Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, YES.
There should be no doubt at this point; you have been given the word.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Maybe next time you should be a little less cryptic and just tell us if you agree with him.
Do you think things are getting better as a whole or do you think the guy getting picked up for a thought crime is a sign of things to come?
Andre: who knows?
I mean, I think it's great that Neil Gaiman, a writer with some heavy clout in much of the fandom, has taken a stance that in most ways mirrors my own in regards to this case. It gives me a small amount of personal vindication, and I hold out some hope that some feminist fangirl that just dismisses my opinions because they come from the bitter ol' blogger who "wants to keep the wimmins down" might think twice about the whole thing when it comes straight from Neil himself.
On the other hand, it's troubling that this has even gone to court in the first place. And it's sad that many feminists, supposedly a more progressive group than most, often echo the "shouldn't we censor things if it would just save one person" sentiments of the person Neil quotes at the beginning of his essay.
I think the sign of things to come will be more accurately reflected by the outcome of this trial, and I think at its root it will come down to which prevails: reason or hysteria.
Never bet on reason when hysteria can make you look good and reason can make you look like a perv.
With the battle cry "Save the children" only the brave or foolish will stand up to point out we might be on the wrong track.
If pics of unreal girls under the age can get you arrested what about real girls over the age of 18 playing girls under the age?
Will owning a copy of American Beauty or American Pie be all it takes to get someone tossed in jail?
I would not want someone who reads this stuff watching my kids but busting someone for a thought is wrong.
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,24767202-2,00.html
^ I read this, laughed, then despaired for the state of humanity. I though you'd like to see it.
Ah, the Simpsons porn case? Yes.
I have no idea what specific images that guy had that got him in trouble, but I've chanced upon "toon porn" a number of times, and seen porn of the Simpsons, among many other cartoons.
Frankly, most of the Simpsons porn I've ever seen is pretty lame; whatever third-rate artists they get to do the drawings usually make the characters more distorted and grotesque than usual, making it some of the most un-erotic art around, in my opinion.
But then, quality isn't always a consideration when some moral busybody gets their underwear in a bunch.
I was shocked and even a little pained to find that my favorite blog writer Occasional Superheroine is all for sending people to jail for illustrations a judge(?) finds offensive.
I find myself using the same arguments "there is no proof that this hurts kids" that I used to try and defend the rights of a man and a man to get married.
I fear that as(if) times get harder people will try and crush what made this nation great in a affort to protect people.
Security at the cost of freedom is how we play this game.
I was unaware of that, Andre... I'll have to mull this over a bit. It may require a new post.
Post a Comment