|
|
 |
hash |
+ |
Wednesday, May 3, 2006 at 9:28 PM ABM and Had To Get It On? —hash |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
catloaf |
+ |
Thursday, May 4, 2006 at 1:32 PM That's ABM and HTGIO? She looks so skinny in her pics, I had no idea her butt was that big! ;) —catloaf |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
catloaf |
+ |
Thursday, May 4, 2006 at 5:20 PM Try ImageShack, that's what I usually use--and I was just messin' with ya about the video. —catloaf |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ItHadToBeJew |
+ |
Friday, May 5, 2006 at 1:35 AM Sometimes I think the internet is a bad thing. But then I look at some pornography, and the world is right again. —ItHadToBeJew |
|
|
|
|
mandeemoo22 |
+ |
Friday, May 5, 2006 at 9:16 AM Speaking of pornography, for the class that I showed porn in, we have to post messages to our class message board for a grade about the presentations and so far, everyone has posted about mine. This one girl said:
I thought that the video and pornography in general is something which degrades society's views on women and how they should be treated. I also had a few other thoughts about the video. Although the woman is in power, it was an UNREALISTIC portrayal of what women are actually like in real life. This does not normally happen in everyday life..at least I do not THINK so.
I also felt that the video was way too graphic for her presentation, and it could have been stopped a bit earlier, or she could have used a scene from an actual movie where an appropriate sex scene took place where a woman was in power. It is not difficult to find. I think the video should have been approved by Ms. Skarf beforehand, as well. It was innappropriate for a classroom environment, in my opinion. I think it crossed the line as for what is appropriate to portray one's argument. It made me feel uncomfortable, to be honest, and I am sure that others felt the same way during the presentation. I did not think that it would be THAT graphic, which is what Mandee said prior to starting the video. I just think she did not judge how appropriate this video truly was to show to a class. I didn't respond to her specifically, but I responded to everyone in general. I said:
The only purpose of pornography is to sexually arouse. It serves to allow people to live out their fantasies by watching them occur on screen. Pornography is not supposed to be realistic. The purpose of the clip that I showed in class was to show that the anti-pornography feminists' claims that pornography portrays women as helpless victims is false because clearly in the video, the woman was not a victim. She was powerful and dominant. I showed the clip for the sole purpose of disproving the anti-pornography feminists' claims, which I believe it did. I also stated during my presentation that studies have shown that sex offenders tend to not have much access to pornography in their earlier years, so there is no correlation between pornography and violence against women. Plus, if someone is against pornography, then they are going to say whatever they can to make pornography look bad. So, after disproving their theory that women are weak in porn, they could then take the position that they are portrayed too strongly. This is hypocritical and would be another fallacy in their argument. Finally, one of the main points of my presentation was also about censorship and freedom of speech. Mainstream movies are extremely violent. If you want to talk about promoting violence, one can go to the movie theater or even turn on the TV everyday and see people fighting and shooting eachother. In my opinion, that is pretty graphic. How is pornography worse than that? Pornography portrays sex, which is a natural behavior. Jennifer said that Ms. Skarf should have previewed my video before showing it to the class. However, Ben's video showed fighting on the soccer field and it even seemed as though he was portraying this violence in a positive way. To me, that is way more offensive than two people having sex. Plus, it would be pretty ironic if I were censored on a project about censorship. Oh, and if my teacher didn't let me show the porn, I had a plan B to stand in front of the classroom and discuss the fact that she didn't let me show it. —mandeemoo22 |
|
|
|
|
Dark Laith |
+ |
Friday, May 5, 2006 at 10:11 AM
Edited Friday, May 5, 2006 at 10:12 AM I feel I should point out that violence is arguably "natural" behavior as well. Perhaps in future arguments you should try to go from a more health-related angle (it'd be much harder for someone to argue against 'sex is more healthy than violence'). —Dark Laith |
|
|
|
|
Had To Get It On |
+ |
Friday, May 5, 2006 at 10:13 AM Without even seeing the clip I'm pretty sure that girl in your class overreacted to the video. I don't see how showing a clip from one particular porn video proves or disproves much. Not all porn is created equally. The question I have is: how different would women be perceived in our society if pornography didn't exist?
I don't think pornography should be banned. No one forces you to watch anything. And a few moments of brief, unintended exposure to explicit images isn't going to hurt anyone. —Had To Get It On |
|
|
|
|
mandeemoo22 |
+ |
Friday, May 5, 2006 at 10:59 AM Well, of course if I had more than 10 minutes to present, I would be able to show more than one clip and read results of various studies. I also should point out that I sent out an e-mail before I showed the video warning people of its graphic nature and then I told people before I presented that if they wanted to leave the room, I wouldn't be offended or anything. No one left. No one responded to my e-mail. So, that girl had no reason to complain. I feel I should point out that violence is arguably "natural" behavior as well.
Well, machine guns and things of that nature are not natural. But yeah, I can see how fighting in defense without any "machinery" is only natural. —mandeemoo22 |
|
|
|
|
Dark Laith |
+ |
Friday, May 5, 2006 at 1:43 PM No, I mean any sort of violence, whether in defense or not. Offensive violence is arguably natural as well, it happens in nature all the time. Now, yes, machine guns are "man-made", but we're talking about the intent and the motivation behind the use of them, which is at least derived from the same previously-mentioned "natural violence". (We are of course excluding pathological cases of violence, which are perpetrated by ill people and therefore motivated by malfunctioning drives, which are arguably not natural.) —Dark Laith |
|
|
|
|
plurry |
+ |
Friday, May 5, 2006 at 2:16 PM whether launching a nuclear missle or flinging poo in a cage.
all the same. no different. —plurry |
|
|
|
|
Dark Laith |
+ |
Friday, May 5, 2006 at 2:24 PM Funny that you'd word it that way, I was just re-listening to one of the recent episodes (the first of the two recent Daniel Tosh episodes, I believe) and Drew was mentioning just that, when he thinks of humans acting out pathologically, he thinks of monkeys flinging poo. —Dark Laith |
|
|
|
|
plurry |
+ |
Friday, May 5, 2006 at 2:31 PM that was no coincidence. i borrowed it from drew.
i listen too, ya know! —plurry |
|
|
|
|
mandeemoo22 |
+ |
Friday, May 5, 2006 at 6:47 PM Wowiezowie! What are the odds of the two of you listening to the same radio show? Small world, small world. —mandeemoo22 |
|
|
|
|
