog, you're men are, of course, very attractive.  However, do you also feature the "less perfect" homosexuals in your films?  And why or why not?