NationStates Jolt Archive

In light of the recent thread on the topic, I remembered that this is a legal grey area in my own country. Should they be legal? In theory I would say yes. With a few exceptions involving location, they don't causes harm to society and provide opportunity for business and employment.

However, I am also concerned that such shows could occasionally be used as a cover for rape and exploitation.

The Big Dan's Gang Rape Case (http://www.masslawyersweekly.com/mlw30/case4.cfm) of 1983 springs to mind. In the event, a 21-year-old mother of two was gang-raped atop a barroom pool table as men stood by chanting and cheering on the assailants.

It was afterwards reported that many of the men claimed that they thought it was a live sex show, that it was consensual and did not know it was a rape.

I am concerned that in future such cases it would be even easier for rapists to weasel their way out of justice than it already is, if live sex shows were made legal.

In light of the recent thread on the topic, I remembered that this is a legal grey area in my own country.

It is?

It is?
Yes, I've heard about Gardai stopping them and I've also heard about them being permitted to go on, because no-one was certain where the law stood on it.

Yes, I've heard about Gardai stopping them and I've also heard about them being permitted to go on, because no-one was certain where the law stood on it.
LOL!
"Stop that!... No...wait.... carry on. *Pass the popcorn*"

I would say yes. After all, it is legal to watch people have sex.

I would say yes. After all, it is legal to watch people have sex.
I mean, as a public spectacle. In the privacy of someone's home is not the same.

As long as the performers consent to it, I don't see why not. Bar entrance to minors, do thorough background checks on all employees, allow unannounced inspections.

I don't see why not. And no, your anecdote doesn't faze me.

yes

And no, your anecdote doesn't faze me.
Why not?

As long as sensible regulations were put in place to prevent rape, sure, why not,

As long as sensible regulations were put in place to prevent rape, sure, why not,
Seconded.

I dont think so. It devalues sex which in turn devalues societies moral fibre.

I dont think so. It devalues sex which in turn devalues societies moral fibre.

Sex has no inherant value.

I dont think so. It devalues sex which in turn devalues societies moral fibre.
Oh really? How many different societies are there on the face of this earth?
I'd wager you don't know, and further, you don't know anything about the variance of "moral fibre" you're talking about.

Sex has no inherant value.

Its a moral thing. Culture in modern western society seems at present deeply obsessed with sex. I am sure most people would agree that isnt a good thing. All this would do is merely fuel that obsession further.

Its a moral thing. Culture in modern western society seems at present deeply obsessed with sex. I am sure most people would agree that isnt a good thing. All this would do is merely fuel that obsession further.

That's because we glamourize it yet try to make it into a horrible sin. The forbidden fruit always is sweeter, ne?

snip. I am sure most people would agree that isnt a good thing. All this would do is merely fuel that obsession further.
I would also agree that it is not a bad thing

it is what it is

I would also agree that it is not a bad thing

it is what it is

So your arguing that societys continual obsession with sex is neither bad nor good. Is this your moral reletivism streek coming through again

So your arguing that societys continual obsession with sex is neither bad nor good. Is this your moral reletivism streek coming through again
Perhaps its your lack of understanding that there's more than "the western world" TO the world and perhaps you should educate yourself on it before you start flinging your misspellings at everyone.

Perhaps its your lack of understanding that there's more than "the western world" TO the world and perhaps you should educate yourself on it before you start flinging your misspellings at everyone.

1. Picking up people on misspellings is normally a sign that you cannot deal with their arguement.

2. When did I suggest that there is only the western world to the world. I was only commenting on the western world when I said society was becoming more obsessed with sex, I did say that. I am aware there is more than the western world but that is all I am commenting on.

1. Picking up people on misspellings is normally a sign that you cannot deal with their arguement.
Okay, if you have an argument, deal with my posts. Otherwise you come across as an illiterate, self-absorbed xenophobe. Don't cry about people calling you on things if you can't handle it, you won't debate well.

2. When did I suggest that there is only the western world to the world. I was only commenting on the western world when I said society was becoming more obsessed with sex, I did say that. I am aware there is more than the western world but that is all I am commenting on.You said SPECIFICALLY this:
I dont think so. It devalues sex which in turn devalues societies moral fibre.
That was your first response. It took until now for you to clarify that you aren't arguing from anything other than what you think is a "western" POV.
That is the natural course of argument, is it not?

Okay, if you have an argument, deal with my posts. Otherwise you come across as an illiterate, self-absorbed xenophobe. Don't cry about people calling you on things if you can't handle it, you won't debate well.

I have an argument and I'm giving it to you. Just dont critise spelling when you cant criticise anything else. Its silly and childish


You said SPECIFICALLY this:

That was your first response. It took until now for you to clarify that you aren't arguing from anything other than what you think is a "western" POV.
That is the natural course of argument, is it not.

Actually I said this in the second post I made

Culture in modern western society seems at present deeply obsessed with sex

So I did clarifiy it before. You are wrong.

I have an argument and I'm giving it to you. Just dont critise spelling when you cant criticise anything else. Its silly and childishYou can't even punctuate OR spell consistantly. That's usually the mark of a poster in the remedial-education mindset.
Here was my post:
Oh really? How many different societies are there on the face of this earth?
I'd wager you don't know, and further, you don't know anything about the variance of "moral fibre" you're talking about.
And there, you qualified nothing, clarified nothing.
So I did clarifiy it before. You are wrong.Actually, all you did was state your POV. And argued that there was clarity or quality, not much in either regard, really.

You can't even punctuate OR spell consistantly. That's usually the mark of a poster in the remedial-education mindset.

I know very few people in the world who spell and punctuate exactly perfectly all the time.


Here was my post:

I didnt see any reason to answer that question. I dont know how many societies there are in the world. What does that prove? Nothing. No one knows how many there are in the entire world simply because no one can define society exactly. So why does it matter?


And there, you qualified nothing, clarified nothing.
Actually, all you did was state your POV. And argued that there was clarity or quality, not much in either regard, really.

I stated my POV and people argued it was flawed so I argued back. Sex is an integral part of a societies morality. Its value is that of love placed with it. If it just becomes 'something fun' it means people view it less highly which in turn means more people have it without the love which can lead to very negative consequences and to people who are emotionanaly and spiritually drained. Alfie gives a fine example of this. A complete hedonist. Someone obsessed with wine, wordly goods and women. But the fact is at then end, he is left questioning some serious fundimentals about life.

I know very few people in the world who spell and punctuate exactly perfectly all the time.
True. But with you, it's a misleading inference of an art.


I didnt see any reason to answer that question. I dont know how many societies there are in the world. What does that prove? Nothing. No one knows how many there are in the entire world simply because no one can define society exactly. So why does it matter?See, that right there is your stumbling block. You simply don't have a frame of reference to qualify your statement. Remniscient of the "flat-earther" mentality ... before air travel and space and all that jazz.



I stated my POV and people argued it was flawed so I argued back. Sex is an integral part of a societies morality. Its value is that of love placed with it. If it just becomes 'something fun' it means people view it less highly which in turn means more people have it without the love which can lead to very negative consequences and to people who are emotionanaly and spiritually drained. Alfie gives a fine example of this. A complete hedonist. Someone obsessed with wine, wordly goods and women. But the fact is at then end, he is left questioning some serious fundimentals about life.
Okay, see THIS is a good post. There's a lot more to argue with here. Essentially, people aren't good multitaskers, and there's probably a lot of good reasons (and examples) to back that up. Also, you have moved the "value" of sex into the "love" arena, which you might consider clarifying with definitions.

Its value is that of love placed with it. If it just becomes 'something fun' it means people view it less highly which in turn means more people have it without the love which can lead to very negative consequences and to people who are emotionanaly and spiritually drained. Alfie gives a fine example of this. A complete hedonist. Someone obsessed with wine, wordly goods and women. But the fact is at then end, he is left questioning some serious fundimentals about life.

Bottom line:

Hollywood shouldn't do remakes.

Bottom line:

Hollywood shouldn't do remakes.
Oooh ... hard to climb out of that one. *nods solemnly*

I stated my POV and people argued it was flawed so I argued back. Sex is an integral part of a societies morality. Its value is that of love placed with it. If it just becomes 'something fun' it means people view it less highly which in turn means more people have it without the love which can lead to very negative consequences and to people who are emotionanaly and spiritually drained. Alfie gives a fine example of this. A complete hedonist. Someone obsessed with wine, wordly goods and women. But the fact is at then end, he is left questioning some serious fundimentals about life.
Sex=/= love. Love =/= sex. The two are seperate, and sometimes are united. I would argue that everyone questions serious fundimentals about their lives at some point. This does not show anything about having sex for fun. I would like to see some kind of source demonstrating a link between casual sex and being emotionally and spiritually drained. Untill then, you have stated opinion, but presented it as fact.

As for the OP, I think they should be legal. There is no reason to believe that a rape would occur. The anecdote claims that some people just started having sex on a pool table, and everyone just cheered them on? Something tells me the owner would stop them, since that is illegal. And the risk of rape would be basically nil, as I see this being something that would happen at a strip-joint type place.

Sex=/= love. Love =/= sex. The two are seperate, and sometimes are united. I would argue that everyone questions serious fundimentals about their lives at some point. This does not show anything about having sex for fun. I would like to see some kind of source demonstrating a link between casual sex and being emotionally and spiritually drained. Untill then, you have stated opinion, but presented it as fact.


This isnt something quantifiable. But it is something that you can see the logic of in Alfie. The fact is that you can have everything in the world and still not be fufilled. Sex without love is empty as it just becomes an experiance, a 'high' so to speek. Then it becomes like drugs or adreniline rush sports, just another experiance. You can have everything in the world, but if you dont have love of some form, it leaves you empty. If your going to disagree with that, I'd be quite amazed.

As long as the performers consent to it, I don't see why not. Bar entrance to minors, do thorough background checks on all employees, allow unannounced inspections.Hm... That got me thinking...

This isnt something quantifiable. But it is something that you can see the logic of in Alfie. The fact is that you can have everything in the world and still not be fufilled. Sex without love is empty as it just becomes an experiance, a 'high' so to speek. Then it becomes like drugs or adreniline rush sports, just another experiance. You can have everything in the world, but if you dont have love of some form, it leaves you empty. If your going to disagree with that, I'd be quite amazed.

Yes, people need love, that doesn't mean they need to love who they have sex with.

Sure, why not? as long as everyone is a consenting adult and there are regulations to stop people being exploited. It would just be like porn but with spectators instead of cameras. or both.

I dont think so. It devalues sex which in turn devalues societies moral fibre.
I feel the same about it devaluing sex but I don't particularly see how it damages society. I don't think that my idea of the value of sex should be forced on everyone else, so the only objection I have is the risk of the practice being used as a cover for gang rape.

That's because we glamourize it yet try to make it into a horrible sin. The forbidden fruit always is sweeter, ne?
Yes I definitely agree.

There is no reason to believe that a rape would occur.
I agree that in the majority of cases, rape would not occur. But in a minority of cases I think it too easily could occur. I don't think that's an acceptable price to pay for the fun of live sex shows.

The anecdote claims that some people just started having sex on a pool table, and everyone just cheered them on? Something tells me the owner would stop them, since that is illegal. And the risk of rape would be basically nil, as I see this being something that would happen at a strip-joint type place.
This is not some anecdote or urban legend. It's an accurate account and my source is credible.

This isnt something quantifiable. But it is something that you can see the logic of in Alfie. The fact is that you can have everything in the world and still not be fufilled. Sex without love is empty as it just becomes an experiance, a 'high' so to speek. Then it becomes like drugs or adreniline rush sports, just another experiance. You can have everything in the world, but if you dont have love of some form, it leaves you empty. If your going to disagree with that, I'd be quite amazed.
I agree, but I still don't see why this viewpoint should be enforced by law. Also, I don't think there's anything wrong with having fun on drugs. As long as you don't get addicted there's no problem. Are you a Puritan by any chance? They tend to be troubled by the thought of people having fun.

Hm... That got me thinking...
*Cue intervention by Cabra West, Sinuhue or Carnivorous Lickers*

*Cue intervention by Cabra West, Sinuhue or Carnivorous Lickers*Well, more about who'd be doing the unanounced inspections...
Probably the cops, and they have handcuffs... hm... thinking again... =D

I dont think so. It devalues sex which in turn devalues societies moral fibre.
Well, i enjoy sex. With changing partners of both sexes. Woot.
I dont see my moral stance on other issues weakened in any way since i became sexually active. If this doesnt work on an individual, how should in on a heterogenous society? Can you show a correlation between openend sexual moral and crime?

I'd say Hell yeah, of course it should be legal! :D

However, *explicit written consent* should be required from all participants, so rapists can't abuse this.

Yes, people need love, that doesn't mean they need to love who they have sex with.

I would argue they do. Otherwise sex loses its value and meaning and becomes just another 'high'. I think considering the deeper emotional involvemnent of sex, not to mention its possible consequences of pregnancy, this kind of thing should be prevented.

I would argue they do. Otherwise sex loses its value and meaning and becomes just another 'high'. I think considering the deeper emotional involvemnent of sex, not to mention its possible consequences of pregnancy, this kind of thing should be prevented.

I suppose you're entitled to be wrong.

If people who aren't in love have sex there is no emotional involvement, additionally pregancy can be fixed. Your arguement isn't coherant.

I suppose you're entitled to be wrong.

If people who aren't in love have sex there is no emotional involvement, additionally pregancy can be fixed. Your arguement isn't coherant.

People who arent in love may have sex, but that doesnt change the fact that sex is something deeply intimate and emotional in itself. Why else do you think it matters so much in relationships. Why is exclusivity so important? If sex is so valueless. Pregnancy shouldnt be able to be "fixed".

If this doesnt work on an individual, how should in on a heterogenous society? Can you show a correlation between openend sexual moral and crime?
It would appear not.

This isnt something quantifiable. But it is something that you can see the logic of in Alfie. The fact is that you can have everything in the world and still not be fufilled. Sex without love is empty as it just becomes an experiance, a 'high' so to speek. Then it becomes like drugs or adreniline rush sports, just another experiance. You can have everything in the world, but if you dont have love of some form, it leaves you empty. If your going to disagree with that, I'd be quite amazed.
I don't disagree that love is a good thing, on its many levels. Romantic or sexual love is in no way needed.
Additionally, having sex without love in no way stops you from having sex with love. Hell, you can have love and still not be fulfilled. It isn't that easy.

And I maintain that there is nothing wrong with a "high" or "just another experiance"

This is not some anecdote or urban legend. It's an accurate account and my source is credible.
look up the word "anecdote" before you claim it isn't one, as that is what you just maintained it is. Additionally, I still highly doubt it. Welcome to the internet.
Something about the person being raped screaming "no" or "help" or crying would probably tip off that it was a rape.

People who arent in love may have sex, but that doesnt change the fact that sex is something deeply intimate and emotional in itself. Why else do you think it matters so much in relationships. Why is exclusivity so important? If sex is so valueless. Pregnancy shouldnt be able to be "fixed".

Exclusivity isn't important to everyone, and it would be alot less important to everyone if we weren't conditioned to think it is.

I mean, as a public spectacle. In the privacy of someone's home is not the same.Sure. The lines between "public" and "private" are already blurred anyway. As long as everyone who is watching is informed of what they're about to see, I can't see a problem with the idea.

<snip>


*Cue intervention by Cabra West, Sinuhue or Carnivorous Lickers*

Damn, missed my cue there :p
But that sure would be one cool job, don't you think? Inspector of live sex shows?

Damn, missed my cue there :p
But that sure would be one cool job, don't you think? Inspector of live sex shows?

I missed it too.

You'd have to wear goggles, right?

I missed it too.

You'd have to wear goggles, right?Why wear anything at all? ;)

Why wear anything at all? ;)

true, without clothing, the meter I use to inspect these things would give a more accurate reading.

You dont want any splatter in your eyes though.

Exclusivity isn't important to everyone, and it would be alot less important to everyone if we weren't conditioned to think it is.

I dont think we are conditioned to think it is. I think its fairly inbuilt in us.

I dont think we are conditioned to think it is. I think its fairly inbuilt in us.

Explain why exclusivity is so much less common in nomadic and hunter-gatherer cultures?

Explain why exclusivity is so much less common in nomadic and hunter-gatherer cultures?
I think Adriatica II has already disqualified themselves from possessing or professing any knowledge of other cultures to any significant degree. Perhaps history factors in there as well. :(

Should Live Sex Shows be Legal?

In short... Yes.