h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

OK......We want a place to dicuss this.......

Keep in mind that one persons definition of porn is another's definition of art! Touchy subject, but ya'll have fun!!!

Goodnight Sweet Princess, Whoever you are!"

NM

*looks around, finds the room deserted*

Well, thanks NM, for setting up the forum!! I've simply been to lazy to do it myself....

I have plenty to say on the subject, something about how our society plays around the edges of these things all the time, what with 55 year old men dating women in their 20's, and all those advertisements with teenagers looking sexy selling us stuff. So we dance around the edges of what is "ok" and what isn't. We pick an arbitrary age (18) when everyone is supposed to be magically mature enough to make decisions about such things. We play with fire all the time, then we act all apalled and self-righteous when someone gets burned....

But right now it's nearly 1am, so it will all have to wait til another time....

Hmmm... me doesn't call a man in his 50's ... dating a woman in her 20's porn... by any definition... whilst some folks would not be happy with it... there is nothing illegal in it... Some people enjoy going out with older or younger people... It's called choice... are we wanting to take that away from people... to tell everyone that they are only allowed to date who is socially acceptable within there given circle.

If it is intended to provoke arousal only, it is porn.
If it is intended to provoke any other emotion, or querying, it is art.

I wasn't calling it porn either, Greebo. We were discussing one researcher's postings of pictures of under-aged girls in suggestive poses. None were really nude (though they were scantily clad), but the intent was obviously sexual. Is that then pornography? Not in the true definition of the word. Is it morally problematic? Perhaps.Which is why I put the things about blurring the lines in our culture. So legally, if a 21-year-old dates a 15-year-old, it's wrong. But if a 65-year-old dates a 19-year-old, it's not.

Why is 18 the arbitrary age that is chosen? Legally, yes you are an adult. But in matters of sexuality, some people are mature by a very young age. Others never are. It's a difficult subject to sort out.Is it really any worse for someone to use an adult woman who was sexually abused as a child, and therefore quite possibly has trouble making good choices about sex, in a sexually explicit photo shoot than, say,a 17-year-old? Emotionally, the 17-year-old might actually be BETTER equipped to make a choice. But laws need to start somewhere.

Here in the U.S., we have some of the most prudish ideas about sex in the Western world, and also the highest (reported) rates of rape. Odd. I believe it's the very fact that we make the subject so taboo that causes a problem.

Here in the US we are also in quite a bit of denial about young people and sex. Despite the fact that people in their very early teens continually get pregnant at an alarming rate, many of us have difficulty facing the fact that children are, indeed, capable of being sexual. By avoiding the issue we are asking for trouble. And trouble is what we are getting.

Is it true that in America someone who is 17 may legally have sex with someone who is 16, but someone who is 18 may not legally have sex with someone who is 17?
(And the fact that 8 people of mixed sex in a room with no socks is officially an Orgy in Alabama, apparently, (thanks Tim))

Sad part of that is, you're right TC! And to think that a couple of generations ago an unmarried 18 year old female in Alabama was considered an "Old Maid"!

Time changes opinions, and opinions change the times. It's a cultural thing, and cultural differences scare us!

It swings like an ever expanding pendulum. Always swinging out and in, but always further out than in.

One day the weight of the swing will destroy the clock, and the process will start all over from the beginning. History has proven this to be true.

In the meantime, all we can do is to set our own limits, live by them and hope to hold things together until it becomes "SOP".

NM

Sorry....I meant "SEP"!

NM

Whats SEP?

"S"omebody "E"lses "P"roblem!

NM

Sorry. Must keep up with my biblical passage reading

He-he!!!.......I was wondering why you'd be asking on this site!!!LOL It runs right along with "Total Improbability Drive", if I'm not mistaken!!

NM

My feelings is that better definition of porn is achieved by using lower compression jpeg or png files.

Oscar: Indeed.

I haven't read much of the trilogy recently - I've been busy. Exams.

Anyway, not all h2g2's would know where their towels are.

Did ya know the Ace's were going to be called 'The Towel Bearers'? Apparently it didn't happen as they were trying to make h2g2 more inclusive of strags.

Ah-ha, this again! The laws are more lenient than they sound, to those who know them well. In situations where people know what they're doing, no harm is done besides artificial, legislated guilt.

In the United States, or at least California, the laws state that anyone over the age of 16 is allowed to have consentual sex with anyone between 16 and 18. Furthermore, if they have been dating the person they are involved with for over a year, they (the older partner) may be up to three years older and it would still be legal (i.e. seventeen and twenty). Knowledge of this law has saved lots of borderline couples. Really, if both parties conduct themselves in a responsible manner and are aware of who can know, who shouldn't know, and who has to consent (like parents, etc.), laws can't and don't interfere. So all that's really needed is a knowledge of the law - who is required to report such incidences, etc.

So in short: if it's okay with the younger party's parents, there's no pregnancy, and there's not much public display, no one gets in trouble. Only those employed by public welfare officials are required to report suspicions, and only they are usually given heed.

I've always said "As long as it's legal, it's ok" if intentions are good - and if they aren't, it's hopefully a growing experience and nothing more. I also think legal age, at least in the U.S., should be lowered - but only with more instruction of proper conduct, which is needed regardless.

Porn is a personal point of view - it's not even about arousal, it's about offense. Remember that porn isn't only sexual - it can be cursing, religiously offensive material, etc. Orff's music was considered pornographic. The use of the word 'pornography' to refer to sexually arousing material is a twist and stretch of the word. If you were offended (arousal could accompany that or not, it plays no part) by the pictures you were talking about and their implications, *then* it's porn.

People should date whoever they damn well please, thanky'verymuch.

Whew!!!......Fenny, I applaude you!

Been on the "downside" of "Age of Consent" laws! In certain cases they are a bit silly!(Actually, my first wife and I married before either of us were 18....THAT should be against the law!!!)



In my opinion...as an adult.......porn is what *YOU* think porn is. If you don't like it....don't look!(I really wasn't planning on putting my opinion in here....but....it's my way!!!)

'Course....what parents want their kids to see on the 'puter is another subject all together!

NM

You're right, that SHOULD be against the law... lol! I was with someone significantly older than myself almost 2 years before I was 'legal', and it never caused any harm besides people giving me wierd, horrific, disgusted looks when they found out... I do, however, understand that most people would probably not be able to handle such a situation. This should be left up the the INDIVIDUAL to find out, in a perfect world.

As for kids - I think the taboo should just be stricken an' kids shouldn't be so sheltered. But since this isn't what most people think, doesn't this make sense: In order to take care of that children and the web thing, I think there should be a simple division: xxx.websiteaddress.com instead of www.websiteaddress.com for sexually explicit material. I've stumbled upon so many porn sites by accidentally typing in something the wrong way, and this would prevent this and allow screening to be a lot simpler. (I started that as a question, so here's the corrosponding ?).

I'm ranting a bit too much. Back to our regularly scheduled behaviour, thanks.

I always thought 'pornography' meant 'the writing of prostitutes' which was then expanded to the current definition.

While an xxx probably wouldn't be accepted, a [Broken link removed by Moderator]would be useful too...

Now that I look it up in the fancy-dancy origin of root words dictionary supplement, you're right. But I still think it's been expanded to the point of anything obscene/offensive, just through use. Because I'm stubborn, an' that's what I was taught and have observed to be true.

Same idea. Just something that would prevent mistakes and make screening that much easier.