There are better mailing lists for this discussion. On Oct 21, 2012 2:00 PM, <toro...@hushmail.com> wrote:
> Julian wrote: > "* It's possible to wank without porn. We can reach places in our > imagination that no amount of “reality” can take us. In my > experience > an orgasm that starts in the mind is *much* more fulfilling than > one involving porn. It's also possible to reach orgasm without > wanking > (i.e. by having sex). " > > But the anti-child pornography laws proceed on the assumption that > even non-commercial possession of computer generated images must be > banned because inducing the stimulation or wanking is a legitimate > societal interest to be regulated. > > It's classic thought crime control. Sure everyone can wank and have > their thoughts, but only until the state manages a way to control what > people think. > > If someone wrote a decentralized truly realistic fantasy Virtual > Reality simulation in which everyone could get their desire without > killing, maiming or molestating another, do you think the government > would allow such a program to exist? > > I bet not. > > "Getting into bed with the porn producers risks > alienating the feminist movement who would otherwise be naturally > aligned with Tor's goals." > > You must be kidding. > Google for Catharine Mackinnon and Andrea Dworkin and the Indianapolis > pornography ordinance. > > The feminist movement has changed since the 1960s. > > These two leading feminists have called for the prohibition on hate > speech and pornography. And only thanks to the ACLU did they not > succeed in Indianapolis. > > The question is not whether someone likes pornography, but whether > he/she believes the state should control it. > If you believe that the state should regulate which material I view in > my own home you can't in the long run be a friend of Tor's goals. > > Enforcement of the neo-feminist movement's censorship goals is no more > friendly to Tor's goals than those of the Christian conservative > movement. > > Aside from the failed war on drugs, there are three policy goals which > often beget more censorship: Protect the children, national security > and enforce copyright. > > I don't want censor happy feminists on my side. They are as toxic to > free speech, privacy and anonymity as the RIAA. > > Fortunately, both the protection of hate speech and virtual child > pornography is a settled constitutional question in the US, so the > worst which can happen is that other nations f-ck up their own laws. > > _______________________________________________ > tor-talk mailing list > tor-talk@lists.torproject.org > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk > _______________________________________________ tor-talk mailing list tor-talk@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
