discussion on xxx domain? [ncsg-policy] Draft NCSG comments to GNSO Council on Rec 6

[Andrew A. Adams]

> Please Andrews, have you a family? woman and child (ren)?

Utterly irrelevant to this discussion. It's called "ad hominem" where you
attack the person not the argument, and it's just as bad to place greater
weight on their arguments because of their background, except where their
background is so heavily relevant that it lends them greater authority
because of their knowledge, not because one grants them greater weight
because of their emotions.

I am against censorship, against the creation of thought crimes, against the
restrictions of what people choose to do with their bodies (but also against
people being forced to do things with their bodies that they do not agree
to). My arguments and views follow from that position and that is all you
need to know on here. Whether I am homosexual or heterosexual, man or woman,
back, white, yellow, red or mixed, should not matter in these discussions.

IMO, we need to create a society where no one is ashamed of their bodies nor
is forced to display it for others7 pleasure as the _only_ way they can
survive. The anti-sexual material lobby almost universally regards all
displays as degrading or in some way negative. I do not, and the fact that
countries like Sweden have the highest measurements of sexual equality and
some of the lowest poverty rates, alongside the highest literacy rates and
the most openness about both nudity and sex provides me with strong evidence
that sexual material is not the automatic negative or degrading thing that
the anti-sexual material lobby make it out to be.

Beside all that, where do you draw the line? A foot fetishist finds pictures
of women's feet in high heels sexually alluring. Should we therefore ban any
and all pictures of women's feet. Sexual allure is in the eyes of the
beholder and the only material that should be banned is that which can be
demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt that either harm was caused in its
production, or harm directly follows (without intervening choice) from its
"consumption".

--
Professor Andrew A Adams                      aaa at meiji.ac.jp
Professor at Graduate School of Business Administration,  and
Deputy Director of the Centre for Business Information Ethics
Meiji University, Tokyo, Japan       http://www.a-cubed.info/