NATION

PASSWORD

"Child Porn"

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Phenia
Senator
 
Posts: 3809
Founded: May 06, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby Phenia » Wed Jun 24, 2009 11:20 am

Khadgar wrote:I have straight porn too. You're weird. Any rate who says art has to be nonsexual? Art is supposed to evoke a reaction, make you experience something.


I do not say that art has to be nonsexual. Art can be nonsexual. Porn cannot.

User avatar
The Schro
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 147
Founded: Jun 18, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby The Schro » Wed Jun 24, 2009 11:21 am

Phenia wrote:
Khadgar wrote:I have straight porn too. You're weird. Any rate who says art has to be nonsexual? Art is supposed to evoke a reaction, make you experience something.


I do not say that art has to be nonsexual. Art can be nonsexual. Porn cannot.


And porn isn't art?

User avatar
Dread Lady Nathicana
Retired Moderator
 
Posts: 26053
Founded: Antiquity
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby Dread Lady Nathicana » Wed Jun 24, 2009 11:22 am

UNIverseVERSE wrote:I link you, again, to Neil Gaiman's blog. Pornography can indeed be art -- he provides the example of Alan Moore's Lost Girls, a pornographic novel including, among other things, depictions of underage incest. Is it nice? No. Is it art? Yes, yes, yes.

Dread Lady Nathicana wrote:<snip>
Sexualizing children is ... well its just plain icky. Granted, you can name any number of instances which skirt the line and can be called 'harmless' or relatively so. Sailor Moon leaps to mind - or any number of anime bits where the girls look or act older, but are listed as younger. But there's a world of difference between that, and illustrating or otherwise representing intentional images of children in obviously sexual situations. I'm not sure how you can interpret something that blatant as being 'harmless' or 'not intended for stimulation'.


Again, I encourage you to read the link I've just shown to Kormanthor. Pornography, even pornographic material depicting underage sex, can indeed be art, be unintended for stimulaton, indeed, be harmless.

Edit: Whoops, that was a url tag I wanted, not an italic one.


And I again, encourage you to read more fully into my entire post there rather than just picking a single point and pouncing on it. Nowhere did I claim that all such depictions are porn, nor that all art - visual or otherwise - should be censored on account of containing uncomfortable content. '

Unfortunately, and not to the fault of the artist presenting said material, those harder-to-define instances can be utilized for different intents than the artist may have intended. I was trying to put an emphasis on imagery and text and the like intentionally providing stimulating content.

I realize that there are some instances, however heinous they may seem on the surface, which are intended to serve a different purpose than a turn-on or fap material, thanks. Hence why the argument itself is a difficult one - we all have our levels of acceptability, tolerance, and hell, interests. One image or passage is not guaranteed to elicit the same response in all people. Which is why I finished with a comment on the responsibility inherent in presenting questionable materials in ways that are less readily misunderstood, in case that wasn't clear - which it seemed it was not.

User avatar
Phenia
Senator
 
Posts: 3809
Founded: May 06, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby Phenia » Wed Jun 24, 2009 11:24 am

The Schro wrote:
Phenia wrote:
Khadgar wrote:I have straight porn too. You're weird. Any rate who says art has to be nonsexual? Art is supposed to evoke a reaction, make you experience something.


I do not say that art has to be nonsexual. Art can be nonsexual. Porn cannot.


And porn isn't art?


Porn is porn. I'm not going to use euphemistic language just so people can go "BUT YOU WOULDN'T OUTLAW THE MONA LISA WOULD YOU!?? YOU ANTI-ARTISTIC ART HATER!"

User avatar
The Schro
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 147
Founded: Jun 18, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby The Schro » Wed Jun 24, 2009 11:25 am

And I again, encourage you to read more fully into my entire post there rather than just picking a single point and pouncing on it. Nowhere did I claim that all such depictions are porn, nor that all art - visual or otherwise - should be censored on account of containing uncomfortable content. '

Unfortunately, and not to the fault of the artist presenting said material, those harder-to-define instances can be utilized for different intents than the artist may have intended. I was trying to put an emphasis on imagery and text and the like intentionally providing stimulating content.

I realize that there are some instances, however heinous they may seem on the surface, which are intended to serve a different purpose than a turn-on or fap material, thanks. Hence why the argument itself is a difficult one - we all have our levels of acceptability, tolerance, and hell, interests. One image or passage is not guaranteed to elicit the same response in all people. Which is why I finished with a comment on the responsibility inherent in presenting questionable materials in ways that are less readily misunderstood, in case that wasn't clear - which it seemed it was not.


And porn isn't art?


Porn is porn. I'm not going to use euphemistic language just so people can go "BUT YOU WOULDN'T OUTLAW THE MONA LISA WOULD YOU!?? YOU ANTI-ARTISTIC ART HATER!"


So porn isn't art?
I fail to see how.

User avatar
Phenia
Senator
 
Posts: 3809
Founded: May 06, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby Phenia » Wed Jun 24, 2009 11:26 am

The Schro wrote:So porn isn't art?
I fail to see how.


Animated child porn is not art, no.

User avatar
The Schro
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 147
Founded: Jun 18, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby The Schro » Wed Jun 24, 2009 11:27 am

Phenia wrote:
The Schro wrote:So porn isn't art?
I fail to see how.


Animated child porn is not art, no.


Why not?

User avatar
Phenia
Senator
 
Posts: 3809
Founded: May 06, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby Phenia » Wed Jun 24, 2009 11:27 am

The Schro wrote:
Phenia wrote:
The Schro wrote:So porn isn't art?
I fail to see how.


Animated child porn is not art, no.


Why not?


I took a shit this morning. Explain how that is not art?

User avatar
Galloism
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 61027
Founded: Aug 20, 2005
Father Knows Best State

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby Galloism » Wed Jun 24, 2009 11:28 am

Phenia wrote:I took a shit this morning. Explain how that is not art?


If you sculpt your bowel movement into the shape of a rose, it's art.
Venicilian: wow. Jesus hung around with everyone. boys, girls, rich, poor(mostly), sick, healthy, etc. in fact, i bet he even went up to gay people and tried to heal them so they would be straight.
The Parkus Empire: Being serious on NSG is like wearing a suit to a nude beach.
New Kereptica: Since power is changed energy over time, an increase in power would mean, in this case, an increase in energy. As energy is equivalent to mass and the density of the government is static, the volume of the government must increase.


User avatar
Phenia
Senator
 
Posts: 3809
Founded: May 06, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby Phenia » Wed Jun 24, 2009 11:31 am

Galloism wrote:
Phenia wrote:I took a shit this morning. Explain how that is not art?


If you sculpt your bowel movement into the shape of a rose, it's art.


Oh, well that is of course exactly what I did. I can't help it if no one else sees a rose shape. Those people are just phillistines who hate self-expression.

User avatar
Dread Lady Nathicana
Retired Moderator
 
Posts: 26053
Founded: Antiquity
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby Dread Lady Nathicana » Wed Jun 24, 2009 11:31 am

Galloism wrote:
Phenia wrote:I took a shit this morning. Explain how that is not art?


If you sculpt your bowel movement into the shape of a rose, it's art.


If you sculpt your bowel movement into the shape of a rose, you need to get help. Not public funding.

User avatar
The Schro
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 147
Founded: Jun 18, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby The Schro » Wed Jun 24, 2009 11:32 am

Phenia wrote:
I took a shit this morning. Explain how that is not art?


I'm sorry, but what?
You are aware that porn requires you to draw, write, film...all of these things?

There's no secret ingredient that makes Saving Private Ryan more of a piece of art than Big Hookers Get Gangebanged II. One is certainly, by most peoples' definitions, a better piece of art, a more influential one, a more creative one, etc; but both are still works of art.

User avatar
Khadgar
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10934
Founded: Antiquity
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby Khadgar » Wed Jun 24, 2009 11:32 am

Galloism wrote:
Phenia wrote:I took a shit this morning. Explain how that is not art?


If you sculpt your bowel movement into the shape of a rose, it's art.


That could be rather interesting, a turd turned into a flower.

User avatar
Galloism
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 61027
Founded: Aug 20, 2005
Father Knows Best State

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby Galloism » Wed Jun 24, 2009 11:32 am

Dread Lady Nathicana wrote:
Galloism wrote:
Phenia wrote:I took a shit this morning. Explain how that is not art?


If you sculpt your bowel movement into the shape of a rose, it's art.


If you sculpt your bowel movement into the shape of a rose, you need to get help. Not public funding.


Who said anything about public funding? I said it's art. It's art you made on your own time, and it's very disturbing, but it's still art.
Venicilian: wow. Jesus hung around with everyone. boys, girls, rich, poor(mostly), sick, healthy, etc. in fact, i bet he even went up to gay people and tried to heal them so they would be straight.
The Parkus Empire: Being serious on NSG is like wearing a suit to a nude beach.
New Kereptica: Since power is changed energy over time, an increase in power would mean, in this case, an increase in energy. As energy is equivalent to mass and the density of the government is static, the volume of the government must increase.


User avatar
Dread Lady Nathicana
Retired Moderator
 
Posts: 26053
Founded: Antiquity
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby Dread Lady Nathicana » Wed Jun 24, 2009 11:33 am

Galloism wrote:
Dread Lady Nathicana wrote:If you sculpt your bowel movement into the shape of a rose, you need to get help. Not public funding.


Who said anything about public funding? I said it's art. It's art you made on your own time, and it's very disturbing, but it's still art.

Regardless ... it'll stink.




stupid quote issues. :mad:
Last edited by Dread Lady Nathicana on Wed Jun 24, 2009 11:34 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
The_pantless_hero
Senator
 
Posts: 4302
Founded: Mar 19, 2007
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby The_pantless_hero » Wed Jun 24, 2009 11:33 am

Phenia wrote:
The Schro wrote:
Phenia wrote:
Animated child porn is not art, no.


Why not?


I took a shit this morning. Explain how that is not art?

Hi boys and girls, it's Logical Fallacy hour! Yayaaaaay
Bottle wrote:Equality is a slippery slope, people, and if you give it to the gays you have to give it to the polygamists and if you give it to the polygamists you have to give it to the serial dog molesters and if you give it to the serial dog molesters you have to give it to the machine fetishists and the next thing you know you're being tied up by a trio of polygamist lesbian powerbooks and you can't get out because the safety word is case sensistive!

Doing what we must because we can

User avatar
Phenia
Senator
 
Posts: 3809
Founded: May 06, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby Phenia » Wed Jun 24, 2009 11:35 am

The Schro wrote:
Phenia wrote:
I took a shit this morning. Explain how that is not art?


I'm sorry, but what?
You are aware that porn requires you to draw, write, film...all of these things?


You know what also requires you to write? Filling out tax returns. Know what else requires you to draw? Making a profit/loss chart. It's official - ACCOUNTING IS ART!

And you didn't mention sculpting, painting? What, those aren't art now? You art-hating monster. ;)

There's no secret ingredient that makes Saving Private Ryan more of a piece of art than Big Hookers Get Gangebanged II. One is certainly, by most peoples' definitions, a better piece of art, a more influential one, a more creative one, etc; but both are still works of art.


As is my piece of shit. True, the only sculpting tools I used were my own rectal muscles and last night's triple order chow mein. But it is still A Work Of Art! Right?

User avatar
The Schro
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 147
Founded: Jun 18, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby The Schro » Wed Jun 24, 2009 11:37 am

Phenia wrote:
The Schro wrote:
Phenia wrote:
I took a shit this morning. Explain how that is not art?


I'm sorry, but what?
You are aware that porn requires you to draw, write, film...all of these things?


You know what also requires you to write? Filling out tax returns. Know what else requires you to draw? Making a profit/loss chart. It's official - ACCOUNTING IS ART!

And you didn't mention sculpting, painting? What, those aren't art now? You art-hating monster. ;)

There's no secret ingredient that makes Saving Private Ryan more of a piece of art than Big Hookers Get Gangebanged II. One is certainly, by most peoples' definitions, a better piece of art, a more influential one, a more creative one, etc; but both are still works of art.


As is my piece of shit. True, the only sculpting tools I used were my own rectal muscles and last night's triple order chow mein. But it is still A Work Of Art! Right?


I'm going to just ignore you now.

User avatar
UNIverseVERSE
Minister
 
Posts: 3394
Founded: Jan 04, 2004
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby UNIverseVERSE » Wed Jun 24, 2009 11:37 am

Phenia wrote:I took a shit this morning. Explain how that is not art?


Actually, some people would argue that it can be.

Dread Lady Nathicana wrote:And I again, encourage you to read more fully into my entire post there rather than just picking a single point and pouncing on it. Nowhere did I claim that all such depictions are porn, nor that all art - visual or otherwise - should be censored on account of containing uncomfortable content. '

Unfortunately, and not to the fault of the artist presenting said material, those harder-to-define instances can be utilized for different intents than the artist may have intended. I was trying to put an emphasis on imagery and text and the like intentionally providing stimulating content.

I realize that there are some instances, however heinous they may seem on the surface, which are intended to serve a different purpose than a turn-on or fap material, thanks. Hence why the argument itself is a difficult one - we all have our levels of acceptability, tolerance, and hell, interests. One image or passage is not guaranteed to elicit the same response in all people. Which is why I finished with a comment on the responsibility inherent in presenting questionable materials in ways that are less readily misunderstood, in case that wasn't clear - which it seemed it was not.


Apologies if I misunderstood or misrepresented your position. Mine is, I suppose, fairly simple. If it is anything which did not involve actual abuse of children in its making, I will defend its right to exist, to be produced, to be owned. The reason I don't accept a more moderate position is, I think, fairly simple: as soon as the precedent is established that some comic books are obscene and should be banned, that some material, despite harming no-one, is beyond the bounds of what the law should protect, then every special interest group and their dog can fight to ban the works they find 'obscene' or 'beyond the boundaries of taste'. Only by recognising the right of it all to exist do we avoid this endless debate.
Fnord.

User avatar
Exilia and Colonies
Diplomat
 
Posts: 626
Founded: Dec 09, 2007
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby Exilia and Colonies » Wed Jun 24, 2009 11:37 am

Define Art already before you waste 2 pages not going anywhere. :palm:
VEGAN IS SYMBOLIC OPPRESSION! STOP THE MURDER OF PLANTS! GO SUNLIGHT DIET!

User avatar
Khadgar
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10934
Founded: Antiquity
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby Khadgar » Wed Jun 24, 2009 11:38 am

The Schro wrote:
Phenia wrote:
I took a shit this morning. Explain how that is not art?


I'm sorry, but what?
You are aware that porn requires you to draw, write, film...all of these things?

There's no secret ingredient that makes Saving Private Ryan more of a piece of art than Big Hookers Get Gangebanged II. One is certainly, by most peoples' definitions, a better piece of art, a more influential one, a more creative one, etc; but both are still works of art.


Saving Private Ryan is borderline snuff film.

User avatar
Xomic
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1308
Founded: Oct 12, 2006
Left-Leaning College State

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby Xomic » Wed Jun 24, 2009 11:39 am

The Schro wrote:To what extent and why?
No proof has been found that this kind of pornography is harmful under any circumstances. It doesn't drive people to do what they wouldn't already do. You're essentially using the same argument that many extremist feminists do to ban pornography in its entirety, and under the same circumstances, no scientific evidence has ever been found to support them.

So should we just do this to make you feel better? We should start limiting freedoms because it feels like the right thing to do? wut


There's also no proof that video games cause violence, but we still try to make an effort to label violent video games as such, and restrict their sales to minors.

I see no reason why the same thinking can't be applied to drawn child pornography, in the sense that there would be limited availability and perhaps certain people would be unable to buy the 'art'.
Political compass
Economic Left/Right: -6.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.21

User avatar
Phenia
Senator
 
Posts: 3809
Founded: May 06, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby Phenia » Wed Jun 24, 2009 11:39 am

The Schro wrote:I'm going to just ignore you now.


Right, so you can't explain why my shit isn't art either.

Look, if you people are going to redefine "art" to include any and all things created by a human, don't blame me if you don't like the implications and can't admit that your definition of art is.... no pun intended... shit.

User avatar
The_pantless_hero
Senator
 
Posts: 4302
Founded: Mar 19, 2007
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby The_pantless_hero » Wed Jun 24, 2009 11:40 am

Phenia wrote:
The Schro wrote:I'm going to just ignore you now.


Right, so you can't explain why my shit isn't art either.

No, because you are being an idiot.
Bottle wrote:Equality is a slippery slope, people, and if you give it to the gays you have to give it to the polygamists and if you give it to the polygamists you have to give it to the serial dog molesters and if you give it to the serial dog molesters you have to give it to the machine fetishists and the next thing you know you're being tied up by a trio of polygamist lesbian powerbooks and you can't get out because the safety word is case sensistive!

Doing what we must because we can

User avatar
The Schro
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 147
Founded: Jun 18, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby The Schro » Wed Jun 24, 2009 11:41 am

There's also no proof that video games cause violence, but we still try to make an effort to label violent video games as such, and restrict their sales to minors.

I see no reason why the same thinking can't be applied to drawn child pornography, in the sense that there would be limited availability and perhaps certain people would be unable to buy the 'art'.


If you're suggesting that we don't give pornography to children, sure, I guess I can go with that.
Otherwise, I don't see how the comparison is valid.

Are you saying that America has taken other acts to restrict things despite a lack of proof? Yes, they have, and I'll have you know that I certainly don't support them. If I could, I would take all regulation of the video game industry away and leave the parents to pick through the mess, like they should.

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Austria-Bohemia-Hungary, Dumb Ideologies, Ethel mermania, Google Adsense [Bot], Gravlen, Hillbillica, Hirota, Ifreann, Miami Shores, Ostroeuropa, Shrillland, The New California Republic, The Nihilistic view, Tuthina, Vassenor, Xuloqoia, Zurkerx

Advertisement

Remove ads