[89500] in Cypherpunks
Re: Why porn must be stopped at all costs, by Jodi Hoffman
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Paul Bradley)
Wed Nov 5 10:09:07 1997
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 1997 14:28:27 +0000
To: jlhoffm@ibm.net
From: Paul Bradley <paul@fatmans.demon.co.uk>
Cc: cypherpunks@algebra.com
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.95.971103132429.23538B-100000@vorlon.mit.edu>
Reply-To: Paul Bradley <paul@fatmans.demon.co.uk>
>As I wander back through all the posts on this list, it finally dawns on
>me what this is all about, this 'fight censorship' rhetoric. It's
>nothing more and nothing less than a lot of egotistical, self-serving
>brats who absolutely refuse to grow up, including you, Declan. Don't
>you realize that YOU are a major reason for the downward spiral of
>society?
1. There is no such thing as society in the sense you refer to it.
The downward spiral of "society", if such a thing even exists, is caused
by the moralising attempts of people much like yourself to impose their
moral views on the rest of us.
>Instead of trying to protect children, you want to empower
>them. Even a moron knows that when you do so, that power has to be
>taken from someone.
What? This seems a natural aim to me, to empower children to be able
to gain a good education and learn about as wide a subject base as
possible, not just what you deem "suitable material".
>Unfortunately, that someone is the parent. I have
>to ask myself just how many on this list have children. Not many, I
>would say.
This is a pointless observation, most people on this list are
under 25 (This is a guess but I would say a well founded one, most
list members I would say are undergraduates and postgrads, with a few
young employees of crypto companies thrown in), so the list membership
does not provide a valid sample space for the question of how many
list members on average have children. Nor does having children change
your understanding of ethics, rights and the goddamn common decency of
letting others do what the hell they want if it doesn`t harm you.
>Someone on this list, I forget who, has made numerous attempts at
>convincing us that pornography 'does no harm' to children.
I can tell you now, regardless of the many surveys done, that
it is moralising and convincing children of silly superstitious beliefs
in the existance of sprites, spectres and god that harms them, tell me,
how can one really expect a child to grow up an intelligent, informed
and fully functional human being if one convinces the child of, to pick
a simple example from the air, creationism. Pornography is only images,
sound or text, it is binary 0s and 1s, a well rounded, educated and
normal child should not be harmed because he sees 2 people fucking,
end of story.
> It is
>exactly at this point that I must draw a line. Studies have shown that
>an event which lasts even so much as three-tenths of a second, within
>five to ten minutes has produced a structural change in the brain.
Which studies, what stimulus and what changes in the brain, the event of me
saying "hello" to you causes a change in your brain which, through
some process leads to your understanding of this statement and
formulating a reply. Should we now introduce the "Non saying hello
for the protection of our little children" (tm) Bill to congress?"
>Exposure to porn causes actual brain damage, especially in a child.
WHAT!!! ROFL... I`m sure masturbation also causes you to go blind,
and if you go too far in one direction you fall off the end of
the world...
What evidence do you have to your above claim?
Now, I present the only sensible part of your post, the below selected
rules are entirely accurate and to be encouraged, as they will lead
to a genetically stronger species and a free, libertarian "society".
>THE RULE:
>The future of any nation lies with its youth. So corrupt them; since
>religion teaches moral virtue, erode the churches and divert the young
>from religion. Make them interested only in themselves. Get them
>involved in drugs, alcohol, and sex. Get them addicted to privileges and
>rights.
Excellent work, addiction to rights is hardly possible, in the same way that
one cannot be "addicted to breathing". Otherwise, you are entirely right.
>THE REALITY:
>Many of today's youth are grossly overprivileged
Excellent, we have a good standard of living.
>committed to fashion,
One form of natural "plumage" of the species, to be encouraged
as it is a part of consumer culture which leads to a strong
market capitalist economy.
>physically flabby and lazy
Those who take this too far will breed unhealthy offspring, who will
in turn die off young leading to the purification of the species,
darwinian evolution in progress.
>If they don't want to do something, they simply will not do it.
Once again, this is a good sign, the youth of today are
assertive and know how to get what they want, this
leads to a strong capitalist ethic which leads to a stronger
species.
> And if they want to do something to indulge themselves,
> no law or moral standard will hold them back.
The enforcement of ethical standards with guns always
seems to work.
>They feel that they are entitled to the 'good things in life,'
>not as a reward for hard work, but as an expected gift, to be received
>without effort and even without asking.
Hence the modern socialist pinko claptrap currently churned out by
the governments of the world about how little jonny should live
off the state because he is in a whellchair and has two mommys.
>Such parasitic habits would not be tolerated in the former
>Soviet Union.
(Shouting whilst giving a nazi salute) "Zis would never have happened
under herr Hitler"
Nor would such parasitic habits occur in an anarchist system,
those who tried to act as parasites would simply be ignored
leading to their eventually getting a job when they ran out
of food, or their death.
>Over 75 percent of America's high school boys now think
>it's acceptable to rape a girl at any age. Wonder why anymore?
Do you have any substantial evidence of this claim? For the record
I believe in an age of consent but the current laws setting it at
16 or 18 are a joke, 12 to 14 is a reasonable age, I was fucking
women when I was 15, anyone who isn`t by 16 is probably gay.
>Since the media shapes the minds of the people, infiltrate it and
>control it. Dominate television, radio, and the newspapers, and you
>control the minds of the people.
Since libertarian morality defines free speech as one of its central
aims I do not see the validity of this claim with regard to the
groups (eg. pornographers) you seem to be referring to.
>It is quite obvious that traditional values are considered ridiculous to
>all branches of the media. Christians, clergy, and even Christ Himself
>are held up as objects of scorn and mocking laughter by television,
>motion pictures, radio, artists, and songwriters. In the place of
>decency and morality, a constant stream of Left-wing values is
>presented.
Fuck Jesus.
>Homosexuality
I personally have a certain level of disdain for faggots as I see
them as a weak element of the species, they spread disease and
fail their primary aim of reproducing the species, but I tolerate
them as I realise they have every right to their way of life, just
as I have a right to live peacefully as I do.
> violence
Unprovoked violence should be seen to have a consequence, I suggest
educational programs for children where real-life murderers/rapists
etc. are filmed being tortured to death. This sort of programming
would help to reinforce ethical beliefs in our children.
>and contempt for all parental and
>governmental authority is the prevailing order of the day.
Indeed, such contempt for governmental authority should be
encouraged, parental authority should be respected up until
it represents an unreasonable invasion of the childs rights
in the name of "protection".
>Always preach true democracy, but seize power as completely and
>ruthlessly as possible. Vigorously censor viewpoints that conflict with
>ours.
Where do you see this viewpoint of tactic in evidence amongst the
libertarian movement?
This sounds more like a weak transcription of Machiavelli`s "the prince"
than your own views.
I really cannot spare the time to criticise the rest of your
weak and substance-free post, if their is any point in particular
you want answering mail me...
Paul Bradley
Paul@fatmans.demon.co.uk
Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org
"Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"
