World is Falling Apart Thread (Locked forever)

[MrPopo]

You're correct regarding the legal aspect, but I was specifically talking about how people react due to the reasons you mentioned.

Nudity is a weird subject when you really think about it. It's an incredibly natural state, but western society has it as one of the largest taboos available. I think it's safe to say that we all agree that sexual contact with a child will give them psychological damage, but then you get into the much greyer area of things like the child getting naked because they didn't like how their clothing felt and an adult sees it. Does that damage the child?

It has been established legally that naked photographs of minors can be taken if they are properly "artistic" and I assume it's not considered to be damaging to the child. If someone else uses those photos for sexual gratification just how "wrong" is that? It definitely gives most people the creepy willies to think about, but if no one is getting harmed is it legally "bad"?

[ElkinFencer10]

My view is that if no children are involved at all - models, photographs for reference, etc - then it's okay. Creepy? In my opinion, yes, but that's just my opinion. In my opinion, anal sex is gross and creepy, but I don't think that should be banned. "Victimless crimes" are bullshit IMO; if no one's hurt, how can I justifiably tell you it's wrong? Now legit child pornography is very much NOT a victimless crime, but manga and anime? It's not my cup of tea, but I'm not ready to limit artistic expression just because I don't understand it or like it.

[jp1]

You're correct regarding the legal aspect, but I was specifically talking about how people react due to the reasons you mentioned.

Nudity is a weird subject when you really think about it. It's an incredibly natural state, but western society has it as one of the largest taboos available. I think it's safe to say that we all agree that sexual contact with a child will give them psychological damage, but then you get into the much greyer area of things like the child getting naked because they didn't like how their clothing felt and an adult sees it. Does that damage the child?

It has been established legally that naked photographs of minors can be taken if they are properly "artistic" and I assume it's not considered to be damaging to the child. If someone else uses those photos for sexual gratification just how "wrong" is that? It definitely gives most people the creepy willies to think about, but if no one is getting harmed is it legally "bad"?

I can see the validity to the "common sense" aspect of that argument. I still have reservations about it because I feel, again, that it perpetuates such an obsession. Perhaps to an extent that the artistic content does not appease the individual any longer and then measures may be taken that do endanger children.

I know that is "punishment before the crime", but as a father...I simply can't stomach it any other way. If my daughter (or one of my sons) was to pose "artistically" and somehow I was able to be ok with it, I would never be at peace with the thought of some adult getting sexual pleasure from it. Perhaps that makes me a hypocrite or closed minded, but I simply can't separate the two, especially when I have my own children's safety to consider.

[MrPopo]

I don't blame you for those feelings. It's a very common thing and we have seen in countless issues that someone's views change once they have kids, because suddenly an issue around kids matters greatly to them.

[Erik_Twice]

Free speech is an important thing, and banning those video games/manga/anime would infringe on that. By all means, give them ratings so severe that stores will refuse to sell them, but it seems wrong to me to ban that expression, no matter how distasteful it may be.

That's not very reassuring, isn't it? Making it so that stores will refuse to carry a game is, in practice, no different from fining people who are "out of the line" and, historically, result in a de facto ban.

You can see this in video games, actually. Since the ESRB was formed there have only been 3 games of any reasonable budget that have been given the Adults Only rating. One was cancelled (Thrill Kill), another edited and censored (Manhunt 2) and the other Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas which suffered millionary losses in lawsuits, attacks and forced recalls after such a rating was given. These three games were by all intents and purporses censored by "ratings so severe that stores will refuse to sell them".

I mean, technically speaking there's no ban on sexual content on video games. But showing is enough to get you rejected from Steam, Xbox Live, Playstation Store, Nintendo platformers, the Apple Store, Twitch, GoG.com, Uplay and the like, there might as well be.

It's not new either. This is exactly how people like Franco kept such an iron grip on culture. Censors and legality were the least important part of the process, controlling what could actually exist could be done in many ways.

[Blu]

Good lord this GOP Debate. Why on earth is something so shitty being held in the beautiful, historic Fox Theatre of Detroit. What a shit show.

[Pulsar_t]

[ElkinFencer10]

I respect Republicans prior to Nixon. It all goes to shit with him, IMO (though I don't have any major problems with Bush41).

[Sarge]

Despite the civil tone, Eisenhower still used overwhelming force to defeat the enemy. If we're going to be involved in a foreign conflict, we need to go all-out, or not go at all. These piddly half-measures are worthless.

(One, of course, could argue that just bombing is also a half-measure. And I think I'd agree with that assessment.)

[ElkinFencer10]

I agree that if we're going to fight someone, we need to go all-out, but military force should be an absolute last resort, and (IMO) we need to stop going all world police on everyone and be PART of an international coalition, not the entire thing. The world takes advantage of our military because we make it so easy for them.