Friday, November 19, 2004
Feeling Victorian

Q: What's more addictive than crack?

A: According to a few congressional panelists, online porn:

Mary Anne Layden, co-director of the Sexual Trauma and Psychopathology Program at the University of Pennsylvania's Center for Cognitive Therapy, called porn the "most concerning thing to psychological health that I know of existing today."

"The internet is a perfect drug delivery system because you are anonymous, aroused and have role models for these behaviors," Layden said. "To have drug pumped into your house 24/7, free, and children know how to use it better than grown-ups know how to use it -- it's a perfect delivery system if we want to have a whole generation of young addicts who will never have the drug out of their mind."

(source)

That's it... the right is right... the academic community is clearly out of control. Somebody take this moron's tenure away, 'cause this is the stupidest thing I've ever heard.
"Pornography really does, unlike other addictions, biologically cause direct release of the most perfect addictive substance," Satinover said. "That is, it causes masturbation, which causes release of the naturally occurring opioids. It does what heroin can't do, in effect."

... said another enemy of human joy.

This prudish hag nice lady has even coined a name for the new drug du jour:
Judith Reisman of the California Protective Parents Association suggested that more study of "erototoxins" could show how pornography is not speech-protected under the First Amendment.

"Erototoxins"... stupid concept, but a great name for a band.

So I guess we'll start seeing the male equivalent of crack whores wandering the streets any day now (and if a $5 porn-whore isn't reflexive and pomo enough for you, you're beyond my help.) Mat, I expect to see you turning tricks on EP Blvd. this weekend.

Just in case you're not quite convinced yet that America's sense of "morality" (read: repression) has not yet completely regressed to the 1950s, check out this bit of high irony:
Kinsey ads were just rejected by WNET - Channel 13 - PBS.

The spots were not the problem, the film's content was.

Tom Conway, the CFO of WNET who oversees the underwriting department and views the spots for approval made the call NOT to take the ad. Tom was not comfortable with the content of this movie and because there has been controversial press re: groups speaking out against the movie/subject matter, they feel that they can't risk viewer complaints on this.

(source)

Yes, they're banning the ads for the new movie about Kinsey -- the man who single-handedly helped wrest America's genitalia from the grip of puritanical Christianity (like my little double-entendre?) -- not because of the ads themselves, but because a movie about a man who openly said that sex isn't dirty is dirty.

Great. Just Great. How far we haven't come.

PS: just thought I'd reiterate this fundamental point: sex is good for you. Masturbation is good for you, emotionally and physically. Porn is only bad if it's exploitative or (more likely) badly made. Keep doing what you're doing; god made your parts so you could enjoy yourself, and Jesus will still love you even if you use them for purely recreational purposes. Just so we're clear.
6:06 PM ::
Amy :: permalink
|