NationStates Jolt Archive

A father and son who were about to play a relaxing game of checkers found that a card bearing a nude Jenna Jameson and some sexually suggestive sentences was part of the checkerboard's packaging. The company that imported the checkerboard explained that their Chinese supplier was using recycled cardboard including cardboard used for porn trading cards to make the packaging.

http://bugmenot.com/view.php?url=orlandosentinel.com

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/volusia/orl-vgame1906apr19,0,5898446.story?coll=orl-home-headlines

Between this and the Wal-Mart thing a while ago, I'm starting to get pretty pissed off. It seems the only person whose childhood innocence wasn't repeatedly bombarded with free and accidental porn is me, and that isn't fair!

ha, if i was the kid i wouldnt have complained

I demand pictures.

Between this and the Wal-Mart thing a while ago, I'm starting to get pretty pissed off. It seems the only person whose childhood innocence wasn't repeatedly bombarded with free and accidental porn is me, and that isn't fair!
Me too:mad:

Children shouldn't see this stuff. I say that the manufacturer be sued, and if they don't start caring about WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S PORNOGRAPHY ON THE PACKAGING, shut them down.

Children shouldn't see this stuff. I say that the manufacturer be sued, and if they don't start caring about WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S PORNOGRAPHY ON THE PACKAGING, shut them down.
But porn is good. Even better when it's free porn. I say the manufacturer should sue the consumers for complaining about something that is clearly a gift from some form of higher power (that I don't actually believe in).

But porn is good. Even better when it's free porn. I say the manufacturer should sue the consumers for complaining about something that is clearly a gift from some form of higher power (that I don't actually believe in).

Actually, I believe that pornographers should have their own level in a deep underground and fiery place, and that all the porn should be burned too.

Children shouldn't see this stuff. I say that the manufacturer be sued, and if they don't start caring about WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S PORNOGRAPHY ON THE PACKAGING, shut them down.
I disagree completely. I think it's healthy for kids to see normal human sexuality frequently. It can help dispel erronious and perhaps damaging playground rumors and lead to the development of a happy sex life when the child becomes an adult. To that end I'm starting a letter writing campaign to replace Sesame Street with tastefully done porn and fetish movies.

Actually, I believe that pornographers should have their own level in a deep underground and fiery place, and that all the porn should be burned too.
Why?

I disagree completely. I think it's healthy for kids to see normal human sexuality frequently. It can help dispel erronious and perhaps damaging playground rumors and lead to the development of a happy sex life when the child becomes an adult. To that end I'm starting a letter writing campaign to replace Sesame Street with tastefully done porn and fetish movies.

I'm not saying that absolutely EVERYTHING should be covered up, but... there's a place where it's distasteful.

Actually, I believe that pornographers should have their own level in a deep underground and fiery place, and that all the porn should be burned too.
Sounds like you need to relax, watch some porn, and rub one out.

jenna jameson isnt even that hot...

Why?

Because they warp something originally intended to make more humans into something that erely exploits a biological drive for cash.


That and it's disgusting.

I'm not saying that absolutely EVERYTHING should be covered up, but... there's a place where it's distasteful.
So like you'd be ok with foot fetish videos as kid's entertainment, but no rimjobs?

Sounds like you need to relax, watch some porn, and rub one out.

Um...

Perhaps not.

But porn is good. Even better when it's free porn. I say the manufacturer should sue the consumers for complaining about something that is clearly a gift from some form of higher power (that I don't actually believe in).
Lord Jeremy, the Porn Father on High?
He has been seen on the move again, arousing an army of followers. Maybe the long Winter of the Puritan Ice Queen will soon give way to a Warm and Moist Spring . . .

Because they warp something originally intended to make more humans into something that erely exploits a biological drive for cash.


That and it's disgusting.
For that reason I'm disgusted by gourmet restaurants. It takes a biological drive intended to keep humans alive and exploits it for cash. It's like food prostitution. Disgusting.

Actually, I believe that pornographers should have their own level in a deep underground and fiery place, and that all the porn should be burned too.

:eek: burn porn? r u teh crazy?

Because they warp something originally intended to make more humans into something that erely exploits a biological drive for cash.


That and it's disgusting.
Ok, so by the same logic, I assume you oppose companies that manufacture condoms?

Porn satisfies the sexual drive of many people. Most of it is perfectly legal and involves only consenting adults. I agree with Drunk Commies, you should relax, watch porn, and masturbate. It's only natural.

For that reason I'm disgusted by gourmet restaurants. It takes a biological drive intended to keep humans alive and exploits it for cash. It's like food prostitution. Disgusting.

However, in the case of food, there's different types, and thus choices to make. Competition. I can't see any difference when it comes to pornography.

jenna jameson isnt even that hot...

Take it back, you hear!

Ok, so by the same logic, I assume you oppose companies that manufacture condoms?

Porn satisfies the sexual drive of many people. Most of it is perfectly legal and involves only consenting adults. I agree with Drunk Commies, you should relax, watch porn, and masturbate. It's only natural.

Actually, since I oppose recreational sex, I somewhat do. It shouldn't be needed.

And to the second part:

Since when do you require it?

:eek: burn porn? r u teh crazy?

No, logical.

However, in the case of food, there's different types, and thus choices to make. Competition. I can't see any difference when it comes to pornography.
I'd provide links to prove you wrong, but I'd get banned.

Take it back, you hear!

neva!!!! teagan presley is so much hotter...

I'd provide links to prove you wrong, but I'd get banned.

dont let that stop you...;)

However, in the case of food, there's different types, and thus choices to make. Competition. I can't see any difference when it comes to pornography.
I would post a series of obscene links and demand that you tell me that there was no difference between them, but I think rather than get myself banned over this I'll just laugh at your ignorace.

Actually, since I oppose recreational sex, I somewhat do. It shouldn't be needed.

And to the second part:

Since when do you require it?
Well, first part, personal belief I guess, I won't argue.

Second part: since I haven't seen my girlfriend for two weeks, and won't see her again for another two. It's not right for a man to go that long without some form of sexual satisfaction.

I'd provide links to prove you wrong, but I'd get banned.

Yeah. Lots of "variation".

Really, there's many more types of food. Now, I'm sure there's different types of the other thing we were talking about, but it's all just parts of the human body. Parts I think need to be censored a bit.

Well, first part, personal belief I guess, I won't argue.

Second part: since I haven't seen my girlfriend for two weeks, and won't see her again for another two. It's not right for a man to go that long without some form of sexual satisfaction.

Well, I've went for way longer than that...

I would post a series of obscene links and demand that you tell me that there was no difference between them, but I think rather than get myself banned over this I'll just laugh at your ignorace.

Very well, I can't really change unfounded beliefs.

neva!!!! teagan presley is so much hotter...

*googles teagan presley*

.....
*blinks*

.....

I concur.

Very well, I can't really change unfounded beliefs.
Nor can I, I suppose.

*googles teagan presley*

.....
*blinks*

.....

I concur.

haha, that didnt take long...:p

*googles teagan presley*

.....
*blinks*

.....

I concur.


Honestly silicon is attractive? Meh straight guys make no sense.

Nor can I, I suppose.

I must say that my beliefs are founded. Why?

Have you seen what happens when children are exposed to that?

I've seen it. They will not stop talking about it. That's all they say.

Not pleasant.

Yeah. Lots of "variation".

Really, there's many more types of food. Now, I'm sure there's different types of the other thing we were talking about, but it's all just parts of the human body. Parts I think need to be censored a bit.
You object to the human body?

Honestly silicon is attractive? Meh straight guys make no sense.

They look quite natural.

And anyway, pfft. Pornstars aren't people- they're objects. Let us treat them like such :D

Wait!?!?!

"Porn TRADING CARDS" Is this like the Pokemon or Harry Potter cards my kids have? (resists urge to say "Poke her man" or something similar)

Do guys trade these at work? Am I missing a growing trend in hobbies?

Because they warp something originally intended to make more humans into something that erely exploits a biological drive for cash.


That and it's disgusting.

Porn is not disgusting - Jenna = tasty, especially in combination with Janine!:D

You object to the human body?

Not most of it. It's not like I can't stand seeing someone's arm.

I do object to the reproductive system.

Porn is not disgusting - Jenna = tasty, especially in combination with Janine!:D

Subjective.

Not most of it. It's not like I can't stand seeing someone's arm.

I do object to the reproductive system.

Now THAT gets sigged.

Now THAT gets sigged.

Why?

However, in the case of food, there's different types, and thus choices to make. Competition. I can't see any difference when it comes to pornography.
You haven't watched enough porn. There are midgets, interracial, anal, whatever.

Subjective.

Objective - Anyone who disagrees must be mad, mad I say, maaaaaaaaaaad!

Subjective.
So's food. I can't stand to eat anything that spends a signifigant portion of its life cycle under water, but other people sit their, stuffing those slimy fish things down their useless throats like someone was about to steal the vile smelling lumps protien and fat from them.

I must say that my beliefs are founded. Why?

Have you seen what happens when children are exposed to that?

I've seen it. They will not stop talking about it. That's all they say.

Not pleasant.
The reason they don't stop talking about it is because it's something new that they haven't seen before. The taboo around the subject only serves to entice them more. If you want kids to be more blase about it, you should try not keeping them deliberately ignorant.

Not most of it. It's not like I can't stand seeing someone's arm.Isn't the objection to the womanly body the reason why radical islamists invented the burka? Should we ban everything but tastefully disguised eyes now because of the desires of a small group?

So's food. I can't stand to eat anything that spends a signifigant portion of its life cycle under water, but other people sit their, stuffing those slimy fish things down their useless throats like someone was about to steal the vile smelling lumps protien and fat from them.

You cannot deny it keeps you alive.

Isn't the objection to the womanly body the reason why radical islamists invented the burka? Should we ban everything but tastefully disguised eyes now because of the desires of a small group?

Um...

No. I most definately agree that you should be able to wear what you want, so long as it is tasteful.

The reason they don't stop talking about it is because it's something new that they haven't seen before. The taboo around the subject only serves to entice them more. If you want kids to be more blase about it, you should try not keeping them deliberately ignorant.

And then they try to imitate it...

Um...

No. I most definately agree that you should be able to wear what you want, so long as it is tasteful.
I'm glad you're not the one who decides what is tasteful then.

You cannot deny it keeps you alive.
Fish doesn't keep me alive! I'm an American, so I eat meat, and I'm a Catholic (well, no, not really), so fish aren't meat.
And, were it not for the masterful use that my parents made of their sex organs, I wouldn't be here to be kept alive.

Um...

No. I most definately agree that you should be able to wear what you want, so long as it is tasteful.
Would pasties and a crotchless G-string be tastefull?

Would pasties and a crotchless G-string be tastefull?

No.

Would pasties and a crotchless G-string be tastefull?

IMO- On Angie Everhart yes, on you or me-No.

Fish doesn't keep me alive! I'm an American, so I eat meat, and I'm a Catholic (well, no, not really), so fish aren't meat.
And, were it not for the masterful use that my parents made of their sex organs, I wouldn't be here to be kept alive.

Let's say you hat some fish. This was the only meat you had. And you ate it.

Along with the other nutrients you need, it would keep you alive.

And then they try to imitate it...
You really aren't up on the whole "child psychology" thing, are you?

The only reason you get extreme behavior like that is because it is forbidden. If it were seen more often, it would not have the sort of appeal it has when it is hidden away.

There's nothing more tempting at that age than that door at the video store marked "must be 18 or over to enter" with no further explaination.

I mean, you aren't going to seriusly imply that it is normal and natural for children to behave sexually when they aren't ignorant, and that only by keeping them ignorant can we hope to maintain their purity? Are you?

Let's say you hat some fish. This was the only meat you had. And you ate it.

Along with the other nutrients you need, it would keep you alive.

Sure fuck it. Go the whole hog and say why bother eating for pleasure or enjoyment. Thou must get NO fun from life at all!

Are you a Puritan by any chance?:rolleyes:

Not most of it. It's not like I can't stand seeing someone's arm.

I do object to the reproductive system.
But what's the difference between an arm and a penis (yeah, ok, I know the difference all you hilarious pedants out there). I mean, an arm is skin, flesh, bone, muscle, etc, the same as the penis. Well, there's no actual bone in the penis (I know what you're thinking, and, no, it's not funny).

Let's say you hat some fish. This was the only meat you had. And you ate it.

Along with the other nutrients you need, it would keep you alive.
Fish isn't meat, the Pope said so!
And even were I to start eating fish, that alone couldn't sustain me. In fact, to eat meat is to participate in a degrading flesh-based industry that relies on our baser desires and exploits them to make profit.
Were we to adopt your ethics in all areas of affairs, we would be Amish Vegans, sitting around cornfields and getting angsty about how many inches of bare ankle our wives were showing.

You really aren't up on the whole "child psychology" thing, are you?

The only reason you get extreme behavior like that is because it is forbidden. If it were seen more often, it would not have the sort of appeal it has when it is hidden away.
Oh right, that's strange - you see, I've known about sex for sometime now, it is in no way forbidden to me, and yet I still want to do it.

But of course, children only do it because it's not allowed. :rolleyes:

Fish isn't meat, the Pope said so!
And even were I to start eating fish, that alone couldn't sustain me. In fact, to eat meat is to participate in a degrading flesh-based industry that relies on our baser desires and exploits them to make profit.
Were we to adopt your ethics in all areas of affairs, we would be Amish Vegans, sitting around cornfields and getting angsty about how many inches of bare ankle our wives were showing.

No.

If I replaced the beef I'm going to have for supper tonight with salmon, and ate it, I would be perfectly fine. Fish is actually better than most meat.

And if you were to adopt my ethics as I presented them, yo uwould live almost the same way as you do now-- minus distasteful porn.

Oh right, that's strange - you see, I've known about sex for sometime now, it is in no way forbidden to me, and yet I still want to do it.

But of course, children only do it because it's not allowed. :rolleyes:
You're seriusly arguing that children normally want sex before they reach puberty?

Actually, I believe that pornographers should have their own level in a deep underground and fiery place, and that all the porn should be burned too.

Okay... whatever gets you off...

Um...

No. I most definately agree that you should be able to wear what you want, so long as it is tasteful.And who gets to decide it's tasteful? During the Iranian elections, I heard plenty of quotes by men about how they hoped Ahmadinejad was going to stop the girls from running around "dressed as whores". Who get's to decide what tasteful is?

But what's the difference between an arm and a penis (yeah, ok, I know the difference all you hilarious pedants out there). I mean, an arm is skin, flesh, bone, muscle, etc, the same as the penis. Well, there's no actual bone in the penis (I know what you're thinking, and, no, it's not funny).

The difference:

Arm-

Manipulator.

Penis-

Sexual organ.

You're seriusly arguing that children normally want sex before they reach puberty?
You're seriously arguing that a child that in no way wants sex would do it just because it's forbidden?

I in no way want to crash my car into someone else, that's forbidden, and hey! I still don't want to do it.

And who gets to decide it's tasteful? During the Iranian elections, I heard plenty of quotes by men about how they hoped Ahmadinejad was going to stop the girls from running around "dressed as whores". Who get's to decide what tasteful is?

I'd define tasteful as-

Not exposing sexual organs.

The difference:

Arm-

Manipulator.

Penis-

Sexual organ.
So?
Arm - bodypart
Penis - bodypart

The difference:

Arm-

Manipulator.

Penis-

Sexual organ.

Never had a handjob, then...

The difference:

Arm-

Manipulator.

Penis-

Sexual organ.
Maybe your penis can't manipulate things, but . . .
No, actually that joke was too obvious, moving right along.

I'd define tasteful as-

Not exposing sexual organs.
So then nipples and ass are OK?

Children shouldn't see this stuff. I say that the manufacturer be sued, and if they don't start caring about WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S PORNOGRAPHY ON THE PACKAGING, shut them down.

Ok honestly now.... what is a lawsuit gonna do? Ok, maybe something that will force them into regulating that kind of stuff or watching out for it, but if you are talking a lawsuit to pay for your child's "damaged or tainted childhood", then thats just bull. No amount of money will fix what the kid has seen. Chances are it had a very little effect on him anyways. The only thing lawsuits are becoming good for nowadays is lazy people who won't get off the couch and get a job and wants some quick, easy money. Thank you for contributing to the lazy fat reputation of America.

I agree that they should take care of problems like this, but let's be a little more reasonable. Stop trying to take advantage of the situation.

As for the rest of you, you are a bunch of pervs who contribute to the generalization that all men think with their penis, and don't know how to treat a woman with respect. That just pisses me off Because I am a guy who isn't like that and it makes me look bad too. Grow up.

So then nipples and ass are OK?

Those prohibited too.

Children shouldn't see this stuff. I say that the manufacturer be sued, and if they don't start caring about WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S PORNOGRAPHY ON THE PACKAGING, shut them down.


*shrug*

Do you think the manufacturer cares?
And how is a US lawsuit going to affect a Chinese company if what that company is doing is PERFECTLY LEGAL where they are?

Those prohibited too.

You don't even agree with your OWN standards?

I've completely lost what you're talking about with fish and meat, but as for children seeing porn, I would say no for the same reason we say no to paedophilia. It just isn't right to be exposing children to it, and can have serious impacts if we do.

I've completely lost what you're talking about with fish and meat, but as for children seeing porn, I would say no for the same reason we say no to paedophilia. It just isn't right to be exposing children to it, and can have serious impacts if we do.

There IS a difference though, between a picture of a naked body, and fifteen minutes of hardcore.

Ok honestly now.... what is a lawsuit gonna do? Ok, maybe something that will force them into regulating that kind of stuff or watching out for it, but if you are talking a lawsuit to pay for your child's "damaged or tainted childhood", then thats just bull. No amount of money will fix what the kid has seen. Chances are it had a very little effect on him anyways. The only thing lawsuits are becoming good for nowadays is lazy people who won't get off the couch and get a job and wants some quick, easy money. Thank you for contributing to the lazy fat reputation of America.

I agree that they should take care of problems like this, but let's be a little more reasonable. Stop trying to take advantage of the situation.

As for the rest of you, you are a bunch of pervs who contribute to the generalization that all men think with their penis, and don't know how to treat a woman with respect. That just pisses me off Because I am a guy who isn't like that and it makes me look bad too. Grow up.


(Very, very good post!)

I actually do not live in America. I come from Canada.

However, I think it's a better idea to give them penalties for things like this.

Because they warp something originally intended to make more humans into something that erely exploits a biological drive for cash.


That and it's disgusting.

It is disgusting in your opinion. Millions of people disagree with you.
And would it not follow that exposing people to pron and titillating them might well result in more humans -- thereby furthering the original 'intention' of the mating instinct?

Maybe your penis can't manipulate things, but . . .
No, actually that joke was too obvious, moving right along.
Reminds me of a joke...
An elephant sees a naked man, and comments: 'Sure, it's nice, but can you pick up peanuts with it?'

I'd define tasteful as-

Not exposing sexual organs.Ah, but why is it up to you and not the guy that thinks tasteful is covered hair?

There IS a difference though, between a picture of a naked body, and fifteen minutes of hardcore.
Oh, absolutely - making children think there is something wrong with their bodies can do damage as well.

Those prohibited too.
Why? They're not sexual organs.

You don't even agree with your OWN standards?

I just did. You can't disagree with your own standards.

There actually is a medical condition called temporary fluid congestion in the sexual organs that causes the condition we call 'Blue Balls'. It is also present in women as Pelvic congestion. So you want us all to shrivel up into the fetal position clutching our genitals screaming, everytime we are exposed to sexually attractive sights or thoughts? Or perhaps you want to drug ourselves or rape somebody? We can't ignore what our bodies are saying. Sex is a need just like anything else and we cannot ignore it just because it involves a few body parts everybody is scared of.

Repression of sexuality is responsible for some of the worst things in culture today. Especially if it is taught to the young. Beliefs and convictions are like a virus, they spread and spread, giving no real benefit but only harm to the society. People marry animals because they aren't allowed to masturbate, men and women are being sexually assaulted because these urges aren't being released elsewhere. Women are second-class citizens all over the world because of their function in sex and their supposed 'biologically submissive' status.

Why? They're not sexual organs.

Thay are distasteful, and they are considered sexual organs by some.

No.

If I replaced the beef I'm going to have for supper tonight with salmon, and ate it, I would be perfectly fine. Fish is actually better than most meat.
Both are unnessecary, distasteful, and designed to pander to lower human instincts. A vegan diet removes us from the flesh trade entirely, is healthier, and makes more efficient use of natural resources.
And if you were to adopt my ethics as I presented them, yo uwould live almost the same way as you do now-- minus distasteful porn.
You're against unnessecary pleasures when they appear distasteful, and I can present dozens of arguments on how the exploitation of animals is distateful, horrible, and a sinful luxury.

Oh, absolutely - making children think there is something wrong with their bodies can do damage as well.

The comment is worth making, because there are some people who consider just seeing nipples as 'too much'.

Indeed, sadly, the FCC seems to agree...

There actually is a medical condition called temporary fluid congestion in the sexual organs that causes the condition we call 'Blue Balls'. It is also present in women as Pelvic congestion. So you want us all to shrivel up into the fetal position clutching our genitals screaming, everytime we are exposed to sexually attractive sights or thoughts? Or perhaps you want to drug ourselves or rape somebody? We can't ignore what our bodies are saying. Sex is a need just like anything else and we cannot ignore it just because it involves a few body parts everybody is scared of.

Repression of sexuality is responsible for some of the worst things in culture today. Especially if it is taught to the young. Beliefs and convictions are like a virus, they spread and spread, giving no real benefit but only harm to the society. People marry animals because they aren't allowed to masturbate, men and women are being sexually assaulted because these urges aren't being released elsewhere. Women are second-class citizens all over the world because of their function in sex and their supposed 'biologically submissive' status.


Tell me what would happen if our culture had evolved differently.

The difference:

Arm-

Manipulator.

Penis-

Sexual organ.
Well, no. You know where the word 'manipulator' comes from? Latin, manus, meaning hand. So hand = manipulator. Arm = limb.

Penis - also used for egestion.

However, in the case of food, there's different types, and thus choices to make. Competition. I can't see any difference when it comes to pornography.


Oh come on now.

There is straight porn, female-on-female porn, male-on-male porn, porn with young folks and old folks, able-bodied and handicapped, fetish porn, and stuff that would send me into convulsions with my brain oozing out of my ears if I thought on it --

--and I don't follow porn.

;) That's like saying food is all the same -- whether it's chicken, pork, beef, lamb, fish, veggies....

Thay are distasteful, and they are considered sexual organs by some.
Feet are considered sexual organs by some, and ugly people's faces are distasteful. Your criteria for determining what should and shouldn't be covered up are kind of dumb. No offense.

Thay are distasteful, and they are considered sexual organs by some.
Yeah by retards that don't know biology.

I'd provide links to prove you wrong, but I'd get banned.
Indeed.

Both are unnessecary, distasteful, and designed to pander to lower human instincts. A vegan diet removes us from the flesh trade entirely, is healthier, and makes more efficient use of natural resources.

You're against unnessecary pleasures when they appear distasteful, and I can present dozens of arguments on how the exploitation of animals is distateful, horrible, and a sinful luxury.

A vegan diet also is innefficient. I know a vegan. He's as skinny as can be, and he is as weak as can be, too.

And to me, "sinful" is nothing. I am an athiest.

The difference:

Arm-

Manipulator.

Penis-

Sexual organ.
If you think that nobody can be manipulated by a penis, you've got much to learn about humanity, pal.

EDIT: While I'm at it, if you think that nobody thinks the arm can be a sexual organ....

OK, this is getting nowhere. Who says we all just agree to disagree?

OK, this is getting nowhere. Who says we all just agree to disagree?
I won't agree to that.

So then nipples and ass are OK?


Female nipples and ass are often ok with me... I do like a preview, just so I dont get stuck with that "Where's the beef?" old lady.

(Very, very good post!)

I actually do not live in America. I come from Canada.

However, I think it's a better idea to give them penalties for things like this.


Great idea, penalties would work. It would keep them focused on making sure something like this doesn't happen. And then I'm sure that our preverted skeptics will ask "So who is going to get the money?". Well, my vote would be some organization for sexually abused. That way no one can say that government is taking advantage of the situation to get more money, and the money goes towards fixing the problem.

And you guys are still a bunch of pervs who need to get laid and then shut up.

A vegan diet also is innefficient. I know a vegan. He's as skinny as can be, and he is as weak as can be, too.

And to me, "sinful" is nothing. I am an athiest.

No, he's just an idiot. There is plenty of food out there to make up lost proteins and carbs that don't include eating meat.
I know vegan's too- they're perfectly healthy.

And since when is your ass a sexual organ?!!?

A vegan diet also is innefficient. I know a vegan. He's as skinny as can be, and he is as weak as can be, too.

And to me, "sinful" is nothing. I am an athiest.
He's obviously either a moron, or he has a medical condition that is aggravated by his veganism. I know a couple of vegans, and both of them are perfectly healthy.

I just did. You can't disagree with your own standards.

You just did.

You said that:

"I'd define tasteful as-

Not exposing sexual organs.

And, then said:

""Those prohibited too".

When Drunk commies deleted said "So then nipples and ass are OK"?

Nipples are not a sexual organ, and neith is the anus - although both can be USED during sex... but then, so can a mouth or a hand, or a finger, or hair...

Not to mention the porn that contains food items.

Nudity hasn't been proven to harm anyone, despite what certain puritanical folk would say. Now outright sex is somewhat more questionable.

Thay are distasteful, and they are considered sexual organs by some.

So were ankles, a few years ago...

You're seriously arguing that a child that in no way wants sex would do it just because it's forbidden?

I in no way want to crash my car into someone else, that's forbidden, and hey! I still don't want to do it.
You're still equating your adult logic with that of a child. Curiosity is much more pronounced in children before puberty, because brain development is more fluid at that age. They are predisposed to explore and experiment with the world around them to find out things they don't know. After a certain point in development, that fluidity goes away, and the result is a net loss in the effect curiosity can have on you.

And again, you're seriusly arguing that prepubescents are interested in sex? I thought that the negation of this was one of the primary arguements for the criminalization of sex involving minors.
I've completely lost what you're talking about with fish and meat, but as for children seeing porn, I would say no for the same reason we say no to paedophilia. It just isn't right to be exposing children to it, and can have serious impacts if we do.
From your previous statements, I would have thought you would have been in favor of pedophiles being free to act on their urges. After all, kids naturally want sex, right?

Great idea, penalties would work. It would keep them focused on making sure something like this doesn't happen. And then I'm sure that our preverted skeptics will ask "So who is going to get the money?". Well, my vote would be some organization for sexually abused. That way no one can say that government is taking advantage of the situation to get more money, and the money goes towards fixing the problem.

And you guys are still a bunch of pervs who need to get laid and then shut up.
You know... That's a great idea.

(You're one of the best new people I've seen in a while.)

The actual name of the cards is;
Wicked Superstar - Jenna Jameson Playing Cards
Google it if you are of legal age I suppose.
They aren't that offensive, it just shows her bare breasts on the cover.
It's the actual cards inside that are probaby wildly inappropriate, the southern regions.

From your previous statements, I would have thought you would have been in favor of pedophiles being free to act on their urges. After all, kids naturally want sex, right?
:rolleyes:

Of course, that's exactly what I said.

You know... That's a great idea.

(You're one of the best new people I've seen in a while.)


Thanks a bunch. Unfortunately I won't be around very much at all. This is just a school government class project. I just think logically and realisticly.

But these guys are going to all blow it off as a stupid joke and continue on with their sexual inuendos and meaningless arguing. But thats ok, they will be 40 years old and not married because they don't know how to have a respectful relationship, and for those who are married, their marriage probably sucks.

And yes, I'm sure that there are exceptions to this, but hey, whatever.

If you think that nobody can be manipulated by a penis, you've got much to learn about humanity, pal.

EDIT: While I'm at it, if you think that nobody thinks the arm can be a sexual organ....


True, however, FAR more are manipulated by vaginas.


I dont think of the whole arm as a sexual organ, but have seen some tricks with a fist before.

:p

Great idea, penalties would work. It would keep them focused on making sure something like this doesn't happen. And then I'm sure that our preverted skeptics will ask "So who is going to get the money?". Well, my vote would be some organization for sexually abused. That way no one can say that government is taking advantage of the situation to get more money, and the money goes towards fixing the problem.

And you guys are still a bunch of pervs who need to get laid and then shut up.
Look, I think porn is mostly juvenile and serves only as a means to an arousal or masturbatory end. Seriously -- why do they even bother with plot or dialogue? But lording your pedantic and condescending comments around here makes you look no better than the "pervs" you decry.

So how's about YOU shut up and DON'T get laid?

Besides, we all know you're harping on this issue in your oh-so politically correct fashion in order to get laid by feminists anyway...which is a potential waste of time if you ask me.

Tell me what would happen if our culture had evolved differently.

If we had evolved culturally differently, one possible path would be a society dominated by matriarchs early on. A culture similar to the Romans. Then a reactionary culture created by those who feel repressed, the early Abrahmic tradtions would appear repressing scuh things.

If the Romans would have won STDs would go on the uprise and their culture would disappear, biological oppurtunism.

However that is presupposing we are starting after Greece. There are far too many variables to count and alter. The slightest change can result in anything. However, I present one possibility that appeals to me the most. It came from a book where they invent a device, essentially a wormhole camera and all forms of human privacy instantly vanish as people can be spied on at any moment anywhere.

In a few years the technology becomes widely avaiable and clothes just become the warming devices that they wre meant for. Clothes for style still exist but they are much more visible. Sex is much more open, many people live in literal glass houses, naked inside because temperature regulation is solved. Sex is only prohibited where people deem it unreasonable. Such as at work where it is disruptive to productivity. Though more liberal places do not prohibit this. Eventually society suffers no real damaging effects and in the end everythign is more open.

With the exception of a few Muslim and Christian countries which ban the technology altogether and become facist nations led by madmen.

I prefer the Scandanavian paradise. What real problem is there against being naked and having sex an open topic besides the disruption of your own personal moral system given to you by your parents. Think to yourself. Have you really considered that your morals may be wrong? That they wre given to you, not you yourself created? YOu must rise up and turly think about what is right and wrong, for society, for you and create your own set of morals, so you can be the Overman, the one who overcomes predetermined levels set by a stagnant society and becomes something better.

Thanks a bunch. Unfortunately I won't be around very much at all. This is just a school government class project. I just think logically and realisticly.

But these guys are going to all blow it off as a stupid joke and continue on with their sexual inuendos and meaningless arguing. But thats ok, they will be 40 years old and not married because they don't know how to have a respectful relationship, and for those who are married, their marriage probably sucks.

And yes, I'm sure that there are exceptions to this, but hey, whatever.


Oooo....kay.... then.

You don't know many on here mate- don't make crass generalisations about people treating a subject with a bit of lighthearted fun, ok? ;)

Thanks a bunch. Unfortunately I won't be around very much at all. This is just a school government class project. I just think logically and realisticly.

But these guys are going to all blow it off as a stupid joke and continue on with their sexual inuendos and meaningless arguing. But thats ok, they will be 40 years old and not married because they don't know how to have a respectful relationship, and for those who are married, their marriage probably sucks.

And yes, I'm sure that there are exceptions to this, but hey, whatever.

(If you can, you may want to actually join this.)

But yeah, it's really sad what debates can turn into.

--and I don't follow porn.




Sure....that old gag.

The actual name of the cards is;
Wicked Superstar - Jenna Jameson Playing Cards
Google it if you are of legal age I suppose.
They aren't that offensive, it just shows her bare breasts on the cover.
It's the actual cards inside that are probaby wildly inappropriate, the southern regions.

Did you learn nothing of the Superbowl incident? Breasts are killing our children!

(If you can, you may want to actually join this.)

But yeah, it's really sad what debates can turn into.

It is.

Ironic, no?

Look, I think porn is mostly juvenile and serves only as a means to an arousal or masturbatory end. Seriously -- why do they even bother with plot or dialogue? But lording your pedantic and condescending comments around here makes you look no better than the "pervs" you decry.

So how's about YOU shut up and DON'T get laid?

Besides, we all know you're harping on this issue in your oh-so politically correct fashion in order to get laid by feminists anyway...which is a potential waste of time if you ask me.


Respectable response to my statement. But I just have a lot of friends who tend to confide in me about their guy problems, and I have learned a lot. I'm not catering to feminists, although I could understand why you would think that. In retrospect, yeah, I could agree with that. But that honestly wasn't my goal. I just truely don't like seeing women mistreated who honestly don't deserve it.

And just for the record, my outlook on relationships has worked amazingly well for me.

I'm just saying, in a nutshell, that people should stop thinking with their sexual organs.

Sorry if I offended you, I'm trying to be mature about this, so cool it.

Actually this debate is pretty much pointless, we actually will all say what we believe, and no one will change their minds and we'll all leave with views more extreme than we had before.

Vice City Public Radio.

Actually this debate is pretty much pointless, we actually will all say what we believe, and no one will change their minds and we'll all leave with views more extreme than we had before.

Vice City Public Radio.
Y'know, Leafanistan's right.

Thanks a bunch. Unfortunately I won't be around very much at all. This is just a school government class project. I just think logically and realisticly.

But these guys are going to all blow it off as a stupid joke and continue on with their sexual inuendos and meaningless arguing. But thats ok, they will be 40 years old and not married because they don't know how to have a respectful relationship, and for those who are married, their marriage probably sucks.

And yes, I'm sure that there are exceptions to this, but hey, whatever.
Okay, this post cinches it.

You really have no idea what you're talking about and need to run back to mommy and tell her how "brave" you were online today.

There is NO connection between porn consumers and people with no or bad marriages. In fact, many couples use porn for mutual titillation prior to their own consummations. Please, pack your Puritanical claptrap away -- NS is one audience you're never going to sway...at least not on this topic...and you're coming off like some "see-no-evil" moralist. How's that private school you're attending?

:rolleyes:

Of course, that's exactly what I said.
You were decrying my statements that the taboo around the subject was the source of the sexual behavior the children Pythogria claimed were exibiting.

By comparing the supposed sex drives of these children to your own, you were implying that children who know anything about sex, naturally want to have it, since you know about sex and naturally want to have it.

Pay attention to the implications of your statements.

True, however, FAR more are manipulated by vaginas.
*snip*


Ain't that the truth?

*sigh*

Respectable response to my statement. But I just have a lot of friends who tend to confide in me about their guy problems, and I have learned a lot. I'm not catering to feminists, although I could understand why you would think that. In retrospect, yeah, I could agree with that. But that honestly wasn't my goal. I just truely don't like seeing women mistreated who honestly don't deserve it.

And just for the record, my outlook on relationships has worked amazingly well for me.

I'm just saying, in a nutshell, that people should stop thinking with their sexual organs.

Sorry if I offended you, I'm trying to be mature about this, so cool it.

Culturally as sexuality becomes more open and accepted in the culture, mistreatment of women, who were traditionally seen as 'baby machines, sheathes for the sword, etc.' are looked down upon. Women become true equals to men when the fact that they also produce babies and contian very pleasuable parts is not so very important. While this may lead to extremist feminist agenda it is important to do everythign in moderation.

So in a nutshell, reciprocate, they will love you for it.

Okay, this post cinches it.

You really have no idea what you're talking about and need to run back to mommy and tell her how "brave" you were online today.

There is NO connection between porn consumers and people with no or bad marriages. In fact, many couples use porn for mutual titillation prior to their own consummations. Please, pack your Puritanical claptrap away -- NS is one audience you're never going to sway...at least not on this topic...and you're coming off like some "see-no-evil" moralist. How's that private school you're attending?

Hey, no insults here.Your'e only angry becaus he presented an alternate viewpoint.

Actually this debate is pretty much pointless, we actually will all say what we believe, and no one will change their minds and we'll all leave with views more extreme than we had before.

Vice City Public Radio.

Debate is only pointless, if you will not let your opinion be swayed by facts.

Well, first part, personal belief I guess, I won't argue.

Second part: since I haven't seen my girlfriend for two weeks, and won't see her again for another two. It's not right for a man to go that long without some form of sexual satisfaction.

Think about it this way. You can't see your girl for four weeks yet somehow you can manage to not "do-it-yourself." Imagine how much better it would be when you finally got the chance to do it the right way. Because then you'd be able to make up for four weeks of frustration/longing/etc. all in one night (and with a bit of luck it'll last more than 6 minutes)!

:fluffle:

On another note, an image is sometimes just an image. Many people who do porn, do it once or twice, give it up and live a normal life. They are not sluts, whores or that, they are just normal people who made a different choice. They are not really being abused, demeaned or anything and saying otherwise would actually be demeaning them by making them appear to be the villians in some sort of evil pornography-industrial complex machine.

Okay, this post cinches it.

You really have no idea what you're talking about and need to run back to mommy and tell her how "brave" you were online today.

There is NO connection between porn consumers and people with no or bad marriages. In fact, many couples use porn for mutual titillation prior to their own consummations. Please, pack your Puritanical claptrap away -- NS is one audience you're never going to sway...at least not on this topic...and you're coming off like some "see-no-evil" moralist. How's that private school you're attending?


Alright douche bag, you just crossed the line.

I know i wont sway anyones opinion. But let's face it, neither will anyone else here.

And if I were to never say that this was a school class project you would have treated me completely different.

I may be young asshole, but my opinions and views are just as good. Let's face it, I'm a part of the next generation. I think i have proven myself to be a logical and respectable thinker. There is absolutely no need to cut me down like that. It seems as if it is the only way you can respond to what i have to say because you can't come up with a better rebuttle.

And the school i go to also has nothing to do with this. Its just like any other school. That should have no effect on what i say.

And i also understand that porn is used in relationships and whatnot, I'm just refering to the porn that people use in preverted ways because they are horny uncontrollable dipshits.

Fuck off.

Think about it this way. You can't see your girl for four weeks yet somehow you can manage to not "do-it-yourself." Imagine how much better it would be when you finally got the chance to do it the right way. Because then you'd be able to make up for four weeks of frustration/longing/etc. all in one night (and with a bit of luck it'll last more than 6 minutes)!

:fluffle:

If that's what gets you off. Some partners LIKE the idea of their significant-other satisfying themselves while they are away.

Think about it this way. You can't see your girl for four weeks yet somehow you can manage to not "do-it-yourself." Imagine how much better it would be when you finally got the chance to do it the right way. Because then you'd be able to make up for four weeks of frustration/longing/etc. all in one night (and with a bit of luck it'll last more than 6 minutes)!

:fluffle:

Actually a thing called the pre-date rub-out and the pre-penetration handjob are common devices because after 4 weeks of not being able to do it, you'll shoot off your cork faster than she can unzip you. There are exercises you can do to increase your time in bed.

While masturbating, find that point where you are just about to release and stop, leave it there, find out how long you have to leave it before you have to continue, then continue and see how much longer you can last. In real life use this exercise to change position, or engage in something else sexually sastifying for the other partner while giving yourself to time to recover from the urge to release and get ready for mroe action. Try to hold it in until the urge to release goes away. Eventually, if you master these skills you can keep going and be (somewhat) in control of yourself.

The More You Know. :D

Alright douche bag, you just crossed the line.

I know i wont sway anyones opinion. But let's face it, neither will anyone else here.

And if I were to never say that this was a school class project you would have treated me completely different.

I may be young asshole, but my opinions and views are just as good. Let's face it, I'm a part of the next generation. I think i have proven myself to be a logical and respectable thinker. There is absolutely no need to cut me down like that. It seems as if it is the only way you can respond to what i have to say because you can't come up with a better rebuttle.

And the school i go to also has nothing to do with this. Its just like any other school. That should have no effect on what i say.

And i also understand that porn is used in relationships and whatnot, I'm just refering to the porn that people use in preverted ways because they are horny uncontrollable dipshits.

Fuck off.

The word is 'perverted'.

Someone is about to get banned, I think.

You were decrying my statements that the taboo around the subject was the source of the sexual behavior the children Pythogria claimed were exibiting.

By comparing the supposed sex drives of these children to your own, you were implying that children who know anything about sex, naturally want to have it, since you know about sex and naturally want to have it.

Pay attention to the implications of your statements.
*sigh*

Must we recap?

You really aren't up on the whole "child psychology" thing, are you?

The only reason you get extreme behavior like that is because it is forbidden. If it were seen more often, it would not have the sort of appeal it has when it is hidden away.

There's nothing more tempting at that age than that door at the video store marked "must be 18 or over to enter" with no further explaination.

I mean, you aren't going to seriusly imply that it is normal and natural for children to behave sexually when they aren't ignorant, and that only by keeping them ignorant can we hope to maintain their purity? Are you?
Now, we begin with a slightly rude statement accusing the person involved in debate of ignorance, and claiming that children go out and have sex not because they have seen porn, but because they're not allowed to have sex.

Oh right, that's strange - you see, I've known about sex for sometime now, it is in no way forbidden to me, and yet I still want to do it.

But of course, children only do it because it's not allowed.
I reply that people want to have sex even when it is not forbidden.

You're seriusly arguing that children normally want sex before they reach puberty?
Now, who was seriously arguing that? hmm... you were, when you said that they did it because it was forbidden.

You're seriously arguing that a child that in no way wants sex would do it just because it's forbidden?

I in no way want to crash my car into someone else, that's forbidden, and hey! I still don't want to do it.
I again reply that people don't do things because they're forbidden.

From your previous statements, I would have thought you would have been in favor of pedophiles being free to act on their urges. After all, kids naturally want sex, right?
Oh look! We've jumped to an absurd and potentially libellous statement.

Perhaps it is not I who needs to pay attention to the implications of my statements, but you who needs to not read arguments where none where made, before you really upset someone.

(and with a bit of luck it'll last more than 6 minutes)!
Dude, don't extrapolate your personal experience to everyone else in the world.

Alright douche bag, you just crossed the line.

I know i wont sway anyones opinion. But let's face it, neither will anyone else here.

And if I were to never say that this was a school class project you would have treated me completely different.

I may be young asshole, but my opinions and views are just as good. Let's face it, I'm a part of the next generation. I think i have proven myself to be a logical and respectable thinker. There is absolutely no need to cut me down like that. It seems as if it is the only way you can respond to what i have to say because you can't come up with a better rebuttle.

And the school i go to also has nothing to do with this. Its just like any other school. That should have no effect on what i say.

And i also understand that porn is used in relationships and whatnot, I'm just refering to the porn that people use in preverted ways because they are horny uncontrollable dipshits.

Fuck off.
That's what I like to see. Nice, civil, respectful debate between two well-reasoned viewpoints makes for a lively forum.

Thanks a bunch. Unfortunately I won't be around very much at all. This is just a school government class project. I just think logically and realisticly.

But these guys are going to all blow it off as a stupid joke and continue on with their sexual inuendos and meaningless arguing. But thats ok, they will be 40 years old and not married because they don't know how to have a respectful relationship, and for those who are married, their marriage probably sucks.

And yes, I'm sure that there are exceptions to this, but hey, whatever.

Wow, there`s a smart one - i hope you can back that up and present us a nice econometric model to prove your argument, because I cant find any correlation between porn and bad marriages, not getting laid, or whatever you are implying, with my regression analysis.

There is however a correlation between porn, prostitution and sexual abuse, child molestation and rapes - meaning: no porn more of that crap.

Hey, no insults here.Your'e only angry becaus he presented an alternate viewpoint.


Pythogria, I'm pretty much sure that I love you.

Haha. Thanks.

That's what I like to see. Nice, civil, respectful debate between two well-reasoned viewpoints makes for a lively forum.

You see this forum combines the ideals of Greek and American values. A nice open friendly place with the ideals of free speech. Or was that the Greek value of feeding wisemen hemlock and the American value of shouting out the other guy? I kid folks, I do.

VCPR.

That's what I like to see. Nice, civil, respectful debate between two well-reasoned viewpoints makes for a lively forum.
Y'know, I think that's worthy of being sigged. But I like the quote I have already. Hmmm...

Ok, so by the same logic, I assume you oppose companies that manufacture condoms?

Porn satisfies the sexual drive of many people. Most of it is perfectly legal and involves only consenting adults. I agree with Drunk Commies, you should relax, watch porn, and masturbate. It's only natural.

On the contrary, porn does not satisfy. That is why we have to keep using more and different and worse stuff.

That is the problem with all sin. It never really satisfies. Not like a Snickers.

Respectable response to my statement. But I just have a lot of friends who tend to confide in me about their guy problems, and I have learned a lot. I'm not catering to feminists, although I could understand why you would think that. In retrospect, yeah, I could agree with that. But that honestly wasn't my goal. I just truely don't like seeing women mistreated who honestly don't deserve it.

And just for the record, my outlook on relationships has worked amazingly well for me.

I'm just saying, in a nutshell, that people should stop thinking with their sexual organs.

Sorry if I offended you, I'm trying to be mature about this, so cool it.
"Cool it"? Hey, 1978 called, they want their slang back.

Besides, you were the one telling the "pervs" to "shut up", I merely turned your own "maturity" back at you. Don't start stuff you don't want finished.

Now, I don't like seeng ANYone mistreated, women or otherwise. However, does it enter into your realm of argument that those creating the porn are not being forced to do so? This is capitalism at its finest: demand engenders supply.

I've heard more women confide to me about their "guy problems" than you will ever hear. I was a nice-guy teenager in the 80s, for cryin' out loud. Not only was I "good friends" with every young woman in high school and college that I really, really wanted to have sex with, but I was their psychologist and crying towel, too. Every time one of them told me they thought of me like a brother, I'd have to restrain myself from asking them their opinion on incest! So please don't think you're somehow unique. Uncommon, certainly, but not unique.

Do I wish folks would think with their minds instead of their libidi? Yes. Do I get tired of commercials and advertisements which constantly bombard heterosexuals with images designed to make them horny consumers? Yes. Am I sick to the teeth of my own father and brother forever pointing out lustily-dressed women at, say, baseball games and making lewd comments despite both of them being married? Yes. Does ANY of that mean I want to ban or restrict people's right to express any of that? NO.

Instead, I choose to be around people who share my ideals, and who are horny in the privacy of their own homes, God bless 'em.

You see this forum combines the ideals of Greek and American values. A nice open friendly place with the ideals of free speech. Or was that the Greek value of feeding wisemen hemlock and the American value of shouting out the other guy? I kid folks, I do.

VCPR.

Mind if I siggy this? :D

The word is 'perverted'.

Someone is about to get banned, I think.

My mistake, a typo.

And ok, ban me. It will just show how close minded people can be.

Grave_n_idle, this is not an attack on you, I make this comment in general.

But I'll cool it with the language, he just really pissed me off.

Sorry.

My name rhymes with porn so it must be good.
I see no problem with it as long as you're not offending anyone around you. If you had a partner and were porning (hehe liking that word) in front of the other and that person objected to it then you'd be a **** to carry on in front of them.......But there's nothing wrong with it unless it's child pornography, beastiality etc.
It's been said by a few people already but it fulfills a need we all have and it's better than going out and raping someone. And regarding the very first post......I don't think it's a good idea to have pornography in a game children play, accidental porn or otherwise, and I think it needed to be pointed out but it doesn't warrent going ballistic over it. After all it's only porn and the child (and it even says this in the article) probably wouldn't give a flying fuck. A child of 6 just wouldn't be interested in sex. It wouldn't register on their radar........shock horror they saw a tiny bit of boob! They're going to be damaged for life!

Mind if I siggy this? :D

Go ahead.

Actually, since I oppose recreational sex, I somewhat do. It shouldn't be needed.

And to the second part:

Since when do you require it?

You oppose recreational sex. I'm going to totally ignore the possible reasons that you would feel this way and jumpr right into my point. While it's totally fine for you to be against sex for pleaure, to be against condoms and recreational sex implies that you have a problem with other people doing it. This is just wrong. It is not your place to tell people that they cannot do something which brings two people closer together. It is possible to have sex without it being some primitive, beastly, thing, as you seem to think that it is. I really have to take issure with your insinuation that you cannot be intimiate with your significant other in a meaningful and loving way.

With that said, I'm going to assume that you are just unable to find anyone to have sex with/had a bad experiance/or are part of some strange, religious sept. In any of those cases, though, I think that it makes you jealous that other people are able to experiance this either at all, or in a meaningful way, so you have built up this mental wall which rationalizes your inability. It's a common psychological defense.

Wow, there`s a smart one - i hope you can back that up and present us a nice econometric model to prove your argument, because I cant find any correlation between porn and bad marriages, not getting laid, or whatever you are implying, with my regression analysis.

There is however a correlation between porn, prostitution and sexual abuse, child molestation and rapes - meaning: no porn more of that crap.


I'll refine my statement.

What I am trying to say is that porn has a tendency to make people view woman more as objects than humans.

When you combine that with relationships it = not good.

Now I could be wrong, but I am pretty sure that no one wants to be treated more like a sex toy by their husband or wife.

Once again, given that their are exceptions to this sort of situation, but I'm just saying that it happens.

Think about it this way. You can't see your girl for four weeks yet somehow you can manage to not "do-it-yourself." Imagine how much better it would be when you finally got the chance to do it the right way. Because then you'd be able to make up for four weeks of frustration/longing/etc. all in one night (and with a bit of luck it'll last more than 6 minutes)!


Really? Seems to me that if you haven't offloaded that built-up semen in four weeks, you'd be lucky to last six minutes!

*sigh*

Must we recap?

I guess so.

Now, we begin with a slightly rude statement accusing the person involved in debate of ignorance, and claiming that children go out and have sex not because they have seen porn, but because they're not allowed to have sex.

Having seen porn is not a modivation. It is simply what breaks through the barrier of ignorance. I suggested the taboo as an alternative to the idea of knowledge about sex being corupting.

I reply that people want to have sex even when it is not forbidden.

Which, like it or not, does have some implications when you're dealing with children. Sexual development is a factor in the desire for sex, so if you are really making the comparison between your own reasons for wanting sex, and a child's potential reasons, you are implying that there is no fundamental difference.

Now, who was seriously arguing that? hmm... you were, when you said that they did it because it was forbidden.

That was phrased as a question for a reason. I in no way really believed you would be arguing for that point of view, and really wanted you to clarify what you meant. I phrased it rather harshly, but ultimately just wanted you to clear up something I believed could be interpreted badly.

I again reply that people don't do things because they're forbidden.

So what is your explaination? That porn is naturally corrupting, and children should be kept ignorant so they don't decide to get in on this pleasurable experience?

Oh look! We've jumped to an absurd and potentially libellous statement.
[/quoe]
The statement was deliberately absurd, suggesting that there was no way you could possibly believe it.
[quote]
Perhaps it is not I who needs to pay attention to the implications of my statements, but you who needs to not read arguments where none where made, before you really upset someone.
Need I really say this?
pot...kettle

I'll refine my statement.

What I am trying to say is that porn has a tendency to make people view woman more as objects than humans.

When you combine that with relationships it = not good.

Now I could be wrong, but I am pretty sure that no one wants to be treated more like a sex toy by their husband or wife.

Once again, given that their are exceptions to this sort of situation, but I'm just saying that it happens.
Still bullshit, but whatever.

Correction: Children are interested in sex, but I wouldn't say they were interested in porn.

Alright douche bag, you just crossed the line.

I know i wont sway anyones opinion. But let's face it, neither will anyone else here.

And if I were to never say that this was a school class project you would have treated me completely different.

I may be young asshole, but my opinions and views are just as good. Let's face it, I'm a part of the next generation. I think i have proven myself to be a logical and respectable thinker. There is absolutely no need to cut me down like that. It seems as if it is the only way you can respond to what i have to say because you can't come up with a better rebuttle.

And the school i go to also has nothing to do with this. Its just like any other school. That should have no effect on what i say.

And i also understand that porn is used in relationships and whatnot, I'm just refering to the porn that people use in preverted ways because they are horny uncontrollable dipshits.

Fuck off.
Nice.

Aside from breaking the rules against flaming (meaning that it is you, not I, who have crossed the line), you've only proven my point. You don't know anything about anything and yet you came in here calling people you don't know "pervs" and telling them to "shut up" about a topic YOU brought up! Rebuttal (which is how that's spelled, honor student), means not calling your opponents names and not assuming that everyone who uses a product (which is all porn is or ever was) is somehow morally deficient.

I'll refine my statement.

What I am trying to say is that porn has a tendency to make people view woman more as objects than humans.

When you combine that with relationships it = not good.

Now I could be wrong, but I am pretty sure that no one wants to be treated more like a sex toy by their husband or wife.

Once again, given that their are exceptions to this sort of situation, but I'm just saying that it happens.

Prove it.

...That was phrased as a question for a reason. I in no way really believed you would be arguing for that point of view, and really wanted you to clarify what you meant. I phrased it rather harshly, but ultimately just wanted you to clear up something I believed could be interpreted badly...

...The statement was deliberately absurd, suggesting that there was no way you could possibly believe it...

Need I really say this?
pot...kettle
You admit that you deliberately phrase your statements in a misleading way, and then accuse me of reading non-existing arguments? :rolleyes:

My mistake, a typo.

And ok, ban me. It will just show how close minded people can be.

Grave_n_idle, this is not an attack on you, I make this comment in general.

But I'll cool it with the language, he just really pissed me off.

Sorry.
The ban comment wasn't aimed at your argument. Argument is positively encouraged on this forum, in case you hadn't noticed. The comment was actually aimed at the fact you called someone (Intangelon, I think) a 'douchebag', then told him to 'fuck off'. That's flaming, which at best will get you an official warning.

Prove it.

To supposrt your point, me and the lover routinely use porn to get into the mood and sometimes you just love watching her play with herself you just can't help to join in.

Wow, there`s a smart one - i hope you can back that up and present us a nice econometric model to prove your argument, because I cant find any correlation between porn and bad marriages, not getting laid, or whatever you are implying, with my regression analysis.

There is however a correlation between porn, prostitution and sexual abuse, child molestation and rapes - meaning: no porn more of that crap.
Careful, I made that same point, and he found it necessary to flame as a response. Logic clearly irritates this guy.

"Cool it"? Hey, 1978 called, they want their slang back.

Besides, you were the one telling the "pervs" to "shut up", I merely turned your own "maturity" back at you. Don't start stuff you don't want finished.

Now, I don't like seeng ANYone mistreated, women or otherwise. However, does it enter into your realm of argument that those creating the porn are not being forced to do so? This is capitalism at its finest: demand engenders supply.

I've heard more women confide to me about their "guy problems" than you will ever hear. I was a nice-guy teenager in the 80s, for cryin' out loud. Not only was I "good friends" with every young woman in high school and college that I really, really wanted to have sex with, but I was their psychologist and crying towel, too. Every time one of them told me they thought of me like a brother, I'd have to restrain myself from asking them their opinion on incest! So please don't think you're somehow unique. Uncommon, certainly, but not unique.

Do I wish folks would think with their minds instead of their libidi? Yes. Do I get tired of commercials and advertisements which constantly bombard heterosexuals with images designed to make them horny consumers? Yes. Am I sick to the teeth of my own father and brother forever pointing out lustily-dressed women at, say, baseball games and making lewd comments despite both of them being married? Yes. Does ANY of that mean I want to ban or restrict people's right to express any of that? NO.

Instead, I choose to be around people who share my ideals, and who are horny in the privacy of their own homes, God bless 'em.

Once again I am attacked by a comment irrelevant to the debate.

The slang I use is a stupid thing to attack me on. And you said it yourself, you were a teen in the 80's. So i don'f know exactly, but that tells me you are somewhere areound the 30's.

Times change buddy, slang changes, some of it resurfaces, but once again, irrelevant to the topic. But A for effort.

And I Immaturely stooped with one of my posts, but I think i corrected for that, explained myself, and apologized. I'm not too cocky to do that. As far as I am concerned, it's in the past and I really don't care about it anymore.

I was not trying to say I was unique with the comment about being someone that friends confided in. But it was a separate incedent that supported my point at the time. It just fit with what i was saying, so there is also no need to attack that.

I think you guys are going to have to find aspects of the points I am trying to make to attack rather than the sidenotes that come with it.

I'm female. I quite like being treated like a sex toy. Oi oi!

Once again I am attacked by a comment irrelevant to the debate.

The slang I use is a stupid thing to attack me on. And you said it yourself, you were a teen in the 80's. So i don'f know exactly, but that tells me you are somewhere areound the 30's.

Times change buddy, slang changes, some of it resurfaces, but once again, irrelevant to the topic. But A for effort.

And I Immaturely stooped with one of my posts, but I think i corrected for that, explained myself, and apologized. I'm not too cocky to do that. As far as I am concerned, it's in the past and I really don't care about it anymore.

I was not trying to say I was unique with the comment about being someone that friends confided in. But it was a separate incedent that supported my point at the time. It just fit with what i was saying, so there is also no need to attack that.

I think you guys are going to have to find aspects of the points I am trying to make to attack rather than the sidenotes that come with it.
But "attackng the sidenotes" is what you just did! You spent most of this quoted post caterwauling over an offhand remark made about your anachronistic choice of slang! You are a piece of work, pal.

Nice.

Aside from breaking the rules against flaming (meaning that it is you, not I, who have crossed the line), you've only proven my point. You don't know anything about anything and yet you came in here calling people you don't know "pervs" and telling them to "shut up" about a topic YOU brought up! Rebuttal (which is how that's spelled, honor student), means not calling your opponents names and not assuming that everyone who uses a product (which is all porn is or ever was) is somehow morally deficient.



ONCE AGAIN CAN ANYONE ATTACK MY POINTS RATHER THAN MY TYPOS?! My God, I'm just bringing another viewpoint to the discussion.

And maybe the "shut up" comment I made was uneccessary, but that was actually in reference to the first few posts because they all were saying things along the lines of "give me pictures" or "I want to see". and stuff like that. I didn't realize right away that you guys were already to the 80th post, which means that what I posted kinda randomly popped up after that part of the issue had died.

Still bullshit, but whatever.


You know, if you are a Thrice fan, maybe you should ask them what their view is on this issue.

I think that they would tend to agree with me a little more, or at least lean in my direction...if you know anything about them.

But awesome band...

But "attackng the sidenotes" is what you just did! You spent most of this quoted post caterwauling over an offhand remark made about your anachronistic choice of slang! You are a piece of work, pal.


I'm not attacking sidenotes, I am defending. A little bit of a difference.

$5 says that if i didn't write this sentence that you are currently reading, you would have said something along the lines of "Yeah, a LITTLE difference."

How bout we get back to the issue and stop it the stupid stuff, eh?

ONCE AGAIN CAN ANYONE ATTACK MY POINTS RATHER THAN MY TYPOS?! My God, I'm just bringing another viewpoint to the discussion.

And maybe the "shut up" comment I made was uneccessary, but that was actually in reference to the first few posts because they all were saying things along the lines of "give me pictures" or "I want to see". and stuff like that. I didn't realize right away that you guys were already to the 80th post, which means that what I posted kinda randomly popped up after that part of the issue had died.
Erm...he was attacking your point. If you remove the bracketed part thus...
Rebuttal [...] means not calling your opponents names and not assuming that everyone who uses a product (which is all porn is or ever was) is somehow morally deficient.
...you will see that he was attacking your point. Now please reply to it.

You know, if you are a Thrice fan, maybe you should ask them what their view is on this issue.

I think that they would tend to agree with me a little more, or at least lean in my direction...if you know anything about them.

But awesome band...
What does anyone's personal music preference have to do with this argument? Are you going to claim any of my points are hypocritical because I chose to name my nation after a Soviet totalitarian dictator?

Actually, since I oppose recreational sex, I somewhat do. It shouldn't be needed.

You're welcome to oppose your own recreational sex. But if you ever try to come after mine, remember this: I have guns, lots of guns!

I'll refine my statement.

What I am trying to say is that porn has a tendency to make people view woman more as objects than humans.

Proof? Of ANY kind?

When you combine that with relationships it = not good.

Objectifying women is not the sole realm of porn. How esle do young men get the idea that women are objects? Might it not be their fathers or other role models? If you disagree, then how is it possible for young men who've seen very little or no porn to have the same attitude you ascribe directly (and solely) to porn?

Now I could be wrong,

First agreeable thing you've said all day.

but I am pretty sure that no one wants to be treated more like a sex toy by their husband or wife.

Again, this is your opinion. Have you asked many (or indeed ANY) women how they like to be treated? Just because the way some folks like to get busy offends you does NOT make it in any way "wrong" for everyone. You're acting like a demogogue and demanding that the world you live in accede to your morality. That makes for a very frustrating existence, but that's your own lookout.

Once again, given that their are exceptions to this sort of situation, but I'm just saying that it happens.
Yet you "give" these exceptions as though you were some sort of moralistic authority figure.

I respect your views, and even share them to a degree, but I'd never waltz into a forum and deliberately inflame the debate by arrogantly supposing that everyone not with you is a pervert. I added the bold because I didn't want you to overlook that point and flame me again.

ONCE AGAIN CAN ANYONE ATTACK MY POINTS RATHER THAN MY TYPOS?! My God, I'm just bringing another viewpoint to the discussion.

And maybe the "shut up" comment I made was uneccessary, but that was actually in reference to the first few posts because they all were saying things along the lines of "give me pictures" or "I want to see". and stuff like that. I didn't realize right away that you guys were already to the 80th post, which means that what I posted kinda randomly popped up after that part of the issue had died.
Look -- when you dash in and moralize, you INVITE an attack of your typos. Why? Because when you post stuff that makes you sound like you know what's right and everyone who disagrees is therefore perverted and wrong, what do you expect? You demand a respect you never gave to those posting here.

ONE MORE TIME, I agree with much of what you say, but you need to refine the way you say it if you want it to be taken seriously.

Would pasties and a crotchless G-string be tastefull?

Not... on a fat man.

Erm...he was attacking your point. If you remove the bracketed part thus...

...you will see that he was attacking your point. Now please reply to it.


OK. I believe I clearly previously stated somewhere (I don't remember where and i am not gonna go find it to quote it) that I didn't believe that anyone who uses porn is morally deficient, I agreed that it could be used in healthy relationships as a sexual catalyst if you will. The point that I was trying to express (and keep in mind i also said that its not in every case) that those who have a porn addiction (and please, don't dwell on my use of the word "addiction") have a tendency to treat women more as objects. I know that everyone here has seen or heard a guy make a sexual comment about a woman as she passes or maybe you have done it yourself. Now personally, I won't lie and tell you I haven't thought these things, it's only natural, but Itry to control it as much as possible and I definitely keep it to myself. And i know that some of the women out there are accepting of it, but I would like to believe that most of them are offended at it, or at least they look at the guy, find him unattractive, and then are offended by it.

And also i know that I cannot attribute porn as being the reason for guys acting like this, but it definitely supports these types of behaviors which i personally find to be a little disrespectful to women.

What does anyone's personal music preference have to do with this argument? Are you going to claim any of my points are hypocritical because I chose to name my nation after a Soviet totalitarian dictator?


Alright, I know it was an irrelevant comment, but I am also a Thrice fan.... I just had to comment on it.

And if you were to adopt my ethics as I presented them, yo uwould live almost the same way as you do now-- minus distasteful porn.


And the recreational sex. Don't forget the recreational sex.

I'm not attacking sidenotes, I am defending. A little bit of a difference.

$5 says that if i didn't write this sentence that you are currently reading, you would have said something along the lines of "Yeah, a LITTLE difference."

How bout we get back to the issue and stop it the stupid stuff, eh?
I've been on the issue since you came in. You seem to want to take issue with my casually making small digs at you -- digs which, as I've mentioned earlier, you deserve and should be able to take if you post in any online forum. Good grief, you know how many digs I've taken for presenting legitimate arguments that chapped someone's hide? Even without inflammatory statements?

Welcome to NS.

My mistake, a typo.

And ok, ban me. It will just show how close minded people can be.

Grave_n_idle, this is not an attack on you, I make this comment in general.

But I'll cool it with the language, he just really pissed me off.

Sorry.

I can't ban you - but the Moderators can, and likely will, if you do nothing but curse and other infractions of forum rules.

Proof? Of ANY kind?

Objectifying women is not the sole realm of porn. How esle do young men get the idea that women are objects? Might it not be their fathers or other role models? If you disagree, then how is it possible for young men who've seen very little or no porn to have the same attitude you ascribe directly (and solely) to porn?

First agreeable thing you've said all day.

Again, this is your opinion. Have you asked many (or indeed ANY) women how they like to be treated? Just because the way some folks like to get busy offends you does NOT make it in any way "wrong" for everyone. You're acting like a demogogue and demanding that the world you live in accede to your morality. That makes for a very frustrating existence, but that's your own lookout.

Yet you "give" these exceptions as though you were some sort of moralistic authority figure.

I respect your views, and even share them to a degree, but I'd never waltz into a forum and deliberately inflame the debate by arrogantly supposing that everyone not with you is a pervert. I added the bold because I didn't want you to overlook that point and flame me again.


I'm just typin the thoughts as they flow, so yeah I understand that they can use some refining.

The whole "sex toy" comment is kind of in a non-arriage relationship.

in Marriages, I'm sure some people are into that, but not so much out of marriage.

I gotta go.

you can start cheering now.

Its been fun. haha.

I gotta go.

you can start cheering now.

Its been fun. haha.
Hey, we won't be cheering. There's nothing I like better than seeing a good debate on here.

Though when they're only between two people, it's not so good. I prefer mass debating. :p

OK. I believe I clearly previously stated somewhere (I don't remember where and i am not gonna go find it to quote it) that I didn't believe that anyone who uses porn is morally deficient, I agreed that it could be used in healthy relationships as a sexual catalyst if you will. The point that I was trying to express (and keep in mind i also said that its not in every case) that those who have a porn addiction (and please, don't dwell on my use of the word "addiction") have a tendency to treat women more as objects. I know that everyone here has seen or heard a guy make a sexual comment about a woman as she passes or maybe you have done it yourself. Now personally, I won't lie and tell you I haven't thought these things, it's only natural, but Itry to control it as much as possible and I definitely keep it to myself. And i know that some of the women out there are accepting of it, but I would like to believe that most of them are offended at it, or at least they look at the guy, find him unattractive, and then are offended by it.

And also i know that I cannot attribute porn as being the reason for guys acting like this, but it definitely supports these types of behaviors which i personally find to be a little disrespectful to women.
The first bolded statement is incorrect. I've scanned the thread and can't seem to find that ameliorative statement anywhere.

What you would LIKE to believe and what IS are always and forever going to be at odds. I would LIKE to believe that porn is unnecessary and that people's imaginations (which are free and can be infinitely better than any porn because you get to decide who stars...) would get them through those times without a lover. However, I have come to OBSERVE that it isn't true and likely will never be true. The only thing I can do is live my life the way I'd like to believe. I own no porn, despite being unintentionally celibate for 30 months. I have imagined lots of women I know when masturbating and that comes without the stupid soundtrack and the fake noises. I find that my sexual history, combined with my imagination, makes far better arousal fodder than anything Jenna Jamison could ever do. But that's me.

NOW -- do I even HINT at the notion that this makes me in some way BETTER than anyone else? Do I imagine that anyone else who uses porn is somehow perverted because they don't choose to engage their imaginations? No and no.

Are you entitled to your own opinions? You bet your ass you are. Had anyone here jumped down your throat and claimed that you were celibate or uber-religious, I'd have defended you in a heartbeat. But once you assumed the air of even minor superiority, you lost me.

And you guys are still a bunch of pervs who need to get laid and then shut up.

The first part is nice. The second part is rather presumptuous.

Haha...

I don't really care if people want to look at porn, but, I would be pretty pissed if I didn't want my children exposed to pornographic material and when I bought a DVD player or Checker's game there were naked women either making grunting noises or posing for the camera.

I don't think the company should be sued but I think they should either be sued for having dysfunctional equipment, or those who work on the conveyor belt and check the packaging (If there are people) should be punished somehow. Also, if the Checkers company just takes the cardboard straight from somebody else's company then the manufacturer should be fined for faulty equipment rather than the check'ers company.

If you want to watch porn, more power to you, although little kids shouldn't be exposed to it if their parents don't want that.


AM.

To be the Devil's Advocate I think porn objectifies men.

Look at it, the women are paraded around as wonderful people, the thing all sexual women should be. And the men? What are they? Cocks, just that, cocks?

We are more than just cocks, we are people! :mad:









:rolleyes:

A father and son who were about to play a relaxing game of checkers found that a card bearing a nude Jenna Jameson and some sexually suggestive sentences was part of the checkerboard's packaging. The company that imported the checkerboard explained that their Chinese supplier was using recycled cardboard including cardboard used for porn trading cards to make the packaging.

http://bugmenot.com/view.php?url=orlandosentinel.com

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/volusia/orl-vgame1906apr19,0,5898446.story?coll=orl-home-headlines
This is damned ridicolous. For one, I don't want to buy Chinese products in the first place because a lot of them are made in commie sweatshops (nothing wrong with being a communist, authoritain communism is wrong, though). Now I don't want to buy Chinese products because the people who make them are just plain stupid.

This is damned ridicolous. For one, I don't want to buy Chinese products in the first place because a lot of them are made in commie sweatshops (nothing wrong with being a communist, authoritain communism is wrong, though). Now I don't want to buy Chinese products because the people who make them are just plain stupid.

Ya, what kind of fool gives away free porn. Though on the plus side at least they're recycling.

You admit that you deliberately phrase your statements in a misleading way, and then accuse me of reading non-existing arguments? :rolleyes:
They weren't intended to be misleading. They were meant to be ironic. Obviously what we have here is a failure to communicate. Whether that was your fault of mine is irrelavent. We should just ignore that whole exchange and start over.

Why, according to you, does porn cause children to experiment with sex?

Those prohibited too.

No swimming trunks then?

To be the Devil's Advocate I think porn objectifies men.

Look at it, the women are paraded around as wonderful people, the thing all sexual women should be. And the men? What are they? Cocks, just that, cocks?

We are more than just cocks, we are people! :mad:









:rolleyes:Porn exploits men. Male actors are paid less and the product is mainly bought by men. It's economic sexism! Now please excuse me while I go exploit myself.

Haha...

I don't really care if people want to look at porn, but, I would be pretty pissed if I didn't want my children exposed to pornographic material and when I bought a DVD player or Checker's game there were naked women either making grunting noises or posing for the camera.

I don't think the company should be sued but I think they should either be sued for having dysfunctional equipment, or those who work on the conveyor belt and check the packaging (If there are people) should be punished somehow. Also, if the Checkers company just takes the cardboard straight from somebody else's company then the manufacturer should be fined for faulty equipment rather than the check'ers company.

If you want to watch porn, more power to you, although little kids shouldn't be exposed to it if their parents don't want that.

Say wha?

Say wha?
You know you're having a very bad day when you contradict yourself before you even finish the sentance.

I don't really care if people want to look at porn, but, I would be pretty pissed if I didn't want my children exposed to pornographic material and when I bought a DVD player or Checker's game there were naked women either making grunting noises or posing for the camera.

I don't think the company should be sued but I think they should either be sued for having dysfunctional equipment, or those who work on the conveyor belt and check the packaging (If there are people) should be punished somehow. Also, if the Checkers company just takes the cardboard straight from somebody else's company then the manufacturer should be fined for faulty equipment rather than the check'ers company.

If you want to watch porn, more power to you, although little kids shouldn't be exposed to it if their parents don't want that.

Incidentally, the cardboard being used was probably just for a box or separator for the checkers themselves (the playing pieces). Now imagine you're on an assembly line or some similarly rapid-paced production facility and you're required to insert one piece of regulation-sized cardboard into the game. You don't know where the cardboard pieces come from and you haven't got the time to look at (let alone examine for prurient images) any of them as you repeatedly put them where they're supposed to go.

Now you're the checkers game manufacturer and you keep costs low by using these recycled rectangles of cardboard. The supplier assures you they're clean and suitable for your purpose. Perhaps you inspected a representative sample and found them to be within specs.

See where I'm going? Now your the recycled cardboard supplier. You might know where your raw material (used cardboard boxes, etc.) come from and you might not. You have a quota to meet and manufacturers to supply. All you do is cut them into the requisite rectangles.

I think the fact that any whole images got in there at all is pretty astounding, speaking from a probability point of view. True, I'm assuming a lot about how the Chinese process works, but my point isn't specifics, it's the rapidity and necessary disregard for images on their components that rapidity would naturally engender.

Point is, relax and find something truly appalling to be shocked about, America (it's something you probably won't do anything about BUT be shocked, but still...).

You know you're having a very bad day when you contradict yourself before you even finish the sentance.
I suppose the poster meant that they didn't want a suit of the kind propagated by lazy Americans who want something for nothing and invent imaginary "pain and suffering" to sue for, and then used the second iteration of "sue" to mean a class-action product liability suit of some kind (the kind generally viewed to be noble as opposed to greedy).

But then, I once supposed the Earth was shaped like a burrito, so take that as you will.

Children shouldn't see this stuff. I say that the manufacturer be sued, and if they don't start caring about WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S PORNOGRAPHY ON THE PACKAGING, shut them down.

SUED? SUED?!?! Do you know how many worse things go on every day in the world that still don't warrant legal recourse?! You are one of the people who wastes money every day thinking that a law suit is the answer to everything. I've seen much more malicious and damaging things than sex on a $2 checkers box purchased at Big-Lots and made in Micronesia!

If you bought 300,000 lbs of recycled cardboard to make into boxes for your checkers game you were manufacturing and someone found a boob on one box should you be sued for not expecting there to be boobs on the boxes and not thinking to check?!

But then, I once supposed the Earth was shaped like a burrito, so take that as you will.
This thread is just full of siggable material...

just a few things:...

1. is a bikini not allowable in pythogria's world?
2. is pythogria a male/female? and what is it's age.
3. porn can be used for bad, but is neither bad nor good.