Full Frontal Politics free speech from a phone sex operator

Sugasm #23  0 Comments

Posted on February 26th, 2006. About Sugasm.

The best of the blogs by the bloggers who blog them, this week starting with the letter S. If you haven’t checked out the new FAQ, give it a look - it takes effect next week.

More Sugasm…
Join the Sugasm

(Sugasm participants should re-post all the links above. The following links may be excluded as long as you include all the above links.)

Bookmark on del.icio.us

“Pornographers Are On Your Side”  8 Comments

Posted on February 22nd, 2006. About Adult Industry, Society.

Pornographers are on your side.

It’s true. At least, as regards children accessing porn.

You don’t have to approve of porn to realize the logic inherent in the following statement:

“Pornographers don’t want kids to visit their websites”

A Pornographers Guide to Protecting Kids from Porn Online,” SugarBank

Actually Sam Sugar raises a good, glaringly obvious point: not all the underage kids accessing porn are children. The vast majority of them are horny, curious, bored teenagers. Saying “children looking at porn” is shortened to “children and porn” which is then blurred with “children in porn” and that gives you the pornography = child porn media situation we have today. The problem we’re talking about is minors accessing porn (yeah, I read my Lakoff), and some of those minors are children stumbling across it unintentionally. If my own teenage years were any indication the rest are horny teens near, at, or over the age of consent in their state of residence, but legal minors and thusly not old enough to buy porn.

Yeah - they can legally screw like bunnies, or get married and produce more horny teenagers, but they can’t legally buy porn.

That’s a good thing. There’s a lot of twisted stuff out there. (That’s also a good thing. Some of us consenting adults like it pretty freaky.) But for a while now it’s seemed to me that the perfect solution to that is to make the natural compromise: it’s okay for teens to enjoy a little softcore, but the hardcore and kinky stuff that I was reading when I was a teenager stays restricted to adults. The idea of teens formulating their ideas of sexuality on Max Hardcore or the Grey Archive is an unsettling one.

I always know I’m right when Sam agrees with me.

As a phone sex operator specializing in BDSM, I’m well aware that most perverts are formed early in life, and often in fairly normal situations. This kind of framework - culture, really - won’t prevent those destined to become kinky but it will do something to help slow the sexual arms race from starting in high school. The logical, healthy approach isn’t to say, “Just don’t - sex is dirty and you should save it for someone you love,” it’s to say “Don’t be in a rush - take your time, enjoy everything being new. There’s no hurry (so say no if you’re pressured) and it’s more fun if you savor it all.”

Sam’s post covers the situation pretty well. He points out that there’s really only one proven age verification solution: parental guidance and monitoring. The problem is, that’s the answer nobody wants.

Bookmark on del.icio.us

Playboy Penetrates MySpace  0 Comments

Posted on February 15th, 2006. About Adult Industry, Society.

Smart. Very smart, especially in the light of the current flood of MySpace teen scare stories:

Playboy.com Logs On to ‘Girls of MySpace’

By Rhett Pardon
Monday, February 13, 2006
LOS ANGELES — Playboy.com set off a round of controversy Monday as it announced that it will tap into the ether for a “Girls of MySpace” photo spread.

“Like the ‘Girls of McDonalds,’ this is just another direction we are going,” Playboy spokesman Matt Kalinowski told XBiz, who noted that the company decided on the spread despite objections from those who say MySpace’s demographics are on the teen end. “The girls we choose have to be 18.”

more…

(Courtesy of XBiz.com)

Then again, there’s nothing like a little steamy controversy to generate publicity.

Bookmark on del.icio.us

2006 Agenda: Mind Your Own Business  2 Comments

Posted on February 9th, 2006. About Civil Liberties, War on Porn.

J.T. Benjamin of ERWA fame has a great idea:

Mind your own fucking business.

“…And what is this theme? How must we respond to the Holy Terrors’ War On Whoopie? Four words.

Mind Your Own Business.

It’s firm. It’s assertive. It’s simple. It’s “Get The Government Out Of Our Private Lives.” It’s Freedom. It’s Liberty. It’s All-American.

It’s Ann Landers saying, “Dear Concerned: M.Y.O.B.” It’s Hank Williams singing, “Why don’t you mind your own business, so you won’t be minding mine.” You can’t get more All-American than Ann and Hank.

Of course, regarding child pornography and sexual assault, we all need to crack down, but when it comes to monitoring the sex lives of consenting adults, we have to say just four simple words.

Mind Your Own Business…”

(“From the Dec-Jan edition of ERWA,” All Worked Up And Then Some)

Up for a rant? Read on…

Sexual freedom in the U.S. rests on three things: the separation of church and state, the First Amendment right to free speech, and the Fourth Amendment right to privacy. (Some pro-forced pregnancy judges believe that the 4th doesn’t imply a right to privacy; you read it and tell me. Without a right to privacy, why would any search be unreasonable? It’s the violation of that recognized, everyday right that makes certain searches unreasonable.)

The separation of church and state is necessary to our continued sexual freedom because a sex-positive religious faction has yet to take political power in the U.S. Sex between any given number of people (1 or greater, and if you think about it, you damn well can be between yourself. It’s not bad grammar, it’s a jilling euphemism, dammit.) is/was considered the domain of morality - public morality (back to the 4th again) - and thusly regulated by religion, law, and law influenced by specific religious traditions.

Traditionally, the chief justification for blue laws and other laws restricting sexuality was that blurred boundary between religious doctrine, public morality, and semi-secular legislation. Of course now cultural and religious attitudes are changing and that justification doesn’t hold the weight it used to. That’s why the Religious Right and the pro-censorship left have turned to “for the children” scare tactics and pseudoscience to push their anti-sex and/or anti-porn agendas.

The idea that the state cannot legislate morality isn’t fully rooted in this country and without that guideline, the free exercise of sexuality doesn’t exist, legally, while church doctrine passes as legislation.

If we lose that, we’re fucked. In the ass. Hard. No lube and no reacharound.

Sex and religion belong together, but tell that to the moral majority.

The First Amendment is every pornographer’s best friend and we all know it. Without the right to free speech, I can’t make a living say half the fun, nasty things I do over the phone or in my blogs. Without the right to yell “Theater!” in a crowded fire or speak out against a fricking irritating Shrubbery there is no right to porn. Period. Every threat to free speech threatens your free porn privileges.

That’s hitting us where it hurts.

But it’s the right to privacy guarded by the Fourth Amendment (I won’t say guaranteed by; it’s guaranteed in the same way any person’s dignity should be, by birth) that truly protects all avenues of consensual sexuality and reproductive rights (including any combination of sexuality and money you can think of, at least in some counties). The idea that whatever happens between informed, consenting adults is okay, even if you’re offended, is as J.T. Benjamin pointed out grounded in privacy rights. The idea that it isn’t really anybody’s business who you’re fucking is the one that gave unmarried people access to birth control. Your health choices and issues are between you and your doctor, right? They thought so when they re-legalized abortion.

Georgia would rather fuck you than let you fuck yourself. No sex toys for you, my friend. The erotica and porn you’re permitted to see, or make… it all comes back to privacy and whether or not you have the right to do what you want when no one’s watching and no one’s getting hurt in ways they’re not into.

Bookmark on del.icio.us
Choose from Full RSS or comments RSS feeds.
Full Frontal Politics is powered by WordPress 2.5.1 and delivered to you in 1.419 seconds.
Design by Matthew, mangled by Sabrina. Content and photos © copyright 2006 Sabrina Morgan unless otherwise noted.