COM 497 sounds really challenging, while Cyber Porn and Society rings like a joke for a course title.  But the course ended up being both interesting and thought provoking.  Never have I blogged or taken an on-line class before…it worked…I learned about topics I had never considered, and was able to easily fit class work in to a busy schedule.

Reading blogs written by other students was interesting, and especially effective since I doubt everyone would have voiced their opinions on controversial topics so freely in a lecture hall (I just read a blog an older student wrote about his sex life!).  Mentioning the course to friends was always funny, girls would usually say what a pervert I was for enrolling, and guys said that they probably already do more cyber porn research than the professor.  Either way, I could always respond with info from that week’s lecture: such as, “do you know the legal difference between obscenity and indecency? – I do!”

Thanks for the course Halavais, I learned way more than expected.  Did you use Sir Mix-a-Lot as a lead-in?  I don’t remember, but I hope you gave another Seattle native some love.

Look at one of the best examples, the Paris Hilton sex tape.  This rich socialite, virtually unknown to America aside from name relation to the hotel chain, made herself in to a star.  Hilton had every right to legally punish her ex-boyfriend for releasing their sex tape publicly, but she did not.  Maybe she was so wealthy already that she didn’t want to go through the legal hassle.  More likely she realized that the immediate attention given to her name would be far more beneficial keeping the video legal on the web.  Still, there is also the theory that she was involved in the decision to release the sex video publicly, knowing the fame supposed ‘leaked’ celebrity footage receives.

Privacy seems not to actually be a law if it is only prosecuted on the victim’s request.  The filmed University of Texas student was able to win a $1 million verdict for intrusion.  That was only because she pursued the case.  Unlike statutory rape laws, where if caught or reported to authorities, the culprit is fully prosecuted- no matter what his or her underage partner, or partner’s family desires.  Is this because there isn’t a good enough benefit to not prosecute statutory rape? But hey, violations of privacy seem to work magic for celebrities, so why prosecute?

This blog, concerning a Massachusetts man’s child porn trial, made me consider a possible exception to child pornography.  Mr. “Zidel was accused of juxtaposing the heads and faces of campers onto images that depicted the youngsters engaging in sexual activity."  So, he was caught with child porn pictures where the faces didn't go with the bodies.

Either way, if it can be proven that the ‘bodies’ engaged in sexual activity are underage, I agree with Zidel being fully prosecuted.  However, perverse as it may be, should it be illegal if he pasted kids faces to legal pornographic images?  Does anyone consider this art? (I hope not…)
In high school photography I pasted one female face over everyone’s in a prom photo featuring a group of girls in their dresses.  Photoshop has so many tricks that made the joke photo look so good, it took friends a few seconds to realize they were seeing the same face on every body.  This Zidel is a sick pervert for sure, but is he really in possession of child porn? Or was he learning some new photo techniques?

To introduce myself, I am a heterosexual male and have never viewed, nor have desire to view, gay pornography. 

Similar to you, I grew up in Europe.  After playing soccer there was never any hesitation, for myself or any other team member, to take the group shower.  Also male/male hugging and cheek kissing is common, something I would never attempt with my American friends.  At first thought it seems that males are not homophobic in my country, but thinking again- maybe they are so homophobic that it is not even considered a possibility that a male who acts ‘normal,’ could really be gay.  So first question:

QUESTION 1.  What is your opinion on European men and homophobia?  And did that have any influence on producing your porn in America?

I do not consider myself homophobic; that is I can behave normally and feel comfortable around many gay men.  However there are the other gay men who at a distance make me uncomfortable instinctively, similar I’m sure to the straight ‘perverts’ who girls dislike.  So this brings up another question:
 
QUESTION 2.  Does this experience relate to your classification of gay males being either a “top” or a “bottom?”

To finish, I support the rule that all gay actors in Lucas Entertainment are required to wear condoms, and must be drug free.   Rules that would benefit all porn producers, giving a defence against pornography being a forced choice for income.

Look at the attention given to the study conducted by a Carnegie Mellon undergraduate student.  He concluded that 80% of the Internet was used for pornography.  The presentation quality of his report must have been exemplary if Time magazine decided it was worth a cover story.  The national attention this low quality data received only outdone after leading to the CDA.  Our conservative government was in need of some action, so what better way than to champion protecting America’s children from the dangers of pornography.

When the CDA was declared unconstitutional in 1997, we turned soft on pornography again.  The nation had a hard time remembering Internet pornography was still a controversial issue.  After all we were focused on the Lewinski scandal; followed by the second page news of our continued bombing of the Balkans.

Next Bush junior takes over what he thinks will be a perfectly easy presidency, a strong, rich nation at peace.  But then, following the terrorist attacks of 9/11, his few promises including putting the hammer down on pornography get thrown to the backseat of the agenda of his administration.

Pornography’s regulation is not a life changing issue, so it is only given attention when there is little else concerning the government.  Both liberal and conservative leaders at national and local levels seem to only mention pornography regulation when they lack any other topic to discuss.

Broke Back Mountain has a rating that is not ‘xxx’ so it has a right to be sold alongside any other films.  Anti-gay communities may exist in America, but like any other prejudice they cannot reverse civil liberties. A mainstream film has the right to be sold at our nation's biggest retailer.

Wal-Mart should not succumb to these protests: Broke Back Mountain is only a film, it's not pornography, and it's aim is not to persuade men to be homosexual (I assume…).  Besides, what about the gay jokes I heard about in the movie Shrek 2?  Was that protested?

The ‘zonable test’ seems reasonable: porn venues cannot be banned; ordinances must serve a substantial state interest, and need to be specific.  OK, the test is a fair compromise for both sides affected- unless you consider neighboring communities.  Look at the case in Seattle where the location of adult theaters is restricted to a certain zone.  Notwithstanding an overwhelming majority of voters approving this city ordinance, there was little thought for residents of the new ‘porn zone.’  Even if this zone is a poor area of the city, I’m sure many of the residents opposed the ordinance but were unable to counter the city majority.

A comparable law recently passed in the city Miami Beach that demonstrates the problems with zoning laws perfectly (related article). An ordinance was passed stating that convicted sexual predators cannot live within 2500 ft of a school.  Sounds great at first glance, no one wants pedophiles living close to their children’s school.  In effect this banishes any sex offenders from living in Miami Beach due to its shape, and location of its schools.  Again not a problem for city residents, but there is no thought about the close neighboring city of Miami- any displaced sexual predator can easily move there.

Zoning creates new problems even while solving a community issue.  Lawmakers need to rethink the zonable test to give better representation to the people affected adversely by zoning ordinances.  Communities can still restrict indecent businesses but without a better zonable test we will end up creating a national porn city (…well there is Las Vegas…).

Amateur Action’s prosecution (1994) is a good example of the unfair applications of the Miller test, causing our freedom of speech to be repressed. Amateur Action was distributing pornographic images that were supposed to be ‘safe,’ San Jose police approved of them.  However when ordered from Memphis, the company was prosecuted for sending obscene materials.  These photos were legal in California, but they were not in Tennessee.

Here is where our right to free speech is being infringed.  I agree that Memphis can, by “community standards,” make the production of ‘obscene’ materials and their public sale (porn shops) illegal.  However, Amateur Action’s photos were not breaking any nationally accepted obscenity laws, so they should not have been prosecuted- notwithstanding Memphis’ local laws. Like drug laws in many countries, Memphis should have the right to ban (their interpretation of) obscene materials from being produced, distributed or sold.  But, if not deemed obscene unanimously, possession of these materials should be acceptable in every state, if not intended for sale or distribution.  Therefore if someone in Memphis wishes to purchase materials legal in California, intended only for his or her personal use, they should be allowed.
   
Free speech means that we can read, listen, or watch anything that we want.  My interpretation of this is that even the raunchiest pornography, legal to produce only in liberal states, should also be legal to purchase by any customer of age, anywhere in the USA.  Restrict him or her from renting it in their video store, or projecting it for free public shows- but personal use is a constitutional right.

It seems that the FCC is being pressured to alleviate some federal debt with their increasing number of indecency fines to television networks.  From journalism on PBS to teen dramas on the WB, all types of programming are under fire to censor before being aired on a national network.  FOX recently was hit with a $1.2 million dollar fine for indecency shown on its reality show “Married by America.”  This is the most expensive fine ever for a television broadcaster, and all for showing a few scenes of pixilated strippers.  This is ridiculous!  Sure some people could deem these scenes inappropriate for minors, but I have seen more indecency on MTV for the past ten years.  Where have their fines been? How about NYC public access?  On those channels you can come across programming nearing obscenity.  Yes, public channels available to all TV set owners need to be more careful about their programming- but the FCC has to relax before it ends up fining every network at once next February for showing Punxatony Phil’s ass on the news.

Fines should not affect TV programs with content suitable for their rating.  R-rated films require adult guardians to accompany children in the theater; similarly a ‘TV-14’ show implies that young kids need supervision to watch.  The FCC can’t be America’s omnipresent parent, the real parents need to do some work occasionally.  Hey we even have the ‘V-chip,’ it’s supposed to work.

Watching porn is the best relationship enhancer available.  This is not a myth about pornography- it is completely true.

Sex is one of the most important aspects of a relationship; without good sex most relationships will not last.  Most couples begin their relationship on a fiery note, but then feel the luster start to dull as sex becomes routine.  After a long day at work sex may not be the only thing on the mind of both partners, and with only one interested, love-making becomes just sex.  These couples need to add some spice to their love life, but often don’t know where to turn- enter pornography.  If you need a way to get ‘turned-on’ at the same time, find a porno that you both agree on and watch it together.  Watching pornography together will get both partners in the ‘mood,’ thus making their significant other desirable.

Porn gives tired partners a way to rejuvenate their love life by giving them a way to get turned-on together again, so the TV won’t be the only thing that’s steamy when you’re done.