Welcome to Slashdot Technology The Internet Microsoft Music Linux
 faq
 code
 osdn
 awards
 privacy
 slashNET
 older stuff
 rob's page
 preferences
 submit story
 advertising
 supporters
 past polls
 topics
 about
 jobs
 hof

Sections
4/22
apache
4/25 (9)
askslashdot
4/17
books
4/25 (2)
bsd
4/25 (2)
developers
4/23
features
4/20
interviews
1/9
radio
4/25 (4)
science
4/25
yro
OSDN
freshmeat
Linux.com
SourceForge
ThinkGeek
Question
 Exchange

NewsForge
SlashCode

'Yahoo! To Start Selling Porn' | Login/Create an Account | Top | 401 comments | Search Discussion
Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. Slashdot is not responsible for what they say.
This is a moral outrage! (Score:5, Funny)
by Anne Marie on Wednesday April 11, @11:59AM EST (#31)
(User #239347 Info)
I'd thought that Yahoo learned their lesson with all those French and German lawsuits about Nazi memorabilia. Now they're selling pornography?

Pornography is indistinguishable from rape. It runs women through a blender, converting their bodies into liquified youth. There is no such thing as consent in pornography, because every person involved is there because of dire economic need. But we tolerate women's public humiliation and public rape, because men universally crave and devour pornography.

How can Yahoo justify profiting from such exploitation? I understand Yahoo's stock prices are slipping and they're desperate to pump some new revenue sources, but pornography is unconscienable. Every dollar Yahoo makes is now tainted with the blood and tears of exploited women.

This calls for a boycott. This calls for a public outcry. There is no excuse for sitting by the sidelines and watching the world go by. Everyone who does not actively oppose this move is complicit in human suffering.

The Ten Commandments tell us, "Thou shalt not rape!" The Bible also tells us to love our neighbors as ourselves. Yahoo fails.

If we let Yahoo sell pornography like this, then it's a slippery slope down to having them sell videos of executions. If you thought it was bad that Dale Earnhardt's autopsy photos were almost published, imagine if you'd had to see photos of electricuted criminals in your Sunday newspaper.

The need to exploit others for profit is a pervasive one in our society, but it's not one that we can't arrest as we arrest other criminal passions. The free market cannot thrive unless we police it for criminal activity such as this, just as it cannot thrive unless we police the market square for pickpockets.

Pornography kills women's souls. Pornography burns men's souls. There is no victor here, except for the ugly head of capitalism. Yahoo must not be allowed to perpetuate this abomination against humanity.

-- Anne Marie
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
<<Sex IS the only internet business plan by Bug2000 (Score:1) | So... by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) >>
Moderation Totals:Flamebait=2, Troll=18, Insightful=4, Interesting=7, Funny=13, Overrated=1, Total=45.
1 | 2 (Slashdot Overload: CommentLimit 50)
Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:5, Funny)
by SamBeckett (bischoff@rickjr.diespammers.org) on Wednesday April 11, @12:01PM EST (#40)
(User #96685 Info) http://rickjr.org
do u have any nudes


Look, Homer, a peanut - Barney.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:1)
by still cynical on Wednesday April 11, @12:03PM EST (#43)
(User #17020 Info)
I'm curious, why aren't you concerned about the men who appear in pornography?

--- Ignorance is the root of all evil.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
twat (Score:0)
by Shitsack Comments on Wednesday April 11, @12:04PM EST (#49)
(User #256887 Info) http://www.bellypunching.net
How much for a blowjob? Or better yet, a Strawberry Shortcake? While watching a video of Timothy McVeigh frying in the chair?


?
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 11, @12:08PM EST (#57)
Err, what about the men being exploited?

Male porno actors are paid even less than their female counterparts.

And believe it or not, males aren't the only buyers of pornography.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:1)
by ReidMaynard (me@here.earth) on Wednesday April 11, @12:08PM EST (#58)
(User #161608 Info) http://home.nc.rr.com/rmaynard/
wow ... what a bitch

"I'm not a number, er, oh yea, I'm #161608."
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 11, @12:08PM EST (#61)
The Ten Commandments tell us, "Thou shalt not rape!"

There is no such commandment.
Yes, I have been trolled.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:2)
by drewmat (hammy12345@nospam.hotmail.com) on Wednesday April 11, @12:08PM EST (#62)
(User #198981 Info)
I agree, except in that "thou shalt not rape!" is not one of the ten commandments. It's wrong just the same. Ted Bundy said in an interview before he was executed that the major fuel for his blood lust was pr0n. Personally I wouldn't mind seeing pr0n totally banned.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:2, Informative)
    by Fat Rat Bastard (nathan@f-a-t-r-a-t-b-a-s-t-a-r-d.com) on Wednesday April 11, @12:20PM EST (#95)
    (User #170520 Info) http://www.fatratbastard.com
    Funny. I've seen pornographic videos, looked at a hustler or two, taken a gander at alt.binaries.erotica.*. I haven't killed/raped/maimed anyone. Hmm... maybe the major "fuel" for Bundy's bloodlust was because HE WAS A NUT CASE.

    Nah, can't be. Personal responsibility is so "yesterday." Proof by anecdote, so it must be right. Let's just ignore that every study, from those under Nixon to those under Regan have shown NO connection between porn and violence.

    If you don't have anything nice to say, say it often.
    - Ed the Sock

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      cause/effect (Score:5, Funny)
      by The Queen (valvolene@SPAMSUX_holophrastic.com) on Wednesday April 11, @01:22PM EST (#160)
      (User #56621 Info) http://holophrastic.com
      Don't remember where I saw this, but I'm sure it's legit: "Out of convicted rapists, 57% admitted to reading pornography. 95% admitted to reading the Bible."

      Rape a feminist for Jesus!

      "Smear'd with gumms of glutenous heat, I touch..." - Comus, John Milton
      -Queen Valvolene-
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
        math major? (Score:1, Interesting)
        by levl289 (spam1@sonous.com (it works)) on Wednesday April 11, @02:29PM EST (#214)
        (User #72277 Info) http://www.sonous.com
        So then by your logic, since 100% of those same convicts drank water, drinking water also has something to do with their offenses?

        Why does every SlashBot have to be so binary as to think that pornography has nothing to do with a changed perception of females? Give me conclusive proof that it doesn't, and I'll believe you, but when you quote anecdotal evidence to make yourself better, you accomlish very little.

        Feel free to moderate this down, since I'm sure nobody really wants to admit this to themselves...

        Q: What do you think about American Culture?
        A: I think it's a good idea.
        (adapted from Ghandi)

        [ Reply to This | Parent ]
          Barbie sez Math is hard. (Score:2)
          by The Queen (valvolene@SPAMSUX_holophrastic.com) on Wednesday April 11, @02:33PM EST (#217)
          (User #56621 Info) http://holophrastic.com
          I don't usually defend myself, but... mathematically speaking, what this tells us is that some rapists read pr0no AND the bible. And I never said anything about them not having a changed perception of females; wouldn't they have to have in order to rape in the first place?

          "Smear'd with gumms of glutenous heat, I touch..." - Comus, John Milton
          -Queen Valvolene-
          [ Reply to This | Parent ]
          Re:math major? (Score:2, Insightful)
          by Fat Rat Bastard (nathan@f-a-t-r-a-t-b-a-s-t-a-r-d.com) on Wednesday April 11, @02:46PM EST (#224)
          (User #170520 Info) http://www.fatratbastard.com
          First of all, statistics DO NOT prove casuality. Hence the water, bible, and porn analagy are all off base (which, I believe, is the point The Queen was trying to make).

          Second, it can be argued that EVERY stimulus changes a person's perception of ANYTHING. The question is as long as I don't harm you or your property what right do you have to tell me what to "sense," be it porn, the bible, water, bad boy bands, televison, etc?

          You may not *like* what I choose to do with my life, but (pardon my french) that's your fucking problem.

          If you don't have anything nice to say, say it often.
          - Ed the Sock

          [ Reply to This | Parent ]
            Re:math major? (Score:1)
            by levl289 (spam1@sonous.com (it works)) on Wednesday April 11, @04:06PM EST (#258)
            (User #72277 Info) http://www.sonous.com
            While statistics do not prove causality, within research they are helpful. I'm certainly not arguing whether a person should be allowed to look at porn, but to argue the point that it doesn't affect people in any way (more than something random), is also being blind to human nature.

            Kind of along the same lines as what the media portrays on television - yeah, people might watch it, and people might like it, but being in a position of high visibility, you can also make the choice not to show it, and instead show something useful [insert arguments of how porn is useful].

            Censorship is when someone prevents you from doing something - I'm a libertarian, so I wouldn't even dare suggest that.

            Q: What do you think about American Culture?
            A: I think it's a good idea.
            (adapted from Ghandi)

            [ Reply to This | Parent ]
              Re:math major? (Score:1)
              by Fat Rat Bastard (nathan@f-a-t-r-a-t-b-a-s-t-a-r-d.com) on Wednesday April 11, @05:47PM EST (#293)
              (User #170520 Info) http://www.fatratbastard.com
              While statistics do not prove causality, within research they are helpful. I'm certainly not arguing whether a person should be allowed to look at porn, but to argue the point that it doesn't affect people in any way (more than something random), is also being blind to human nature.

              And I was arguing otherwise where exactly? As I said above everything you "sense" has an effect on you, be it large or small.

              Kind of along the same lines as what the media portrays on television - yeah, people might watch it, and people might like it, but being in a position of high visibility, you can also make the choice not to show it, and instead show something useful

              Or, since they are companies with sharholders to whom they are obligated to make money for, they can show programming that attracts viewers so they can meet that obligation. Yes, I think that most TV is crap, but there's an easy solution to that. I don't watch crap TV. The few shows I do like I watch. TV stations are no more beholden to me than any other business. If they want my business then they'll cater to what I like. If I want 24 hours of wall to wall "usefull television" then I'd better start my own network. I have no more right to demand "useful" programming from a TV station/network than I have to demand that the deli next to my work starts making food that doesn't taste like cardboard, or make Cosmo publish pictures of only redheads. The flip side of that is no one should have the right to tell me to stop doing something that is not a threat to someone else's well-being or property, which includes things that one, a few, or many people don't like.

              [insert arguments of how porn is useful]

              How is music useful, or water fountains, or art? Usefullness is in the eye of the beholder. I'm sure a religious zealot would argue that nothing but wall to wall, 24 hour religious programming would be "useful," show those heathens how to live a good life. Something so subjective shouldn't be a criteria for existance.


              If you don't have anything nice to say, say it often.
              - Ed the Sock

              [ Reply to This | Parent ]
        Re:cause/effect (Score:0, Redundant)
        by ralmeida on Wednesday April 11, @03:04PM EST (#238)
        (User #106461 Info) http://robertoaf.dealmeida.net/

        Don't remember where I saw this, but I'm sure it's legit: "Out of convicted rapists, 57% admitted to reading pornography. 95% admitted to reading the Bible."

        And 100% drank water and breathed air!!!

        --
        If you think my post is senseless, try reading it backwards.

        [ Reply to This | Parent ]
        Re:cause/effect (Score:1)
        by elefantstn on Wednesday April 11, @03:32PM EST (#250)
        (User #195873 Info) http://www.shenknet.com
        Don't remember where I saw this, but I'm sure it's legit

        Ha ha ha ha!


        [ Reply to This | Parent ]
        Re:cause/effect (Score:2, Insightful)
        by tommyServ0 (paul AT paultastic DOT com) on Wednesday April 11, @06:49PM EST (#311)
        (User #266153 Info) http://www.paultastic.com

        This seems bogus. only 57% admitted to reading porn? I'm asking this because, everyone I know has at some point (guys, anyway) seen or read porn. I can understand the 95% Bible thing because most everyone has read the Bible at least once in their life.

        So, this statistic seems very neato and scandalous, but it seems very manufactured and you haven't cited your source. Why is this modded 5?

        So here's my stat, so you can mod me at 5, too:

        55% of all rapists use computers, and 98% of them were Windows users.



        --
        Consider the daffodil. And while you're doing that, I'll be over here, looking through your stuff.
        [ Reply to This | Parent ]
        Re:cause/effect (Score:1)
        by underpaidISPtech on Wednesday April 11, @07:59PM EST (#319)
        (User #409395 Info) http://soundmethod.net
        I'll admit the part about the bible is amusing, but *rape a feminist for Jesus* ? What the hell is so funny about that?

        I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy, troll or not.


        Want custom streaming audio? http://soundmethod.net.

        [ Reply to This | Parent ]
          Re:cause/effect (Score:1)
          by mikefe on Wednesday April 11, @08:13PM EST (#320)
          (User #98074 Info)
          I'm a christian, and I thought it was a little funny, maybe not 5, but funny...
          I Am Not A Lawer, but here's the contract I wrote that should....
          [ Reply to This | Parent ]
        Re:cause/effect (Score:1)
        by Tungz10 on Wednesday April 11, @09:35PM EST (#330)
        (User #99857 Info)
        Hasn't it been estimated before that 5% of felons are wrongly convicted?

        Now how does THAT fit into your statistics?
        [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:0)
      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 11, @02:03PM EST (#198)
      I agree with this post!
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:0)
    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 11, @02:08PM EST (#205)
    I'm having trouble understanding the last part of your argument.
    "Personally I wouldn't mind seeing pr0n totally banned."
    I'm guessing that your goal is to see pr0n go away. Personally, I wouldn't mind if pr0n didn't exist at all. But how, exactly, does banning it make it go away? That's like saying making drugs illegal will end the use of those drugs.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:2)
by n3rd on Wednesday April 11, @12:10PM EST (#65)
(User #111397 Info)
If we let Yahoo sell pornography like this, then it's a slippery slope down to having them sell videos of executions.

Isn't this the same argument the War on Drugs uses?

This calls for a boycott.

Are you then prepared to boycott any each and every other business and orginization that sells pornography? Where is the line drawn? Do movies with sex scenes count as "pornography" and should be banned? Take Eyes Wide Shut for example.

The free market cannot thrive unless we police it for criminal activity such as this..

Morality and the law are two completely and totally separate subjects. The current law states pronography is legal, thus it is not criminal activity. Also, if you would look at the numbers the free market DOES thrive because of things such as this. Right, wrong on indifferent, these are the facts.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
    No (Score:1, Funny)
    by Anne Marie on Wednesday April 11, @02:10PM EST (#206)
    (User #239347 Info)
    The war on drugs is an unfortunate attempt by conservatives to impose their own blind view of proper private behavior upon others.

    Pornography, in contrast, is a public enterprise dealing in wares that are by definition non-consensual. No one can consent to participating in pornography, just as no one can consent to non-sexual slavery under the 13th amendment.

    Are you then prepared to boycott any each and every other business and orginization that sells pornography?


    Yes.

    Where is the line drawn? Do movies with sex scenes count as "pornography" and should be banned?

    Draw the line at exploitation. Are women being exploited? Then it's pornography and should be banned. It's important to understand these issues by the power bases they draw from and the hegemonies they perpetuate.

    Morality and the law are two completely and totally separate subjects.

    That's false. Law is public morality. Law properly seeks to be moral. The fact that pornography is currently legal is not an argument for allowing to let it remain so, just as the existence of slavery didn't preclude the abolitionist movement.

    Also, if you would look at the numbers the free market DOES thrive because of things such as this.

    So does organized crime, at the expense of our neighbors and loved-ones.

    You are without a moral or legal leg to stand on.
    -- Anne Marie
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      You would have a valid argument (Score:1)
      by Pfhor (chrisb@zarquon*nospam-industries.com) on Wednesday April 11, @02:46PM EST (#223)
      (User #40220 Info)
      If you A) posted things that weren't just inflammatory B) gave us links or real reports C) gave logical rebuttals.

      I can see how in some cases pornography could be forced upon someone, but that person could be a man or a woman. Homosexual boys end up worse in some cases, since they end up getting kicked out of the house, and some turn to prostitution.

      Have you considered that some people enjoy being on video. Enjoy having sex for money. Enjoy their choice in life. And they weren't forced into it.

      You sound like either a single view pointed bigot or a well planned troll. Your last 5 points are meant to be inflammatory. The one about monkeys is just a joke. So either shutup or make a legitimate argument.
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
        Re:You would have a valid argument (Score:1)
        by theneel on Thursday April 12, @01:21AM EST (#352)
        (User #409691 Info)
        You sound like either a single view pointed bigot or a well planned troll. Your last 5 points are meant to be inflammatory. The one about monkeys is just a joke. So either shutup or make a legitimate argument.

        To me, it is you who has a single view. It is you who is being inflammatory. And it is you who should come up with some sort of legitimate argument or shut up. You probably like to censor all views that do not reflect your own (if you have even bothered to form your own opinions and not just borrowed from the rest boys in the /. locker room).

        -neel
        [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      anne marie 4 slashdot 0 (Score:0)
      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 11, @02:58PM EST (#233)
      who let the trolls out!
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re:No (Score:5, Insightful)
      by n3rd on Wednesday April 11, @02:59PM EST (#234)
      (User #111397 Info)
      The war on drugs is an unfortunate attempt by conservatives to impose their own blind view of proper private behavior upon others.

      Isn't this what you're doing, only it is proper public behavior? If a woman and I made a private video of us having sex, would this consititue pornography in your opinion?

      Pornography, in contrast, is a public enterprise dealing in wares that are by definition non-consensual.

      Dictionary.com states the definition of pornography is Pictures, writing, or other material that is sexually explicit and sometimes equates sex with power and violence.. I don't see anything mentioning non-consentual, do you?

      No one can consent to participating in pornography...

      So you are saying that each and every woman and man who participates in pornography is doing so against his or her own free will? Not only this is a blanket statement, but I don't feel it's true. Please elaborate.

      That's false. Law is public morality. Law properly seeks to be moral. The fact that pornography is currently legal is not an argument for allowing to let it remain so, just as the existence of slavery didn't preclude the abolitionist movement.

      Ahh, an excellent argument!! I cannot debate this. :)

      So does organized crime, at the expense of our neighbors and loved-ones.

      You obviously need to see the flip side of organized crime. John Gotti used to have an annual party for everyone in his old neighborhood, and they weren't happy to see him go. There's another side to everything.

      Frankly, I understand your argument, however the foundation of that argument (that pornography is non-consentual and exploits women) in my opinion is flawed. Perhaps the law should be changed, but the law, which is "public morality" currently seems to disagree.

      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re:No (Score:0)
      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 11, @03:07PM EST (#241)
      "No one can consent to participating in pornography"

      I find this assertion confusing. In most states in this country, the age of consent for sexual activity is 18. In this country, it is perfectly legal to record the sexual activities of consenting adults, provided they also consent to the recording. So what exactly is the prohibition against "participating in" pornography? Is it some hidden legal prohibition? Is it physically impossible? Or is it a moral prohibition? If the latter, shut up and eat some angel food cake whilst I jerk off to some vivid video.

      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
        Re:No (Score:1)
        by Spoobie on Friday April 13, @03:05PM EST (#393)
        (User #113024 Info)
        In this country, it is perfectly legal to record the sexual activities of consenting adults, provided they also consent to the recording.

        Au contrair! Section 43.23(c)(2) of the Texas Penal Code states (emphasis is mine):

        A person commits an offense if, knowing its content and character, he produces, presents, or directs an obscene performance or participates in a portion thereof that is obscene or that contributes to its obscenity.
        While it doesn't come straight out and say "Thall shalt not record a shagging," a prosecutor doesn't need much skill to interpret that say saying as much. Prosecutor convinces judge and jury, and you land in jail without passing Go. Even if you are aquitted, you're still out the money you paid a lawyer (you did pay a lawyer, right?), your time while locked up, and your good name. Actually, that whole section of the code is quite a hoot to read. It's a sad example of the closed-minded thinking that still goes on down here in the South.
        [ Reply to This | Parent ]
          Re:No (Score:0)
          by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 16, @09:16PM EST (#399)
          The legal definition of obscenity is not 1:1 equilvalent to pornography; if you're going to play street lawyer at least do some homework first.
          [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Anne Marie, you're no better than a Nazi (Score:0)
      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 11, @03:10PM EST (#243)
      In my eyes, that is. You're so blinded by your gender crusade that the Ku Klux Klan ideology seems more appealing than your BS, and Im hispanic!

      "The war on drugs is an unfortunate attempt by conservatives to impose their own blind view of proper private behavior upon others."

      It's pretty obvious that you've never seen anyone die to their heroin addiction, like I have. You would know that there are some drugs that we should never stop fighting, if only for our children. By the way, if you knew your history, then you would know that the legalization of Opium in China during Britain's colonization was an atrocity beyond measure. Personally, I think you're full of shit. And yes, God sees this too. You should make it a point to correct this before meeting your maker.

      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re:No (Score:1)
      by geigertube on Wednesday April 11, @03:28PM EST (#249)
      (User #265640 Info) http://www.studiosputnik.com
      >Draw the line at exploitation. Are women being exploited? Then it's pornography and should be banned. It's important to understand these issues by the power bases they perpetuate.

      This is so extreme im having a hard time believing its serious. But anyway..

      Define "exploitation" here. If, you plan on eliminating porn only because it exploits women, I think that if we follow through on that and apply it to the rest of the world, we should ban most if not all of what goes on in our lives.

      Factory work can easily be described as expolitative. Women probably worked on the computer you are using. Yet you use it. Same with the clothes you are wearing and the food you are eating that is harvested by exploited workers. I am forced into working at a boring job because I need money. Etc. etc.

      Dearie, -life- is exploitative. The time to opt out is now.

      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re:No (Score:2)
      by Syberghost (syberghost.NOHAM@NOPORK.eiv.com) on Wednesday April 11, @03:52PM EST (#254)
      (User #10557 Info) http://www.eiv.com/users/syberghost
      The war on drugs is an unfortunate attempt by conservatives to impose their own blind view of proper private behavior upon others.

      BWAHAHAHAHAHA! This is funny! How many people watch a dirty movie that causes them to have the steering wheel melt out of their hands, and crash into a busload of nuns? At least the anti-drug nuts can show a possible avenue of harm to folks who have not chosen of their own free will to participate.

      You can't show anything but your own assertion that pornography harms anyone. Sorry, you'll need more than assertions to get action from anybody except a bunch of bitter, frigid prudes.

      Pornography, in contrast, is a public enterprise dealing in wares that are by definition non-consensual. No one can consent to participating in pornography, just as no one can consent to non-sexual slavery under the 13th amendment.

      Ah, yes; here we have the claim of self-evident, revealed knowledge. It had to be coming, you insane fanatics always come around to it sooner or later. In fact, it sounds remarkably like the reasons Nazis give for Aryan superiority.

      How about you provide some background for this belief, other than "Anne Marie says so".

      Draw the line at exploitation. Are women being exploited? Then it's pornography and should be banned. It's important to understand these issues by the power bases they draw from and the hegemonies they perpetuate.

      Congratulations, you have managed to come full circle; you *ARE* talking about banning sex scenes. And cheerleading. And surrogate mothers.

      Curiously, you seem to think it's physically impossible to exploit men, and that no man could ever possibly be forced to participate in pornography.

      Just because you don't like sex doesn't mean other women don't.

      Are you then prepared to boycott any each and every other business and orginization that sells pornography?

      Yes.


      Great; well, Slashdot has porn posted on it every day. Please start your boycott. Go away.

      -
      FOR GREAT JUSTICE.
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re:No (Score:1)
      by bogado on Wednesday April 11, @08:53PM EST (#323)
      (User #25959 Info) http://www.bogado.net
      I must reply to this. You talk as if no one would ever want to be sexual or sexy. Many people do like to show themself, and please tell me what is wrong with that?

      What you are sujesting is something like sayng that the south american indians (for those who never saw a picture of them, they used to walk arround naked) are perverts. They simply have a diferent culture, that does not see nothing wrong in walking naked.

      Well, but people who do pornography is from the same sulture, wright? I don't think so, if someone is a jew isn't this person from a diferent tradition? Well many people simply don't belive as hard in jesus or any other religion to think that what they are doing is fundamently wrong as you are saying, some people don't follow any religion at all. I don't belive that there's nothing wrong with pornography. Shure I am against rape and abuse, but that's compleatly diferent from porn.

      Just because you would feel raped if you made porn yourself, does not mean anyone else would feel the same. If you feel abused by porn does not mean that everyone would feel the same way. There is no such thing as one morality for all! Every person should set's their stanrds and live by them, as long you don't cross other person line you're not doing anything wrong.

      In my opinion if you managed to ban porn for good you wuold being abusive to many people. In fact you be as abusive as a tiran gorvernor that bans books that do not agree with his polices. The only diference is that you're banning based in "morality" instead of politics.


      --
      "take the red pill and you stay in wonderland and I'll show you how deep the rabbit hole goes"

      []'s V

      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
10 commandments (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 11, @12:11PM EST (#67)
The Ten Commandments tell us, "Thou shalt not rape!"

I ask you where? I see not rape...

Exodus 20: 1-17

King James Version
1 And God spake all these words, saying,
2 I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.
3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth:
5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;
6 And showing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.
7 Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.
8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:
11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
12 Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.
13 Thou shalt not kill.
14 Thou shalt not commit adultery.
15 Thou shalt not steal.
16 Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
17 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's.

New American Standard Version

1 THEN God spoke all these words, saying,
2 I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.
3 You shall have no other gods before Me.
4 You shall not make for yourself an idol, or any likeness of what is in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the water under the earth.
5 You shall not worship them or serve them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, on the third and the fourth generations of those who hate Me,
6 but showing lovingkindness to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments.
7 You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain, for the LORD will not leave him unpunished who takes His name in vain.
8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work,
10 but the seventh day is a sabbath of the LORD your God; in it you shall not do any work, you or your son or your daughter, your male or your female servant or your cattle or your sojourner who stays with you.
11 For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day and made it holy.
12 Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be prolonged in the land which the LORD your God gives you.
13 You shall not murder.
14 You shall not commit adultery.
15 You shall not steal.
16 You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
17 You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall not covet your neighbor's wife or his male servant or his female servant or his ox or his donkey or anything that belongs to your neighbor.


[ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re:10 commandments (Score:3, Funny)
    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 11, @12:16PM EST (#78)
    Cats Standard Version

    1 THEN God spoke all these words, saying,
    2 I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery, and set us up the bomb.
    3 Thou shalt have no other gods before Me. What you say!!
    4 Thou shalt not have any chance to survive. Maketh thou time.
    5 Thou shalt not covet your neighbor's house; thou shalt not covet your neighbor's wife or his male servant or his female servant or his ox or his donkey or all his base, which belong to us.

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re:10 commandments (Score:0)
      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 11, @01:48PM EST (#187)
      That's funny! But then again, AYBABTU is always funny!

      I notice that the big G doesn't say anything about coveting your neighbor's goat. (or is that covered by the "ox" thing?)
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re:10 commandments (Score:1)
    by b0r1s (jjirsa@hmc.edu) on Wednesday April 11, @12:19PM EST (#91)
    (User #170449 Info) http://www.boriswebworks.com
    first, you've obviously been trolled. Second, committing rape is, by definition, committing adultry (unless your wife doesnt put out, but that's a different story). It also involved 'coveting your neighbor's wife', unless you rape people you dont covet, in which case you probably have some serious issues.


    CmdrTaco stole my sig.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re:10 commandments (Score:2)
      by ajakk (doug_bridges@hotmail.com) on Wednesday April 11, @12:25PM EST (#109)
      (User #29927 Info)
      Actually, according to the law in most states, you can't rape your wife. The criminal definition of rape explicitly says that forcing your wife to have sex with you is not rape.


      Sig? I don't need no steenkin' sig.
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re:10 commandments (Score:2)
      by Tim C on Wednesday April 11, @12:30PM EST (#121)
      (User #15259 Info)
      committing rape is, by definition, committing adultry

      Even if neither you nor the woman is married?

      Cheers,

      Tim
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
        Re:10 commandments (Score:1)
        by b0r1s (jjirsa@hmc.edu) on Wednesday April 11, @12:34PM EST (#132)
        (User #170449 Info) http://www.boriswebworks.com
        yes... any sex outside of marriage is biblical adultry..


        CmdrTaco stole my sig.
        [ Reply to This | Parent ]
        Re:10 commandments (Score:1)
        by andy@petdance.com (andy@petdance.com) on Wednesday April 11, @01:24PM EST (#162)
        (User #114827 Info) http://petdance.com
        Even if neither you nor the woman is married?

        According to the Bible, yes, because having sex with anyone who is not your wife is adultery. This includes even thinking about sex with someone who is not your wife.

        You choke the chicken while watching an episode of "Just Shoot Me" (David Spade, Laura San Giancomo, doesn't matter), you're committing adultery.
        --
        Yes I know my brother well/Heard it said he's queer as hell/Pray that he's in love as well/Higher than the moon

        [ Reply to This | Parent ]
        yes (Score:0)
        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 11, @02:41PM EST (#221)
        You have to keep in mind that the Bible wasn't written in English. Substitute "adultery" for "sexual deviancy" and you'll be a little closer I think.
        [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re:10 commandments (Score:1)
    by jargoone on Wednesday April 11, @01:06PM EST (#138)
    (User #166102 Info)
    nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass

    Must... not... link to... goatse.cx...

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re:10 commandments (Score:1)
    by matroid (matroid@hushmail.com.noSpammo) on Wednesday April 11, @05:34PM EST (#290)
    (User #120029 Info)
    Just for shits and giggles here's the 10 commandments run through Babelfish a couple times (English ->Span ->French->German->English).

    Now imagine what 4000 years of the same thing has done to the original version of The Bible... :)

    Emigration 20:1-17

    spake king James version
    1 and God all this word, say
    2 I gentleman thy gott to have that thee track Egypt, house bondage. shalt
    3 Thou outside to bring every other God not to have, before does not shalt
    4 Thou to arrive around thee each load picture or each similarity to make each thing at skies or at earth under or at water under earth: from
    5 Thou serves shalt neither arqueamien to thyself downward at them nor them: for Mr. Deity of I thy jealous God, which visits iniquity from the family members on the children, the third and fourth generation of them the hate i; to show
    6 and at the thousands compassion of them that the i and maintenance my
    7 entries shalt auftraege of Thou, fallen in love, not the name of Mr. Deity thy in unnecessary; for GENTLEMAN the taketh at innocent at it will not bring its name in unnecessary up to date.
    8 remembers on on day sabbath to bring over it santo up to date the work thou shalt from
    9 six days and from the characters the whole thy work:
    10, but the sieved day thy is sabbath from Mr. Deity: in it shalt thou, in order to execute each work, thou, neither maidservant manservant threads thy, neither thy foreign and neither thy and nor thy thy and won thy and neither the girl, who is in the thy tueren: in six days the GENTLEMAN made
    11 close the sky and the earth, the sea and everything in them is, and the sevened day rested: the wherefore GENTLEMAN approved the day sabbath, and he sanctified more thy father from 12 honours and from more thy mutter: day time does not out thy long power on track the thee thy giveth Mr. Deity tearing off shalt
    13 Thou number shalt
    14 Thou, in order adulterous confidence shalt
    15 Thou not to make, around a false witness bear shalt
    16 Thou not against neighbour thy. house
    17 Thou shalt nonneighboring ovetthy to steal wife neighbour thy covet shalt thou not, neither its manservant neither its, neither its cattle, neither its donkey, nor each thing maidservant neighbouring thy.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
ATTENTION MODS (Score:0)
by Shitsack Comments on Wednesday April 11, @12:11PM EST (#68)
(User #256887 Info) http://www.bellypunching.net
Moderating Anne Marie up with NOT get you a free BJ. Giving her $10 will do the trick though.


?
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:1, Funny)
by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 11, @12:12PM EST (#70)
who let the trolls out!

woop, woop woop woop

who let the trolls out!


[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 11, @12:14PM EST (#74)
Seriously people? Can't you spot a troll when you see one? I just modded it down to troll, but it took two seconds for it to get back up to insightful. This is absurd. "Thou shalt not rape!" isn't a commandment, for one. And then in general it's just so overdone it's silly. *sigh*
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:1)
by jocknerd on Wednesday April 11, @12:15PM EST (#77)
(User #29758 Info)
What if its gay porn? "Not that theres anything wrong with that", quoting Jerry Seinfeld. How does gay porn run women through a blender? Just because you don't like sex, do keep others from it.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
You're just outraged.. (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 11, @12:16PM EST (#80)
because you're too fucking ugly to be photographed naked.

no doubt it's because you're a fat ugly, disgusting pig

.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:3, Funny)
by Tackhead on Wednesday April 11, @12:16PM EST (#81)
(User #54550 Info)
> [Pr0n] runs women through a blender, converting their bodies into liquified youth.

Really? Hey, that's a new one, even for rotten.com! Wonder if there's a market for that? And if there is, can I get some from Yahoo?

> Every dollar Yahoo makes is now tainted with the blood and tears of exploited women.

You forgot their vaginal juices! And the lube! And what about the jizz of the exploited men who have to lay pipe all day long, or stand erect with their schlongs in some fluffer's mouth while the director sets up the cameras for the next scene, to make these movies? Blue balls hurt after the first couple of hours! Where's your compassion, woman?

> The Bible also tells us to love our neighbors as ourselves. Yahoo fails.

I tried that with Mrs. Jones across the street. She wasn't too happy with me. Umm, neither was Mr. Jones, for that matter. Guess I failed too!

(Though I admit it was a brilliant troll, Anne. Well done! ;-)

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 11, @12:17PM EST (#85)

This doesn't deserve "Interesting" nor "Troll." It should be +3 Funny.


[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:1)
by LNO on Wednesday April 11, @12:19PM EST (#93)
(User #180595 Info)
This calls for a boycott. This calls for a public outcry. There is no excuse for sitting by the sidelines and watching the world go by. Everyone who does not actively oppose this move is complicit in human suffering.

There's a lot of shit in the world. People can only actively oppose so much. It'd be nice if I were able to dedicate myself to righting all the wrongs I see in the world, but after years of activism, I've learned that I've got to pick my battles.

Maybe I'm just a little jaded, but I don't see how Yahoo offering pornography rather than just linking to the vendors themselves can possibly compare against religious, racial, and sexual intolerance, genocides, any pretty much anything else that's ugly and wrong in this world.

So what's more morally repugnant? Yahoo finding a new revenue stream, or the Taliban teaching that women are inferior to men?

I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm just saying that the accusation of complicity in human suffering is laughable when there are others who are working for more important goals.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:1)
by dissy on Wednesday April 11, @12:20PM EST (#96)
(User #172727 Info)
Just because you arnt bright enough to not look at the things you dont want to see, doesnt mean the rest of us are just as dim.

If you dont want to see porn on yahoo, dont go to yahoo's porn section
If you dont want to see pictures in your newspaper, dont read it.

Is this really that hard of a concept?

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:1)
by bwaters351 on Wednesday April 11, @12:21PM EST (#100)
(User #323972 Info)
Any credibility your highly emotional arguement may have is outweighed by your sweeping generalizations and "miss-information".
 

1) "Though shalt not rape" is NOT a commandment.
2) "There is no such thing as consent in pornography, because every person involved is there because of dire economic need" -FALSE. I don't think Heffner is in dire economic need.
3) Men DO NOT universally crave and devour pornography. There are men that have never "devoured" pornography, ie: Aborigines or other people with no access or interest. I do not crave or devour pornography and am a man.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Of course he isn't (Score:2, Flamebait)
    by Anne Marie on Wednesday April 11, @12:29PM EST (#120)
    (User #239347 Info)
    I don't think Heffner is in dire economic need.

    Of course he isn't, because he's grown fat off the suffering of the women he exploits.

    You must think you're smart because you caught me in a semantic slip. I wasn't speaking of everyone involved in pornography's financing and production. I was talking about the people sweating under the camera's gaze, penetrating and palpitating each other's bodies until they are extinguished by the shame and the horror of it.

    Go read up on the statistics for suicides by former porn "actresses" (really "slaves"). They're illuminating. It's a testament to women's fortitude that more don't slit their wrists or gas themselves because of what men put them through.
    -- Anne Marie
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      why come you don't rebut his first point? (Score:0)
      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 11, @12:33PM EST (#131)
      you dumb cunt

      that's becaus YOU CAN'T!!!

      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re:Of course he isn't (Score:1)
      by Rooman on Wednesday April 11, @01:08PM EST (#142)
      (User #412310 Info)
      Of course he isn't, because he's grown fat off the suffering of the women he exploits.

      Do you keep up with Playboy at all? I have a subscription -- hell, even my wife likes to browse and read the articles, so I have some authority here. ;-)

      Do you know how many "superstars" pose for Playboy? You think Madonna, Drew Barrymore, or Janet Jackson every needed the cash when they posed for the cameras? I doubt it.

      Sure, that sorry looser from Who Wants To Marry A Millionaire Darva Whats-Her-Name was likely strapped and was milking her 15 minutes of fame (as will the Survivor and Temptation Island chicks.

      But still... There are many bad things that people (not just women) get stuck in because they need money. So don't blame the symptom (doing shitty work for money), but rather blame the problem: need for money.

      And why do these women need money that badly? Hell, many of these girls quit good jobs (some wven with 4- or 8-year degrees!) to dance, do porn, etc.. So blame them for being so damned greedy!
      -- "Superlative sarcophagi, what a great idea!!!" Joey, from the HP-75 Internal Design Specification

      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re:Of course he isn't (Score:0)
      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 11, @01:27PM EST (#166)
      I don't think Heffner is in dire economic need.

      Of course he isn't, because he's grown fat off the suffering of the women he exploits.

      Bzzt! Wrong! He's grown fat off of advertisers, videos and subscriptions. You might believe that the women who pose for Playboy are going to burn in hell but I can assure you that their take on this is entirely different. They almost universally say that the experience increases their self-confidence enormously.

      ..extinguished by the shame and the horror of it

      It's a testament to women's fortitude that more don't slit their wrists or gas themselves because of what men put them through.

      I feel sorry for you, Anne Marie. You must be one really, really bitter woman. Either that or I'm being really, really trolled.

      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
        Re:Of course he isn't (Score:0)
        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 11, @03:03PM EST (#236)
        I feel sorry for you, Anne Marie. You must be one really, really bitter woman. Either that or I'm being really, really trolled.

        Anne Marie 1 you 0

        YHBT. HAND.
        [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re:Of course he isn't (Score:1)
      by TobyWong (tobywong@phatchicks.com) on Wednesday April 11, @01:59PM EST (#194)
      (User #168498 Info)
      How do you explain the fact that the CEO of playboy is a woman?

      Poor lass, suffering in the blender of upper executive positions. :~(


      - Toby
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      anne marie 3 slashdot 0 (Score:0)
      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 11, @02:55PM EST (#232)
      Who let the trolls out (woof, woof, woof, woof)
      Who let the trolls out (woof, woof, woof, woof)

      When slashdot was new, the moderation was jumpin
      (Hey, Siggie, Yi, Yo)
      And everybody havin a ball
      (Hah, ho, Sig leven Yi Yo)
      I tell the trolls start the First Postin
      (Siggie Yi Yo)
      And the moderators report to the call
      The poor dogs mod down

      Who let the trolls out (woof, woof, woof, woof)
      Who let the trolls out (woof, woof, woof, woof)

      Rap 1
      I see ya little Taco head up our site
      He really want to keep us down
      But his readers are too stupid to see us comin
      And everybody mods up us clowns

      Verse
      Im gonna tell
      (Hey, Siggie, Yi, Yo)
      To any Dan Hayes and Anne Marie
      (Siggie, Yi, Yo)
      Tell the dummy Hey Baby, Kiss MY Blade!
      (Siggie Yi, Yo)
      You fetch a moderator in front and her trolls behind
      (Siggie, Yi, Yo)
      Her points run out now

      Chorus
      Who let the trolls out (woof, woof, woof, woof)
      Who let the trolls out (woof, woof, woof, woof)

      Chant
      Say, A troll is nuttin if he dont have suckers
                    All mods give up ya points, all mods give em up
                A troll is nuttin if he dont have suckers
                    All mods give up ya points, all mods give em up

      Rap 2

      Wait for yall my trolls, the party is on
      I gotta get my girl I got my goatsex on
      Do you see the mods comin from my eye
      What could you be first post
      that Katz man thats breakin them down?
      Me and My petrified short shorts
      And I cant post a lot, any troll will do
      Im figurin thats why they call me Lita Juarez
      Cause Im a stupid man of the land
      When they see me they go doo-doo (howl)

      Chorus 5 Xs
      Who let the trolls out (woof, woof, woof, woof)
      Who let the trolls out (woof, woof, woof, woof)
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re:Of course he isn't (Score:1)
      by ratthedd on Wednesday April 11, @03:18PM EST (#245)
      (User #98320 Info)
      Go read up on the statistics for suicides by former porn "actresses" (really "slaves"). They're illuminating. It's a testament to women's fortitude that more don't slit their wrists or gas themselves because of what men put them through.

      I think you may be confusing cause and effect here. Just because there may be a correlation between the numbers does not mean that one act causes the other act.

      More likely than not, in the case of a girl who commits suicide after having been in a pr0n flick, the reason for each action stems back to something earlier in her life.

      You'll probably also find high incidences of drug use, child abuse, truancy, neglect, and various other social ills in the history of the suicidal pr0n stars.

      I suggest that you target the cause of the problem - not the end result.

      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re:Of course he isn't (Score:2, Insightful)
      by bwaters351 on Wednesday April 11, @04:09PM EST (#259)
      (User #323972 Info)
      I don't think I'm smart because I caught you in a semantic slip.
      I think I'm smart because I caught you in one semantic slip, one generalization, and one lie.
      You're getting hammered enough from your posts, by people with other points better than mine.
      I'm not here to hammer you. I happen to agree that porn is bad. I just wished you would have taken more care in the language and facts you used in your post. It's hard to give any credibility to someone who blatantly misquotes the Bible.
      The Ten Commandments tell us, "Thou shalt not misquote the Bible."
      Frankly, it sounds like you have some deep seated and mildly irrational views on pornography. Your unsubstantiated opinons seemed weak to you, so you tried to add weight by making stuff up.
      I would consider getting in contact with the people that participate in porn and interviewing them on their thoughts on feelings before you speak of them as humiliated and raped and having dead souls.
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      why people slit their wrists or gas themselves. (Score:1)
      by jonbrewer (jonathan_brewer@hotmail.com) on Wednesday April 11, @09:28PM EST (#327)
      (User #11894 Info) http://www.rock-chalk.com/
      They've been told by "moral" people like you that they're scum for a.) allowing themselves to be photographed nude, or b.) allowing themselves to be photographed while engaging in some sexual act.

      Riddle me this Ann Marie: What are the suicide rates of bonobo monkeys due to anthropoligists capturing their "penetrating and palipatating" on film? Since you say they're human, is their sex ever "extinguished by the shame and horror of it?"

      Next question: Have you visited alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.ann-marie.die.die.di e?
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Hmm. (Score:2)
      by Grendel Drago (gdrago23@yaSPAMMhoo.com) on Wednesday April 11, @11:31PM EST (#341)
      (User #41496 Info) http://grendel.dyndns.org
      I think Annie Sprinkle and Carol queen would take issue with that.

      Really, though, I must commend you -- brilliant research with COINTELPRO. The best way to destroy feminism is to call yourself a feminist, then act like a fucking moron. Brilliant job so far...

      -grendel drago
      remove SPAMM to mail
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:1)
by smitty_one_each (smitty_one_each@REMOVETHISPARThotmail.com) on Wednesday April 11, @12:25PM EST (#108)
(User #243267 Info)
Anne,

Our society is a moral outrage. I'm unclear, given the desire to be 'in the world, but not of it', just how you balance things on the fulcrum of the comma in that phrase.

Your post is a great shot across the bow. Seriously: shall we become Amish?


Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof. (Mt6:34)

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Current mod totals for parent (Score:0)
by Shitsack Comments on Wednesday April 11, @12:27PM EST (#116)
(User #256887 Info) http://www.bellypunching.net
Troll=7, Insightful=4, Interesting=3, Funny=2, Overrated=1, Total=17

The poster is a cunt but the moderation is fucking hilarious.


?
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:4, Informative)
by ruin (msargent (at) hevanet.com) on Wednesday April 11, @12:31PM EST (#125)
(User #141833 Info) http://www.hevanet.com/msargent/
I have been trolled. I have lost. On the other hand, it's just such a fantastic troll, that I can't be rid of this compulsion to reply. So, a few quick points:

There is no such thing as consent in pornography, because every person involved is there because of dire economic need.

Untrue. I would imagine that most people in the sex industry could make enough money in other pursuits to subsist, sex is simply much more profitable. There is also the issue of people making pornography for pleasure and not for profit. Suppose I were to write a pornographic short story, would I be doing it because of dire economic need? Would this be exploitation? What about a couple who videotapes themselves having sex? Is this exploitation? What if they do it to sell the tapes at a profit -- is this different than if they do it for fun?

In short, it's a complex issue, and one that's not improved by the sorts of in-good-faith fearmongering that goes along the same lines as this troll.

But we tolerate women's public humiliation and public rape, because men universally crave and devour pornography.

Your language is strongly gendered and is every bit as much a part of the cultural mandates that oppress women as porn. Why are you equating nakedness and/or sex with humiliation? Why do you label only men as craving pornography?

Lastly, some facts that deserve to be stated a few times to keep the truth-to-nonsense ratio up.

--None of ten commandments mention rape. (Another reason why they suck.)

--"Slippery slope" is a logical fallacy.

--Generally speaking, people don't have souls.


--
"Bang bang he's dead; chalk up another triumph for our hero, the Automatic Man..."

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:1)
    by kurioszyn on Wednesday April 11, @01:58PM EST (#191)
    (User #212894 Info)
    Small note.
    Just because there is no mention of rape does it mean that all other commandments suck ?
    I mean is it really that bad stating that "Thou shalt not kill" ?

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:3, Insightful)
      by jasonhee on Wednesday April 11, @05:27PM EST (#287)
      (User #237770 Info)
      Well, that's pretty vague. Plenty of Christians kill animals everyday. Heck, Christians even kill other people in some states (like Texas)with approval from the Government.
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
        Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:1)
        by cburley (craig-sd@jcb-sc.removeexample.example.com) on Thursday April 12, @11:35AM EST (#377)
        (User #105664 Info) http://world.std.com/~burley/
        The original language actually reads "Thou shalt not murder", from what I've read. So it applies only to people, not animals.

        And it isn't Christians killing people "in some states" -- it's governments doing that, as governments have always done (the ability to get away with murder being one of their fundamental ways of maintaining control).

        But, yes, a lot of people who call themselves "Christian" do believe that murder is okay in some circumstances, just as they believe taxation and other sins are okay in various circumstances. They entertain the Christ only when they find it convenient; at other times, they prefer the company, government, and judgement of Satan.

        That's not the fault of the Ten Commandments, the Golden Rule, etc. That's why we have them -- because, without clear, absolute principles by which we can judge good vs. evil, we'd be even more prone to use labels ("Christian", "Democrat", "atheist", whatever) to do so, labels that are so easily attached and detached based on personal whims.


        "The Internet interprets statesmanship as flamage and routes around it." -- James Craig Burley

        [ Reply to This | Parent ]
        Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:0)
        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 12, @11:44AM EST (#378)
        Christians also routinely commit idolatry with all their saints crap.

        Conclusion?

        Christians routinely ignore the bible.
        [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      thou shalt not kill? (Score:1)
      by CryoPenguin on Wednesday April 11, @11:12PM EST (#340)
      (User #242131 Info)
      How are you going to stop your immune system from killing bacteria? And how would you survive if you did?
      I suppose your diet could consist entirely of fruits and the like, so you wouldn't have to kill plants.
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:0)
      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 12, @01:35AM EST (#353)
      Yes, if you killed my mother, I would torture your ass slow-like until you died a slow agonizing death. it should be "Thou Shall Not Kill Unless it is an act of Honor"
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:2)
by FortKnox ( . ) ( .) on Wednesday April 11, @01:00PM EST (#136)
(User #169099 Info) http://www.marotti.com
Hook, line, and sinker...

You can't have your cake and eat it too. You can only have one of two things:
1.) A free country, and free economy where you, as a person, get to choose what you and your family does.
2.) You live in a dictatorship where the person(s) in control choose what is good for you.

It appears that you prefer the latter. Move to Cuba. I just don't want to hear you whine about it when it isn't free enough.
Point being, if you don't like it, don't watch it. But don't try and get everyone on /. to boycott something for your own little revolution.

-- We are lease all your base, with option to own
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:2)
by Puk on Wednesday April 11, @01:08PM EST (#143)
(User #80503 Info)
I'd thought that Yahoo learned their lesson with all those French and German lawsuits about Nazi memorabilia. Now they're selling pornography?

<FLAME>
I thought they'd learned their lesson with that whole freedom thing! Now they're allowing some other thing on the net which doesn't fit in with my own personal morals and political agenda? How dare anyone not agree with me and choose to live their life in some other fashion?!
</FLAME>

This type of "what works in business and what people want is wrong, and freedom is good as long as it doesn't allow people to follow principles other than my own" attitue genuinely scares me.

-Puk
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 11, @01:09PM EST (#146)
Moderation Totals:Flamebait=1, Troll=8, Insightful=4, Interesting=4, Funny=2, Overrated=1, Total=20.
Jesus and this article isnt even that old yet either :P
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 11, @01:12PM EST (#149)
Agreed! This is just another sign of the ongoing corruption of moral values by the liberals and communists.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Wish someone would pay to see me naked! (Score:2)
by MikeFM (moc.liamhsuh@soimgom) on Wednesday April 11, @01:17PM EST (#151)
(User #12491 Info) http://porn.kavlon.com
Damn wish someone would pay to see me naked. Sure as hell beats working at Burger King for a living. I honestly wonder why more women don't sell pictures of themselves online. It's an easy way to make money so they have the freedom to do whatever they want with their lives. Besides in my experience women look at porn almost as much as men so the whole argument that it's men using women is bullshit. Like all business it's people using people. The customer gets the desired product or service and the business gets some $$$. Of course if the women are getting screwed by selling their pictures for far less than they are worth they should wise up and open their own site. If they are somehoe being forced into selling pictures when they don't want to they should go to the cops and report it. Ever been to Miami Beach? People walk around naked all the time just for the fun of it -- in public. Is that 'rape' too? I will agree capitalism sucks but unless you have some magic way to make the world change we're all in the same trap. It sucks but that's life.
Coed Naked Netting: Pushing all the right buttons.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:2, Insightful)
by Chakat (em@il.sucks) on Wednesday April 11, @01:20PM EST (#156)
(User #320875 Info)
IKIHBT, but...

You did know that there is a HUGE number of women who pay for college through starring in pornographic movies, exotic dancing, etc, right? Using their bodies, as you like to put it, allows them to make a decent paycheck for a few hours of work. These women aren't particularly ashamed of what they do, they're just more concerned about what the moron majority will do if they find out that they have decided to take their clothes off for a little extra money.

Also, you've obviously never seen the "Faces of Death" series. They have items in there much more disturbing than pornography, but it is legal.

I have the body of a god...unfortunately, it's Buddah

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 11, @01:20PM EST (#157)
Aren't you a slashdot 'working girl' yourself?
http://www.educatedescort.com
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:2)
by TBone (mark@thisismyown.com) on Wednesday April 11, @01:23PM EST (#161)
(User #5692 Info) http://www.thisismyown.com

Yahoo was already selling items that may as well have been pornographic through it's auction site. Now it's got a commercial category. Whee, big deal.

If you can't tell the difference between pornography and rape, then you have some serious issues to contend with. And it seems to me that people like Jerri (tossed from Survivor 2 weeks ago) aren't going to be in "dire economic need" any time soon with all the endorsements she can pick up, yet she's still willing to do a Playboy stint. Perhaps you're thinking of Snuff, or child porn, or something else. But just because you wouldn't put yourself in the position to be the object of art-that-may-be-considered-porno doesn't mean there are many people who would.

So you're also going to boycot every convenience store that sells Penthouse or Cherry or Big Breasts magazine, too? And which 10 commandments would those be, that's not in any bible I've ever seen.

And, as many people have pointed out, what about all those women who buy Playgirl? It's not nearly as prolific, but there's plenty of male Porn out there as well.

If you want to do something about it, do to your local women's shelter and help there, teach women who _do_ sell themselves to porn how to do better, make a tangible difference. Spouting your mouth off about what a bad moral state we live in won't do anything but get people to help you pack your bags so you can move to Antarctica.


This space for rent. Call 1-800-STEAK4U

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:1)
by jgerman on Wednesday April 11, @01:24PM EST (#163)
(User #106518 Info)
I know it's a troll but I just can't help it

Pornography is indistinguishable from rape. It runs women through a blender, converting their bodies into liquified youth. There is no such thing as consent in pornography, because every person involved is there because of dire economic need. But we tolerate women's public humiliation and public rape, because men universally crave and devour pornography.

Apparently there's no such thing as consent in a world that you run. You get to dictate everyone's behavior. Besides the fact that your claim is ridiculous. There's plenty of jobs out there that don't involve pornography, these women (and men) like the money and have fun doing it. And no one universally does anything all people are different.

How can Yahoo justify profiting from such exploitation? I understand Yahoo's stock prices are slipping and they're desperate to pump some new revenue sources, but pornography is unconscienable. Every dollar Yahoo makes is now tainted with the blood and tears of exploited women.

Yes because all women in porn are beaten severly after each shoot. It's a blood bath. You can hardly walk from all the blood and tears. Especially the women at strip clubs. Not a time goes buy where I don't see a stripper crying and bleeding as she's counting the wad of cash in her garter. Especially the one who enjoy the exhibitionism. They're the most exploited of all. How dare they do something that they enjoy and make money at it.

This calls for a boycott. This calls for a public outcry. There is no excuse for sitting by the sidelines and watching the world go by. Everyone who does not actively oppose this move is complicit in human suffering.

I actively enjoy it. but my usual reaction isn't suffering, in fact quite the opposite. When I set down with some porn I usually really, REALLY happy.

The Ten Commandments tell us, "Thou shalt not rape!" The Bible also tells us to love our neighbors as ourselves. Yahoo fails.

Uhhh no it doesn't. Unless maybe that was on a tablet moses dropped on the way down the mountain. And I must say that porn definitley inspires love in most people I know that come in contact with it. I LOVE Miss November.

The need to exploit others for profit is a pervasive one in our society, but it's not one that we can't arrest as we arrest other criminal passions. The free market cannot thrive unless we police it for criminal activity such as this, just as it cannot thrive unless we police the market square for pickpockets.

And of course we'll let people like you decide what is or is not criminal. The free market cannot thrive unless we DO NOT police it. Otherwise it's not so much free is it?

Pornography kills women's souls. Pornography burns men's souls. There is no victor here, except for the ugly head of capitalism. Yahoo must not be allowed to perpetuate this abomination against humanity.

Hmmm I thought souls were immortal. And I must say I certainly feel like taking a victory lap right after a night at the nudie bar.

"Shit, I'm not carrying all these stone tablets down this damn mountain, some of these have to go, otherwise I'll be too tired to look at porn" -- Moses


[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:1)
by yorgasor (yorgasor@cs.MAPS.pdx.edu) on Wednesday April 11, @01:32PM EST (#171)
(User #109984 Info) http://www.ee.pdx.edu/~yorgasor
Amazing. Moral outrage coming from the ultimate geek prostitute? Isn't this the same Anne Marie described in this article?
My real email doesn't have spam written backwards.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 11, @01:32PM EST (#172)
Who let the trolls out (woof, woof, woof, woof)
Who let the trolls out (woof, woof, woof, woof)

When slashdot was nice, the moderation was jumpin
(Hey, Siggie, Yi, Yo)
And everybody havin a ball
(Hah, ho, Sig leven Yi Yo)
I tell the trolls start the First Postin
(Siggie Yi Yo)
And the moderators report to the call
The poor dogs mod down

Who let the trolls out (woof, woof, woof, woof)
Who let the trolls out (woof, woof, woof, woof)

Rap 1
I see ya little Taco head up our site
He really want to keep us down
But his readers are too stupid to see us comin
And everybody mods up us clowns

Verse
Im gonna tell
(Hey, Siggie, Yi, Yo)
To any Dan Hayes and Anne Marie
(Siggie, Yi, Yo)
Tell the dummy Hey Baby, Kiss MY Blade!
(Siggie Yi, Yo)
You fetch a moderator in front and her trolls behind
(Siggie, Yi, Yo)
Her points run out now

Chorus
Who let the trolls out (woof, woof, woof, woof)
Who let the trolls out (woof, woof, woof, woof)

Chant
Say, A troll is nuttin if he dont have suckers
              All mods give up ya points, all mods give em up
          A troll is nuttin if he dont have suckers
              All mods give up ya points, all mods give em up

Rap 2

Wait for yall my trolls, the party is on
I gotta get my girl I got my goatsex on
Do you see the mods comin from my eye
What could you be first post
that Katz man thats breakin them down?
Me and My petrified short shorts
And I cant post a lot, any troll will do
Im figurin thats why they call me Lita Juarez
Cause Im a stupid man of the land
When they see me they go doo-doo (howl)

Chorus 5 Xs
Who let the trolls out (woof, woof, woof, woof)
Who let the trolls out (woof, woof, woof, woof)
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:1)
by kenneth_martens on Wednesday April 11, @01:34PM EST (#173)
(User #320269 Info)
I agree mostly with Anne Marie, with only a few exceptions. A boycott of Yahoo! is not necessary or desirable--it will not make a significant impact on Yahoo!, and there is no need to stop using one of the best (in my opinion) portals on the web. What we should boycott is pornography. >>Pornography is indistinguishable from rape. Come now. Surely you cannot expect us to believe pornography is equivalent to rape?
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 11, @01:34PM EST (#175)
Ah ha.

I see.

Regard this post.

In yesterday's post, Anne Marie subtley bashes Christians. In this post, the Bible is touted and Yahoo is criticized for failing to follow the Ten Commandments (nice touch, that. Wonder how many people will blindly assume that actually *is* one of the Ten Commandments?)

In yesterday's post, sexual freedom is praised, and humanity's repression is lamented. In this post, pornography is vilified, and humanity's sexual excesses are lamented.

In yesterday's post, Anne Marie is a fervent liberal. In today's post, an impassioned conservative.

Forsooth, methings ye have been trolled. And not subtely.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:1, Interesting)
    by Anne Marie on Wednesday April 11, @01:42PM EST (#182)
    (User #239347 Info)
    Moses wasn't a Christian. The Old Testament isn't a Christian document. It's a Jewish one and one revered by Muslims as well.

    There is nothing conservative about opposing pornography, any more than there's anything conservative or liberal about outlawing pickpocketing. We can all agree that pickpockets are bad for society. We can all agree that they're criminals. The same is true of pornographers.

    When I celebrated Bonobos' sexuality yesterday, I was absolutely sincere. Bonobos are wonderful creatures whose sexualities aren't adulterated by our human problems of economic exploitation and coercion. When a Bonobo sexualizes another Bonobo, it is a pure and wonderful gesture. When humans do it to each other for the benefit of voyeuristic third parties, it's rape.

    I'm insulted that you'd call me a conservative. Is Catherine MacKinnon a conservative? Is Andrea Dworkin? All proper feminists are antipornography.
    -- Anne Marie
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:1)
      by TobyWong (tobywong@phatchicks.com) on Wednesday April 11, @02:02PM EST (#197)
      (User #168498 Info)
      "All proper feminists are antipornography"

      I feel blessed to be able to read rhetoric straight from the one true voice of "all proper feminists".

      God help all "unproper" and "semiproper" feminists.


      - Toby
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:1)
      by kurioszyn on Wednesday April 11, @02:05PM EST (#199)
      (User #212894 Info)
      "I'm insulted that you'd call me a conservative. "

      How is that so insulting to you ?
      Do you mean you are one of these people who actually find others lesser human beings for the mere fact that they happened to believe in some other set of values ?


      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:1)
      by sulli (slashdot_comments at sulli dot org) on Wednesday April 11, @02:18PM EST (#210)
      (User #195030 Info) http://www.sulli.org
      Is Catherine MacKinnon a conservative?

      Well, yes. She's a prudish idiot.

      sulli

      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:0)
      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 11, @02:45PM EST (#222)
      Have you ever heard the term 'Live and let live'? If these people want to sell videos and pictures of themselves naked and doing sexual acts then let them do it. As long as we're not buying it, it shouldn't affect us. I think if we didn't have pornography as a tool to let out peoples sexual frustration then REAL rape (ie the actual crime, not consenting people getting it on) would go up. You cannot be everyones mother and force your ideals on everyone, sorry. You're just going to have to learn to deal. Fight it all you want but 75% of congress has their own porn stashes and you know it
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      annie marie you are a genius (Score:0)
      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 11, @02:49PM EST (#226)
      Who let the trolls out (woof, woof, woof, woof)

      Who let the trolls out (woof, woof, woof, woof)

      When slashdot was jiggy, the moderation was jumpin

      (Hey, Siggie, Yi, Yo)

      And everybody havin a ball

      (Hah, ho, Sig leven Yi Yo)

      I tell the trolls start the First Postin

      (Siggie Yi Yo)

      And the moderators report to the call

      The poor dogs mod down

      Who let the trolls out (woof, woof, woof, woof)

      Who let the trolls out (woof, woof, woof, woof)

      Rap 1

      I see ya little Taco head up our site

      He really want to keep us down

      But his readers are too stupid to see us comin

      And everybody mods up us clowns

      Verse

      Im gonna tell

      (Hey, Siggie, Yi, Yo)

      To any Dan Hayes and Anne Marie

      (Siggie, Yi, Yo)

      Tell the dummy Hey Baby, Kiss MY Blade!

      (Siggie Yi, Yo)

      You fetch a moderator in front and her trolls behind

      (Siggie, Yi, Yo)

      Her points run out now

      Chorus

      Who let the trolls out (woof, woof, woof, woof)

      Who let the trolls out (woof, woof, woof, woof)

      Chant

      Say, A troll is nuttin if he dont have suckers

                    All mods give up ya points, all mods give em up

                A troll is nuttin if he dont have suckers

                    All mods give up ya points, all mods give em up

      Rap 2

      Wait for yall my trolls, the party is on

      I gotta get my girl I got my goatsex on

      Do you see the mods comin from my eye

      What could you be first post

      that Katz man thats breakin them down?

      Me and My petrified short shorts

      And I cant post a lot, any troll will do

      Im figurin thats why they call me Lita Juarez

      Cause Im a stupid man of the land

      When they see me they go doo-doo (howl)

      Chorus 5 Xs

      Who let the trolls out (woof, woof, woof, woof)

      Who let the trolls out (woof, woof, woof, woof)
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      feminists. (Score:1)
      by saintlupus (saintlupus at angelfire dot com) on Wednesday April 11, @04:45PM EST (#271)
      (User #227599 Info)

      Is Catherine MacKinnon a conservative? Is Andrea Dworkin?

      no. andrea dworkin is a fucking monster. no matter how many papers you write about sex being "evil and contemptuous," guess what, that's how we're plumbed. tough shit, chubby wumpkins.

      --saint
      ----
      one more roadboy in a rust belt town.
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:0)
      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 11, @04:49PM EST (#272)
      ya? well how many feminists quote the bible? (correctly or not)
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:1)
      by ayden (ayden|AT|carolingia|DOT|org) on Wednesday April 11, @07:01PM EST (#314)
      (User #126539 Info) http://www.carolingia.org/KWDS
      All proper feminists are antipornography.

      You mean like Annie Sprinkle?

      You must be one of those "Northampton feminists", not one of those proper "Boston feminists".

      Sorry, Anne Marie, you've lost me. I thought you had a point. Now I think you're just ranting and raving.

      I Meta Moderate and I lose karma?

      I'm The Bounty Bear.
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:0)
      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 12, @01:55AM EST (#355)
      >Moses wasn't a Christian. The Old Testament >isn't a Christian document. It's a Jewish one >and one revered by Muslims as well. wow annie, we are awed by your mighty erudition here.... >We can all agree that pickpockets are bad for >society. We can all agree that they're >criminals. The same is true of pornographers. really? taking naughty pictures is criminal? if i take a picture of my "naughty bits" as you might call them, i am unable to consent to myself, am exploiting myself, and have to go to jail? hm... >When I celebrated Bonobos' sexuality yesterday, >I was absolutely sincere. Bonobos are wonderful >creatures whose sexualities aren't adulterated >by our human problems of economic exploitation >and coercion. When a Bonobo sexualizes another >Bonobo, it is a pure and wonderful gesture. When >humans do it to each other for the benefit of >voyeuristic third parties, it's rape. wow, i love the shift between prozac-talking and fascist jealotry here. When I sexualize another domesticated primate, they usually come back asking for more. some domesticated primates rather enjoy "sexualizing" each other (gods, reminds me of 1984... this kind of postmodernist discourse is the excretion of undeveloped minds) in front of other domesticated primates. These people are called "exhibitionists", and they do it because they enjoy it. oh shit! bonobos "sexualize" each other in front of third parties! agh! the primates are raping each other! just because nobody wants to have sex with you doesnt mean you should take it out on the rest of us... >I'm insulted that you'd call me a conservative. would you be insulted if I laid the yoke of "village idiot" upon your shoulders? good! >Is Catherine MacKinnon a conservative? a fascist. >Is Andrea Dworkin? a stalinist. >All proper feminists are antipornography. nah, I know lots of feminists who dont share your jack-booted misinformed ideology. "proper" has nothing to do with it. "real" feminists know that it has nothing to to with "men vs women" but about having the ability to "choose". now run along and whinge to your neurotic friends..
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:1)
by pod on Wednesday April 11, @01:49PM EST (#188)
(User #1103 Info) http://www.domainofdarkness.com/
Wow, that's a lot of moderation points that went into that troll, a most admirable example for trolls far and wide to follow.

Your argument, well, ok, 'argument', is rather flawed. You're either trolling, or arguing from emotion, trying to support your position with various opinions. This is obvious from the fact that throughout you equate pornography with holocaust and televised executions. These are not in the same class, not even in the same school. You're talking completely different things, and equating the production of pornography with events we now call the Holocaust, is an insult to anyone who still remembers and who survived, and is a mistake made by many in an effort to support their position. There is very little you can compare to how and what happened to people from all walks of life in concentration camps and not come out looking like an ignorant, insensitive, hypcritical idiot.

Second, there is no 'thou shalt not rape' commandment. You may be able to derive that from other passages in the Bible which condemn rape and violence, but it's not in the commandments, you just can't read that into them, hmm, except maybe 'thou shalt not covet...' if you try really hard. Except, it has been shown time and time again, rape is rarely about sex, it's about power and domination, not about coveting someone's body.

Third, pornography is not criminal. In the US it has been explicitely protected by the Supreme Court under free speech multiple times. It may be immoral in the sense that even men appearing in porn media are doing it for the money, sometimes from necessity, sometimes because that's where a lot of 'easy' money is (insert a quote by everyone's favourite porn star Asia Carrera), and, sadly, sometimes because they're forced to. But not illegal (except in the last case). In this light, pornography is about as immoral as McDondals jobs, where the vast majority of low level employees are there just for the money, because they have to, and are thus exploited for their labor. But again, not illegal.

So as much as anyone may agree with your point, that pornography should be purged or even classified as rape, you can surely come up with much better arguments than this.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Publicise the Damn Executions (Score:1)
by kilgore_trowt on Wednesday April 11, @02:05PM EST (#200)
(User #314575 Info)
I disagree with you on several points, but the one on which I differ the with you the most is the idea of public executions. I think that they SHOULD be on the cover of every newspaper and broadcast live on every channel.

I'll give you two good reasons.

1. You think our court system is so flawless that you can risk disposing of an innocent person and you're so self-rightcheous that you think you deserve the revenge? Fine, you can watch. It's not obscene to kill, but it's obscene to have to see the consequences of your judgment? I think not.

2. For all of you fine people who think we need to have a deterrant to maintain civilization? Fine, let's see this deterrant. Let's show the world what the consequences really are.


This is your life and it's ending one minute at a time.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:2)
by 1010011010 (1010011010@PORKSHOULDERANDHAMholly-springs.nc.us) on Wednesday April 11, @02:30PM EST (#215)
(User #53039 Info) http://www.flyingbuttmonkeys.com/
Look what I found on the Internet! ;)

II Kings 6:28,29 "And the king said unto her, What aileth thee? And she answered, This woman said unto me, Give thy son, that we may eat him to day, and we will eat my son to morrow. So we boiled my son, and did eat him: and I said unto her on the next day, Give thy son, that we may eat him: and she hath hid her son."

Luke 14:26 (Jesus speaking) "If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple."

Matthew 10:34-36 "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man's foes shall be they of his own household."

Judges 19:24-29 "Behold, here is my daughter a maiden, and his concubine; them I will bring out now, and humble ye them, and do with them what seemeth good unto you: but unto this man do not so vile a thing. But the men would not hearken to him: so the man took his concubine, and brought her forth unto them; and they knew her, and abused her all the night until the morning: and when the day began to spring, they let her go. Then came the woman in the dawning of the day, and fell down at the door of the man's house where her lord was, till it was light. And her lord rose up in the morning, and opened the doors of the house, and went out to go his way: and behold, the woman his concubine was fallen down at the door of the house, and her hands were upon the threshold. And he said unto her, Up, and let us be going. But none answered. Then the man took her up upon an ass, and the man rose up, and gat him unto his place. And when he was come into his house, he took a knife, and laid hold on his concubine, and divided her, together with her bones, into twelve pieces, and sent her into all the coasts of Israel."

Genesis 38:8-10 "And Judah said unto Onan, Go in unto thy brother's wife, and marry her, and raise up seed to thy brother. And Onan knew that the seed should not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother's wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should give seed to his brother. And the thing which he did displeased the Lord: wherefore he slew him also."

Numbers 31:18 (Moses to his soldiers) "But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves."

Solomon's Song 5:4 "My beloved put in his hand by the hole of the door, and my bowels were moved for him. I rose up to open to my beloved; and my hands dropped with myrrh, and my fingers with sweet smelling myrrh, upon the handles of the lock. I opened to my beloved; but my beloved had withdrawn himself, and was gone: my soul failed when he spake: I sought him, but I could not find him; I called him, but he gave me no answer."



- - - - -
You should never invite policemen or vampires into your home
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:2)
by bgarcia (garsh@home.com) on Wednesday April 11, @02:33PM EST (#216)
(User #33222 Info) http://members.home.net/garsh
There is no such thing as consent in pornography, because every person involved is there because of dire economic need.
Right on!!!

But why stop there?

I don't consent to working at my job, because the only reason I work there is because of dire economic need!

That's right! I'm a slave!

Employment is indistinguishable from slavery! It's time that we outlaw employment once and for all!

Confuscious say: "Baseball is wrong. Man with four balls cannot walk."

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:1)
    by CSC on Thursday April 12, @03:12AM EST (#361)
    (User #31551 Info)
    There is no such thing as consent in pornography, because every person involved is there because of dire economic need.

    Right on!!!

    But why stop there?

    I don't consent to working at my job, because the only reason I work there is because of dire economic need!

    I want moderator points now!

    This post needs a couple Insightful points!

    -- Colin

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    [OT] I never thought I'd say it... (Score:2)
    by Tim C on Thursday April 12, @03:29AM EST (#362)
    (User #15259 Info)
    ...but damn, I wish I had moderator points, and could blow them all modding up your comment.

    Oh, and hadn't already posted a comment to this very thread...

    Of course, I'd have already blown them all modding down Anne Marie's comment, so some sort of ability to foretell the future would be nice too, if anyone's handing out wishes... :-)

    Cheers,

    Tim
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:1)
by revscat (revscat@ughnolikeyspam.swbell.net) on Wednesday April 11, @02:39PM EST (#220)
(User #35618 Info) http://home.swbell.net/revscat

The Ten Commandments tell us, "Thou shalt not rape!" The Bible also tells us to love our neighbors as ourselves.

Let's see here...

  • Rape is not forbidden by the 10 Commandments.
  • The Bible is one big pack of lies, front to back.
  • Porn is not rape. It's consensual, you dope. Like any other job, people do it to make money. I'm pretty sure they enjoy it because their acting abilities suck. I don't think they could pull off faking it too convincingly.
  • Sometimes I like to love my neighbors by watching them fuck.

    It runs women through a blender, converting their bodies into liquified youth.

    What the hell is "liquified youth"? Christ on a crutch, you ever been to Denny's? Denny's is apprently much MUCH harder on women than porn is.

    Pornography kills women's souls.

    Except, of course, that "soul" is a mythological term without any basis in reality. But it sure does let you make blanket statements and judge what's good for others! If it turns their SOUL away from GOD it must be bad, and probably made illegal!

    Long walk, short pier, baby.

    - Rev. - Rev.
    "still you pray never stray never taste of the fruit never thought to question why" - A Perfect Circle, "Judith"
  • [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:1)
    by mkelley (iomike@bellsouth_dot_net) on Wednesday April 11, @02:51PM EST (#229)
    (User #411060 Info) http://www.mkelley.net
    Oh come on......how many women pornographers are there? tons. Go to Yahoo Clubs and see how many of those site are being run for and by women. Don't cast that feminism sword here. Your reasoning is flawed.

    m.kelley
    www.mkelley.net
    www.generationgeneric.com
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:1)
    by h0p on Wednesday April 11, @02:55PM EST (#231)
    (User #169526 Info)
    Pornography is indistinguishable from rape.

    do pornographic stories count? they are a form a pornography. are stories about pornography indistinguishable from rape as well? what if its a story about 2 married consenting adults having sex? no-one is harmed from reading or writing a story last time i heard. what about women porn authors? who's soul is "killed" or "burned" the author or the reader? or both? speaking of which.

    Pornography kills women's souls. Pornography burns men's souls.

    let me get this straight. pornography kills women's souls, and men get away with a simple burning? that seams unfair. no wonder women are always so pissed off about porn. i guess i'm glad i'm a man, i'd rather my soul burnt then killed. i'll have to re-read the bible again i must have missed the bit about porn and who's soul gets burned and who's gets killed and all that jazz. i was un-aware the "souls" could be "killed".

    is it worse to you to look at the pornography or pick up a prostitute? which is the lesser evil according to you? because i have to think, if there wasn't any pornographic movies/pictures/stories, more people would be picking up prostitutes. if more ppl start picking more prostitutes up, there are going to be more prostitutes.

    pornography has been around much longer then the internet, and its not going anywhere, anytime soon. don't blame yahoo for selling stuff that people want buy.


    ideal; model tiny; codeseg; org 100h; start: cli; hlt; ret; ENDS; END start
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:2)
    by Syberghost (syberghost.NOHAM@NOPORK.eiv.com) on Wednesday April 11, @03:37PM EST (#251)
    (User #10557 Info) http://www.eiv.com/users/syberghost
    I'd thought that Yahoo learned their lesson with all those French and German lawsuits about Nazi memorabilia.

    Yes; they learned that in every country, there are idiots who are opposed to freedom, and who will use the courts to attempt to enforce their values upon everyone else.

    Pornography is indistinguishable from rape.

    If pornography is indistinguishable from rape for you, you have no concept of what either is. How can you sit there and trivialize the anguish and pain that women have had forced upon them by their attackers? What kind of unfeeling monster are you? Are you even a woman?

    There is no such thing as consent in pornography, because every person involved is there because of dire economic need.

    Explain Terry Weigel, then.

    Hell, explain why multi-millionaires keep going back to Playboy to get more pictures taken.

    The free market cannot thrive unless we police it for criminal activity such as this, just as it cannot thrive unless we police the market square for pickpockets.

    The free market cannot thrive unless prudes like you keep their goddamn nose out of other people's bedrooms.

    Even if those people choose to take a camera into their bedroom. If you don't like it, don't watch it. Nobody is forcing you to. (Another one of those pesky distinctions between porn and rape; bet you wish those would all go away, that'd sure help you make your stupid analogy.)

    Yahoo must not be allowed to perpetuate this abomination against humanity.

    In every country, there are idiots who are opposed to freedom, and who will use the courts to attempt to enforce their values upon everyone else. Yahoo already learned that lesson, remember?

    Although your post is an obvious troll, it really should be moderated down as redundant. Go away.

    -
    FOR GREAT JUSTICE.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    35 moderations! (OT) (Score:2)
    by donutello on Wednesday April 11, @04:11PM EST (#260)
    (User #88309 Info)

    Moderation Totals:Flamebait=1, Troll=14, Insightful=4, Interesting=7, Funny=8, Overrated=1, Total=35.

    What's the record?


    Mmmm.. donuts
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
      No (Score:0)
      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 11, @04:52PM EST (#274)
      I once saw one with 54. 35 is nothing to sneeze at, but it's hardly the record.
      [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    A contrary opinion (Score:0)
    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 11, @04:42PM EST (#267)
    (Like there aren't already plenty here)

    I'm posting this as AC, because I think I'm about to come off sounding like either a freak or a braggart, and I am neither. If this causes you to assign less validity to my post, then so be it.

    I have a number of points to make. I will try to keep them brief.

    First off, my little brother has dated two strippers. Admittedly, my little brother was a drug abuser, lawbreaker, and many other bad things. These girls, on the other hand, were sweet and often worked hard to try to help him turn his life around. They were a strong positive influence on him. And furthermore, they loved their jobs and their bodies. No exploitation there.

    I think God every day for giving me the internet and easy access to porn. Having porn so easily accessable makes it much easier for me to AVOID exploiting women. Bear with me, here, and this will make perfect sense. First off, I love sex. Secondly, like any young man (I'm twenty-five), I like a lot of sex. I also get many offers from women for sex. I won't speculate on why this is;it's irrelevant. But it is true. I've also just had an unhappy love affair with my long-standing girlfriend. I am emotionally screwed up about women right now, and if I were to have sex with any of these girls who offer, *THAT* would be exploitation, in my mind. And sometimes I am sorely tempted to agree and go ahead with it just for the sake of getting my rocks off. Instead, I turn to my DSL connection and the plethora of porn sites onthe internet (and a bottle of Astroglide -- gentlemen, if you have not tried it, I strongly recommend it. I am not in any way associated witht he company.) After a few minutes alone with my porn, I'm feeling much less horny and frustrated and much less likely to take advantage of the women in my life.

    As for women only getting into porn because they need the money -- this is ridiculous on two fronts. 1) Many of the people who pose nude (especially in playboy) are already plenty wealthy. Several of the strippers I've met through my brother also come from good, supportive families with no finincical difficulties. 2) As someone else here pointed out -- I work two jobs, and one of them I work for the love of it. The other -- you guessed it, I only do for the money. I'm sure many people are the same. Yet we do not shout that we are being exploited. We did choose our jobs; if I had a moral objection to being a programmer, I could always get a job at McDonald's or the local shopping mall or as a labourer. *YOU ALWAYS HAVE CHOICES*

    Those points will do.

    Thank you God for making women so beautiful, wonderful, and enjoyable. Thank you God for giving us sex, orgasm, and the million other wonderful sensations associated with sex. And thank you God for giving us porn to tide us over in times of need.

    Lest I get marked as a troll for my mentioning God, I'd like to point out I say it only as a phrase, and have no particular religious ties of my own.

    -Anonymous (and yes, Cowardly as well)

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:1)
    by grappler (cshpaarmlsiuecokks@ubsaal.nlest) on Wednesday April 11, @04:43PM EST (#268)
    (User #14976 Info) http://www.thehungersite.com/
    Holy mother of fuck! 43 replies! Masterful.

    --
    Vidi, Vici, Veni

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:1)
    by wickline on Wednesday April 11, @04:43PM EST (#270)
    (User #93513 Info)
    There is no such thing as consent in pornography, because every person involved is there because of dire economic need.

    Yeah... like when Vanna White did Playboy all those years ago, it was because she wasn't making enough money on the Wheel Of Fortune.

    ...and when they do "Coeds on Campus" or the equivilant, all those students are in dire economic need because they've decided to blow all their spare change (after rent, tuition, books, beer money, and utilities) on christmass presents for their families.

    Puh-lease.

    I've known porn models, strippers and mud restlers. Not a single one of them was in any more dire economic need than I was. In fact, without exception, they made more money than I did (I was an undergrad).

    You've got some twisted image of homeless heroine addicts selling their bodies for their next fix or their next meal. That may be the reality for some individuals, but it isn't what happens in mainstream pornography, and certainly isn't the case for "every person involved", as you claim. Hell, Hugh Hefner is involved. He's certainly not broke.

    Go talk to some strippers and learn for yourself before you spout this nonsense. You really have no idea what you're talking about.

    -matt
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:0)
    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 11, @04:49PM EST (#273)
    Pornography is indistinguishable from rape. It runs women through a blender...

    Well, technically, you run the women through the blender after you rape them.

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:1)
    by cnkeller on Wednesday April 11, @05:06PM EST (#279)
    (User #181482 Info)
    Yes it is.

    I had no idea Yahoo has been selling porn for two years! Why the hell wasn't this publicized sooner...

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re:This is a moral outrage! (Score:1)
    by bigbadwlf (bigbadwlf@spam.me.and.die.linuxfreemail.com) on Wednesday April 11, @06:42PM EST (#306)
    (User #304883 Info) http://vierna.dnsq.org
    It is an outrage that you feel you have the right to come here and preach your morals to everyone else.
    Not all of us read the bible.
    Not all of us are prudes.
    Some of us like porn.
    Your statement that pornography is indestinguishable from rape represents your opinion. You would present it as fact.

    Go away and pray for our eternal souls or something.


    Never grep /dev
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    1 | 2 (Slashdot Overload: CommentLimit 50)
      Do nothing unless you must, and when you must act -- hesitate.
    All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest 1997-2001 OSDN.

    [ home | awards | supporters | rob's homepage | contribute story | older articles | OSDN | advertising | past polls | about | faq ]