The case of child porn is instructive. The history in countries where it was legal, and the weight of the scholarly evidence, clearly shows it comes down on the side on providing an outlet for those urges and decreasing child molestation, not normalizing it with an increase. But because any normal person finds it horrible, it's banned, but at the expense of significantly higher sex crimes against children. Nobody should think that a worthwhile trade-off to stop people from jerking off to pictures, and spen
If you pick single clear examples, yeah, it's not arbitrary. Why would you think it would be? Here you go, draw the line:
1) John is like a pretzel with no salt. 2) John is ugly. 3) John is fugly. 4) John's mom wished she would have aborted him. 5) If John died, would anyone care? 6) Any day that John gets hurt is a good day. 7) I cheer on anyone who punches someone like John. 8) Would be nice if someone would go over and fuck John up. 9) If John does that again, I'm going to kick his ass. 10) I'm buying a beer for the first person to kick John in the nuts. 11) Anyone up for kicking John's ass? 12) Lets all meet at 10am tomorrow morning at John's house and teach him a thing or two. 13) The John beatdown party for tomorrow is on! 12 confirmed participants. 14) [image of gun] John, I'm coming for you.
Feel free to envision a vast spectrum for child porn as well, with differing amounts of clothes and levels of sexual innuendo through actual sex, with stick figures to uncanny valley 3D to photo-realistic 3D to real children.
If you don't think it's going to be arbitrary, I don't think you've thought about it hard enough. And you don't realize that most everyone is going to have a different line than you'll have.
Your comment is insightful, as modded. However, I'd answer by saying that everything in the real world is on a spectrum and unless you want to exist all the way on the end of the spectrum (which is often an argument to absurdity) then you have to draw a line somewhere. The line is going to be somewhat arbitrary and will somewhat conform to "community standards". If you don't like it then don't live in that community or stay and try to push the standards your way (not being an a-hole there, just realistic). The way to not change community standards is to insist on 100% purity and extremes in everything. Instead, push for realistic changes and push the line a little at a time -- that's how many good social changes have occurred. And for those firebrands out there who say they should have whatever they want, whenever they want -- the "community" can push back a lot harder than you can if provoked enough.
Everything is on a spectrum, and not acknowledging that ends in failure. Wanting a simplistic binary choice is almost never a functional solution, unless you're talking about actual 1s and 0s.
My general philosophy is to come to an agreement on the borders of the extremes, and then set up a methodology for judging everything else. In my example above, I'd take the position of saying, "1-5 is fine, and 10-14 is not. Everything else needs to be judged based on the following...." And t
Funnily enough, we've already done this as a society over the last 1000 years or so. 10-14 are potentially illegal, with the ease of prosecution going up as you approach 14. This is particularly true if there is any other evidence available of actual intent to follow through on any of these.
Note that in most jurisdictions both are crimes as well as instigating or encouraging others to engage in these crimes. This is similar to yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater. So starting from #7; #8, #9, #10, #11, #12, #13, #14 are all already crimes. #14 is a special type of assault "uttering death threats" which is far more severe.
This line is not at all subjective or arbitrary as you claim. You are wro
Really tho, dont conflate the act of speaking about an act with performing the act. Those are very different things. All of those COMMENTS bout John should be ok to say without beeing CENSORED. However, some of those maybe constitue a crime (such as offering goods for beatings) and should be punished by whatever laws apply.
I think your pron example is particularly stupid, because its an actual problem. Thats also why its illegal, like drugs. People doing it, selling it, sharing it, possessing it,
Anal gangbang videos are legal. Should they be on youtube? What about videos of people committing suicide? Religious cults recruiting? Mentally ill people posting their episodes? Gore vids? Anorexia promotion?
Liberty is a dangerous thing. It sounds like you have seen the possibilities and want less liberty for those around you because their preferences don't align with yours... which really means that you hate liberty.
So promoting that content is considered leaving them alone? If I'm the one holding the megaphone at a "kill all the bunnies" rally, but don't actually touch the keynote speaker, am I leaving him alone?
Research is what I'm doing when I don't know what I'm doing.
-- Wernher von Braun
Good (Score:1, Insightful)
I see no problem here (except with some employees who are complaining, who should probably be fired).
Re:Good (Score:2)
*Exceptions being the obvious ones, illegal content, kiddy pron.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
illegal content
Oops.. That's pretty arbitrary, don't you think? Anything can be made illegal at the drop of a hat. Or has everybody forgotten already?
The only thing that is truly threatened by "toxic" content is mass media and the institutions dependent on its propaganda.
Re: Good (Score:2)
OY! You got a license for that joke?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:0)
Re:Good (Score:5, Insightful)
If you pick single clear examples, yeah, it's not arbitrary. Why would you think it would be? Here you go, draw the line:
1) John is like a pretzel with no salt.
2) John is ugly.
3) John is fugly.
4) John's mom wished she would have aborted him.
5) If John died, would anyone care?
6) Any day that John gets hurt is a good day.
7) I cheer on anyone who punches someone like John.
8) Would be nice if someone would go over and fuck John up.
9) If John does that again, I'm going to kick his ass.
10) I'm buying a beer for the first person to kick John in the nuts.
11) Anyone up for kicking John's ass?
12) Lets all meet at 10am tomorrow morning at John's house and teach him a thing or two.
13) The John beatdown party for tomorrow is on! 12 confirmed participants.
14) [image of gun] John, I'm coming for you.
Feel free to envision a vast spectrum for child porn as well, with differing amounts of clothes and levels of sexual innuendo through actual sex, with stick figures to uncanny valley 3D to photo-realistic 3D to real children.
If you don't think it's going to be arbitrary, I don't think you've thought about it hard enough. And you don't realize that most everyone is going to have a different line than you'll have.
Re:Good (Score:4, Insightful)
Your comment is insightful, as modded. However, I'd answer by saying that everything in the real world is on a spectrum and unless you want to exist all the way on the end of the spectrum (which is often an argument to absurdity) then you have to draw a line somewhere. The line is going to be somewhat arbitrary and will somewhat conform to "community standards". If you don't like it then don't live in that community or stay and try to push the standards your way (not being an a-hole there, just realistic). The way to not change community standards is to insist on 100% purity and extremes in everything. Instead, push for realistic changes and push the line a little at a time -- that's how many good social changes have occurred. And for those firebrands out there who say they should have whatever they want, whenever they want -- the "community" can push back a lot harder than you can if provoked enough.
Re: (Score:2)
That was largely my point.
Everything is on a spectrum, and not acknowledging that ends in failure. Wanting a simplistic binary choice is almost never a functional solution, unless you're talking about actual 1s and 0s.
My general philosophy is to come to an agreement on the borders of the extremes, and then set up a methodology for judging everything else. In my example above, I'd take the position of saying, "1-5 is fine, and 10-14 is not. Everything else needs to be judged based on the following...." And t
Re: (Score:2)
Funnily enough, we've already done this as a society over the last 1000 years or so. 10-14 are potentially illegal, with the ease of prosecution going up as you approach 14. This is particularly true if there is any other evidence available of actual intent to follow through on any of these.
That should be YouTube et al's standard.
Re: (Score:0)
You need to be mindful of the difference between assault and battery.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Note that in most jurisdictions both are crimes as well as instigating or encouraging others to engage in these crimes. This is similar to yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater. So starting from #7; #8, #9, #10, #11, #12, #13, #14 are all already crimes. #14 is a special type of assault "uttering death threats" which is far more severe.
This line is not at all subjective or arbitrary as you claim. You are wro
Re: (Score:3)
----------------------
Once you incite violence, you've crossed the line.
Re: (Score:1)
You really don't like John do you.
Re: (Score:0)
Poor John.
Really tho, dont conflate the act of speaking about an act with performing the act. Those are very different things. All of those COMMENTS bout John should be ok to say without beeing CENSORED. However, some of those maybe constitue a crime (such as offering goods for beatings) and should be punished by whatever laws apply.
I think your pron example is particularly stupid, because its an actual problem. Thats also why its illegal, like drugs. People doing it, selling it, sharing it, possessing it,
Re: (Score:0)
Re: Good (Score:0)
Anal gangbang videos are legal. Should they be on youtube?
What about videos of people committing suicide?
Religious cults recruiting?
Mentally ill people posting their episodes?
Gore vids?
Anorexia promotion?
Re: (Score:0)
Liberty is a dangerous thing. It sounds like you have seen the possibilities and want less liberty for those around you because their preferences don't align with yours ... which really means that you hate liberty.
Typical.
Re: (Score:0)
GanjaDude doesn't want to watch any of that. But he does want ganja videos. 24/7/365.2425 ganja videos.
Re: (Score:3)
I think it is fine to ban extremely graphic content, including sex and violence, as you described.
I think it is not fine to ban ideas.
So yes, allow cult recruiting, mentally ill people posting, anorexia promotion. All of that. Yes. Absolutely.
Re: (Score:1)
I think it is fine to ban extremely graphic content
Damn, man! I thought you were a true believer.. This is a sad day
Re: (Score:2)
A true believer in ... what?
Re: (Score:1)
Free speech, you big dummy!
Re: (Score:0)
yes, no, yes, yes, no, no
Re: (Score:2)
Yes to all.
If you're worried about idiots seeing that and harming themselves or others, the problem is with the idiot.
Re: (Score:0)
So promoting that content is considered leaving them alone? If I'm the one holding the megaphone at a "kill all the bunnies" rally, but don't actually touch the keynote speaker, am I leaving him alone?