Is censorship moral?

[DBT]

Child porn, immoral and illegal for obvious reasons, was brought up as an example of something that should be censored.

Actually, the view that extramarital sex including voyeurism is immoral has its roots in the Bible, Christian theology, and in church tradition. The age of the girls who were sold off into marriage by this tradition has often been much younger than today's "legal" age although most US states allow child marriage.

So in the USA you might be technically breaking the child porn laws if you have photos of your wife in the nude.

False analogy.

I didn't post an analogy.

Of course you did, and still do. An analogy is comparing significant aspects between two things.

You try to analogize what may be innocent nude paintings of children, cherubs, etc, with porn, when what turns nudity into porn is the setting, poses and acts being performed, therefore not an analogy at all.

 

[Shadowy Man]

You want a concrete example: I think in many cases death threats would be moral to censor.

But again, because there is nuance involved, we would have to investigate any specific case to assess harm.

This 'nuance' you speak of; Is it good, or bad?

Do we need to make it mandatory, or ban it?

Well, nuance did sink the Titanic…

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Child porn, immoral and illegal for obvious reasons, was brought up as an example of something that should be censored.

Actually, the view that extramarital sex including voyeurism is immoral has its roots in the Bible, Christian theology, and in church tradition. The age of the girls who were sold off into marriage by this tradition has often been much younger than today's "legal" age although most US states allow child marriage.

So in the USA you might be technically breaking the child porn laws if you have photos of your wife in the nude.

False analogy.

I didn't post an analogy.

Of course you did, and still do.

What's wrong with analogies? What I posted above is meant to lend some understanding about the history of porn and how it's evolved into the silly mess it is today. It demonstrates that opposition to porn and attempts to censors it is based on the primitive attitudes of religious clans from antiquity and has little to do with logic or safeguarding people.

An analogy is comparing significant aspects between two things.

That's not the definition I normally use, but I'd rather not get bogged down arguing semantics.

You try to analogize what may be innocent nude paintings of children, cherubs, etc, with porn, when what turns nudity into porn is the setting, poses and acts being performed, therefore not an analogy at all.

OK, that's how you distinguish porn from "nude paintings." As any man who remembers the Sears catalog knows, porn can crop up anywhere, and it's in the eye of the beholder. Paintings can be every bit as sexually stimulating as photos, yet we call paintings "art" and photos "porn." So my point is that what is or is not porn is very subjective, and the opinion that will win out is the opinion not of the wisest or the most moral but the strongest.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Child porn, immoral and illegal for obvious reasons, was brought up as an example of something that should be censored.

Actually, the view that extramarital sex including voyeurism is immoral has its roots in the Bible, Christian theology, and in church tradition. The age of the girls who were sold off into marriage by this tradition has often been much younger than today's "legal" age although most US states allow child marriage.

So in the USA you might be technically breaking the child porn laws if you have photos of your wife in the nude.

Yes, because that marriage should not be legal and the only reason is conservatives, the same conservatives that want to censor homosexuality and broadcast child beauty pageants.

I would rather censor child beauty pageants and let adults be adults in adult places.

That said, if you want to get your rocks off to whatever, just... go to civit.ai and download whatever model gets your rocks off. I know FurtasticV20 makes some absolutely fantastic filth, in fact. It has no standards, and will generate pretty much anything you want, as long as you don't mind furry, and what's more, you know you're consuming something not-real, and the law actually stands on your side there in the United States.

You have absolutely no reason to ask for access to a view of live child abuse happening somewhere in spacetime. There is no reason to allow people to consume that material evil, unless to feel rage and hate. It is erosive to the joyful and good things.

Personally I don't like the thought of mixing my enjoyment of my own memories of carefree innocence and exploration with what should be well connected to someone's native impulse for hate-of-evil.

It sets my teeth buzzing thinking what I would do to the director of a "child beauty pageant", of all such persons, and all such mothers who do that to their daughters, and all the creepy men that buzz around such hives of child abuse and thinly masked pedophilia.

I would as soon say all photos of children belong to them, and all naked photos especially, and to the adults they become, to do as they wish, except most would wish these never existed and you have no way to know who those are, and neither do investigators have any way of knowing, and the people who consume the most disgusting evil this world has to offer simply do not care; they will do to children to make whatever style of fucked up evil they wish to perpetrate.

You have AI. I will teach you how to use it and I will argue for your right to do so. I argue for my own right to do so...

... But...

For the love of fuck please stop asking the world to let you touch the most disgusting of it's evils. There's no reason to want that.

In what ways have kids been harmed by beauty pageants, and how can censoring those pageants undo that harm? I've never watched a child beauty pageant, but they sound like they can be a lot of fun for the kids in them. Little girls like to feel pretty, in case you don't know. It sounds like it's the prudish adults who don't like those kinds of pageants.

 

[TomC]

How about we drop the extremely murky subject of porn and discuss more grown up aspects of censorship as an issue?
Tom

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Little girls like to feel pretty, in case you don't know.

Have you interviewed them about this?

 

[Jarhyn]

Child porn, immoral and illegal for obvious reasons, was brought up as an example of something that should be censored.

Actually, the view that extramarital sex including voyeurism is immoral has its roots in the Bible, Christian theology, and in church tradition. The age of the girls who were sold off into marriage by this tradition has often been much younger than today's "legal" age although most US states allow child marriage.

So in the USA you might be technically breaking the child porn laws if you have photos of your wife in the nude.

False analogy.

I didn't post an analogy.

Of course you did, and still do. An analogy is comparing significant aspects between two things.

You try to analogize what may be innocent nude paintings of children, cherubs, etc, with porn, when what turns nudity into porn is the setting, poses and acts being performed, therefore not an analogy at all.

Rather, I don't care about porn either. They are trying to equivocate a drawing with a reality.

Little girls like to feel pretty, in case you don't know.

Have you interviewed them about this?

Maybe some little human children like to feel pretty. This does not necessitate parading them before a bunch of creepers. I would be willing to bet that once they encountered the creeps, they thought better. I'm sure Jon Bennett Ramsey might have had some opinions on the matter...

 

[TomC]

Little girls like to feel pretty, in case you don't know.

Have you interviewed them about this?

Yes.
They do.

I grew up with four sisters and their friends. As a gay man, you'd be surprised at what women share with me.

The big problem I have with child beauty pageants is the commodification and sexualising of youngsters. Teaching girls that what's important is looks and sex appeal.
Call me a prude if you must, but I despise those things and consider the parents involved abusers.
Tom

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Little girls like to feel pretty, in case you don't know.

Have you interviewed them about this?

Yes.
They do.

#notallgirls

The big problem I have with child beauty pageants is the commodification and sexualising of youngsters. Teaching girls that what's important is looks and sex appeal.

It's kind of creepy seeing the makeup and high heels on a 3 year old, but this seems off-topic.

I understand you don't want to keep seeing a discussion of child porn. Neither do I, really. BUT I think it came up multiple times because when someone makes an absolutist statement (proposition), people tend to try to find logical counterexamples. In the case of a moral position, it means something obviously wrong. That's why child porn will continue to be brought up as long as the thread op position remains unchanged.

Universal Soldier probably lost the debate on page#1 and so one must wonder why it goes on. Maybe it's another cry for help. Who knows.

 

[pood]

Little girls like to feel pretty, in case you don't know.

Have you interviewed them about this?

Yes.
They do.

I grew up with four sisters and their friends. As a gay man, you'd be surprised at what women share with me.

The big problem I have with child beauty pageants is the commodification and sexualising of youngsters. Teaching girls that what's important is looks and sex appeal.
Call me a prude if you must, but I despise those things and consider the parents involved abusers.
Tom

Have you seen the move Little Miss Sunshine?

 

[TomC]

Little girls like to feel pretty, in case you don't know.

Have you interviewed them about this?

Yes.
They do.

I grew up with four sisters and their friends. As a gay man, you'd be surprised at what women share with me.

The big problem I have with child beauty pageants is the commodification and sexualising of youngsters. Teaching girls that what's important is looks and sex appeal.
Call me a prude if you must, but I despise those things and consider the parents involved abusers.
Tom

Have you seen the move Little Miss Sunshine?

No
And thank you for not sharing.
Tom

 

[Unknown Soldier]

How about we drop the extremely murky subject of porn and discuss more grown up aspects of censorship as an issue?

What I had in mind when I started this thread was the censorship of unpopular "fringe" ideas that appear threatening to those in power. But anything that might be censored is on the table.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

The big problem I have with child beauty pageants is the commodification and sexualising of youngsters.

I think you take it too seriously. I think it's funny to see kids taking on the role of adults.

Teaching girls that what's important is looks and sex appeal.

But that is important! That's why people have traditionally dressed up and groomed their kids.

Call me a prude if you must, but I despise those things and consider the parents involved abusers.

If you don't let kids have fun dressing up and pretending, then that's a kind of abuse.

Anyway, we see how censorship can ruin fun for no good reason. The censors are safeguarding themselves under the pretense of safeguarding others.

 

[pood]

Little girls like to feel pretty, in case you don't know.

Have you interviewed them about this?

Yes.
They do.

I grew up with four sisters and their friends. As a gay man, you'd be surprised at what women share with me.

The big problem I have with child beauty pageants is the commodification and sexualising of youngsters. Teaching girls that what's important is looks and sex appeal.
Call me a prude if you must, but I despise those things and consider the parents involved abusers.
Tom

Have you seen the move Little Miss Sunshine?

No
And thank you for not sharing.
Tom

Well, bless your heart!

It’s a movie you might like, but I won’t share it with you.

Are you still misremembering the time you adamantly insisted I said something I didn’t, something that you took deep offense at? And I proved to you I didn’t say it, and you had to withdraw your claim?

Anyway, if you want to be rude, I’m not going to try to disentangle your psyche. Maybe I’ll just put you on Ignore. You generally don’t write much worth reading anyway.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

It's kind of creepy seeing the makeup and high heels on a 3 year old, but this seems off-topic.

Personally, I think it's cute and funny.

Universal Soldier...

LOL--Who is "Universal" Soldier?

...probably lost the debate on page#1...

The winning argument is: Censorship good because Soldier bad!

...and so one must wonder why it goes on.

Then we all must wonder why you keep showing up.

Maybe it's another cry for help. Who knows.

Help looks to be sorely needed.

 

[TomC]

Maybe I’ll just put you on Ignore.

Works for me.
You go ahead and censor yourself.
I can't be bothered

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Child porn, immoral and illegal for obvious reasons, was brought up as an example of something that should be censored.

Actually, the view that extramarital sex including voyeurism is immoral has its roots in the Bible, Christian theology, and in church tradition. The age of the girls who were sold off into marriage by this tradition has often been much younger than today's "legal" age although most US states allow child marriage.

So in the USA you might be technically breaking the child porn laws if you have photos of your wife in the nude.

Prosecution of sexting teenagers is unfortunately a real issue. Personally, I think the law would be better served by carving out something like the Romeo and Juliet laws--make self-creation legal, but only the creator may distribute it, only by a one-on-one means and not commercially. Images depicting more than one individual can only be distributed to those depicted in the image.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Child porn, immoral and illegal for obvious reasons, was brought up as an example of something that should be censored.

Actually, the view that extramarital sex including voyeurism is immoral has its roots in the Bible, Christian theology, and in church tradition. The age of the girls who were sold off into marriage by this tradition has often been much younger than today's "legal" age although most US states allow child marriage.

So in the USA you might be technically breaking the child porn laws if you have photos of your wife in the nude.

Yes, because that marriage should not be legal and the only reason is conservatives, the same conservatives that want to censor homosexuality and broadcast child beauty pageants.

I would rather censor child beauty pageants and let adults be adults in adult places.

Yup. We have this strange obsession with nudity when the real issue is sexualizing. Sexualized images of those too young to understand the sexual nature of them are unacceptable in my book regardless of how much or little is shown. Kids at the nudist resort, no problem.

That said, if you want to get your rocks off to whatever, just... go to civit.ai and download whatever model gets your rocks off. I know FurtasticV20 makes some absolutely fantastic filth, in fact. It has no standards, and will generate pretty much anything you want, as long as you don't mind furry, and what's more, you know you're consuming something not-real, and the law actually stands on your side there in the United States.

Huh? I thought simulated kiddie porn was illegal.

You have AI. I will teach you how to use it and I will argue for your right to do so. I argue for my own right to do so...

That's where I stand (although I have no experience with it to do the teaching.) I do not believe the law should make any action illegal that doesn't have a non-consenting victim (true informed consent) or undue risk of a victim (thus, for example, DUI--even if you don't hit anyone you took an undue risk of doing so.) (Also, a law need not be required to point to a specific victim--for example, pollution laws. If releasing chemical X will result in an increase in some malady it can be made illegal without identifying any particular victim.)

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Child porn, immoral and illegal for obvious reasons, was brought up as an example of something that should be censored.

Whether a thing is obvious or not is subjective, i.e. it depends on the subject considering it and especially their brains. For example, it wouldn't be obvious to a person in a brain coma, a psychopath, a pedophile, or a newborn baby.

That a child lacks life experience and is unable to grasp the nature of what is happening to them or how they are being exploited is probably quantifiable and testable through questioning the child. Isn't that why children are protected?

I think it would be pretty hard to quantify and even identifying in particular cases could be hard.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Finally, please check out these paintings by Lewis Carroll. Do they constitute child porn? Should we imprison people for having those images?

Those are paintings, not photographs. And I see nothing on there that I would consider pornographic, period.