Let girls do what will make them feel better…

   While reading some of the other students' blogs I came across this one.  I completely agree with Jmmurphy on her argument.  I feel as though sometimes young girls may have something wrong with them that will completely erode away their confidence levels, even something silly such as bushy eyebrows.  If the young girl really feels as though getting her eyebrows waxed will boost her confidence then let her do so.  Just as stated in that blog, as long as she is not raised to feel that these procedures are the most important aspects of life then it is okay to do so.  Everyone deserves to feel good about themselves, and if something small involving cosmetics can make them feel better why not?  I'm not saying that everything cosmetic is okay, such as plastic surgery and what not, but little things like waxing and shaving.  It is just like getting braces.  The majority of time the reason one gets braces is to improve the looks of their teeth.  If a parent feels so wrongly about allowing an eleven year old to wax her eyebrows, because it causes her to focus too much on superficiality, then how are you to not only allow, but encourage, that same girl to get braces?  They are both allowing the individual to look and feel better about themselves. 

   I think society needs to stop worrying so much about little cosmetic procedures such as waxing and focus on much greater problems.  As long as the parent is raising their child to realize what is more important in their life then there should be nothing to worry about.

Web labeling

   I believe that web labeling would only partially help solve the problem of children running across pornography on the internet.  Making it mandatory for links to a pornography site will allow the viewers to become aware that the site may be pornographic.  Say for instance if a child randomly typed in a keyword and a deceiving link came up which the child had no clue involved pornographic content, they would see the label and know not to enter. 

   But on the contrary, these labels may also drive a child to look at a website out of curiosty, because they now know these links lead to pornographic websites.  I personally feel they should just do it anyways because every little bit helps.  I am also hoping that by doing so, the pornographic links that automatically pop up may be reduced because they will be forced to show the label, and therefore they may think this method of advertising may become insufficient. 

  Overall the government needs to be doing a lot more than just ruling mandatory labels if they want to elminate the problems with internet pornography.

Sick murderers

   After watching lecture 32, what shocked me the most was the story of Karla Homolka and Paul Bernardo.  I have never before heard of this case, therefore the story was extremely disturbing to me.

   Karla Homolka and Paul Bernardo were a married couple that killed 43 people.  They would kidnap these women and then rape them.  After looking up more information online, I came across this website.  In class, it was said that their first murder together was Karla younger sister Tammy.  After looking on the website, I discovered the reasoning for this first murder.  Karla was not a virgin when she married Paul, and this upset Paul.  He later deemed necessary that Karla must sacrifice her younger, pretty sister, Tammy to him, so he could take her virginity.  Karla later agreed, and they developed a scheme.  Eventually they drugged her with Valium, and Paul began raping her, but only for a minute because she began to awaken.  After another attempt, but this time with drugs stolen from Karla's work they were able to knock her out and rape her.  She choked on her own vomit during this process.  The couple continuously captured and raped a variety of other random women.  A number of these rapes were videotaped for the couple's viewing pleasure in the future.

   The thought that any couple could do this is really disturbing.  Before the couple met, it was later found that Paul had raped numerous girls.  And since when they met, Karla was only 17, whereas Paul was 23, it may be assumed that he was the main influence on her participating.  But that still should be no reason as to why she only was sentenced with 12 years in prison, where he will pretty much spend the rest of his life there.  I believe that she was well aware as to what she was doing, as well as Paul.  I feel that they both should have received equal punishment, for the rest of their lives.  To this day Karla has been released from prison.  Despite the fact that she is under strict rules and regulations, it is still disturbing that someone that has done so many awful things is lurking around in the streets.

Child pornography bust

  While looking over other people's public blogs, I came across this article.  The article is based on  a massive child pornography bust that included forty people from across the world. 

  The large bust all  began from a comment that came out of a youth's mouth that was simply over heard by a parent.  The comment was one that just was not an appropriate thing a child should not be saying.  Eventually an arrest was made of a local parent that was accused of sleeping with his step children, as well as with other numerous friends of those children during regular sleepovers. 

  After searching the house of the local accused parent they discovered on his internet connections another local, Treleaven, that was also involved in distributing child pornography pictures and videos across the world to a wide number of people.  Treleavenwas later charged with three and a half years in prison, whereas the man accused of having sexual intercourse with children was charged with fourteen years in prison.  With the police's computer internet discovery forty people from countries including Canada, the US, Australia and Great Britain were accused and the completion of one child pornography ring was diminished.

  I feel that both of these men should have been sentenced with much greater time, but at least they were convicted and charged with something.

A town with no alcohol, porn, or contraception?

   After searching for public blogs I came across this blog.  It speaks of a possible new town called Ava Maria.  The town, if created, would consist of the Catholic rules.  The entrepeneur of Dominoe's Pizza, Tom Monaghan has come up with the idea of this town.

  The town would allow a place for all Catholic followers to abide by their beliefs and practices in a complete Catholic environment.  This of course would mean the ban of alcohol, pornography, as well as contraceptions within the zoning unit of the town.  Whether this would actually work or not is unknown, as well as the fate of the town actually being developed. 

  I feel that if a town like this was developed, it would almost be cult- like.  Everyone would be identical.  I myself am Catholic, but would have no desire in living in a town like this.  I feel that it will only bring upon more problems.  Why are people constantly trying to seperate themselves from the world, yet always complaining of discrimination?  If this town did exsist, the people who chose to abide there would most likely be decisions of the parental units in the family.  Therefore the children would almost be forced to live in a non average community, like the children stuck in cults with no option to leave.  If a child was raised here, it would just allow for more possible problems.  With a ban of these specific objects it would only allow the children to become more curious as to why they are not allowed to use these objects or practices and potentially lead them in the direction of them. 

  Overall I think the town is a bad idea, and am hopeful that it is never even created.  If people wish to harshly follow the Catholic rules, let them do so in a regular town and actually resist the temptation instead of taking the easy way out and eliminating it.

Mr. Lucas

I would just first like to start off by saying that after reading about Mr. Lucas's view point it is good to hear about such safe procedures in the gay porn industry going on, as well as his morals relating to his work. 

Questions:

Have you ever worked in jobs that did not follow the safe procedures (sober stars, condoms, etc.) that you are currently involved with right now?

How did you come about the involvement in the pornography industry?

Congressional hearing

   After watching the Congressional hearing, I agree with Senator Blanche Lincoln about her view on children and internet pornography.

   Society today is obviously much different than our parents and grandparents generation.  When our parents were our age they had no computers with internet access.  Therefore our grandparents had no worries on watching over our parents to make sure they did not run into any inappropriate sites or pictures on the internet.  It was upsetting to hear that everyday words such as white house could possibly link a child to a pornographic site.

    I think that all parents should get a lesson on how to provide appropriate blockage from these sites.  They should talk to their children about what is right or wrong to look at online, and warn them about consequences if they chose to observe these sites.  Like Senator Blanche Lincoln says, "danger now occurs in the family room on their own internet."  Parents should not only focus on dangers from the external environment, but equally emphasize internet hazards as well. 

Pasties or no pasties?

   After hearing lecture 28, I was exposed to the rules about nude dancing that I have never previously known.  The current New York law for nude dancing requires the dancers to wear at least only g- strings, whereas in New Jersey "pasties" are required. 

   Apparently using pasties reduces the excitement somewhat.  As said in lecture, Justice John Paul Stevens claims it does affect the imagination level if pasties are used or not used.  Supposedly seeing the nipple causes secondary effects.

    I do not agree with this.  I feel that a pastie really does not change the appearance that much, the breast is still being exposed.  I do not believe that by causing the nipple, that the viewers excitement levels would decrease.  And is the reason the audience members are attending these places in the first place not for their viewing pleasure?  I also think that the laws should not vary from state to state, if showing the nipples is okay in New York then why not in New Jersey?  If they are going to place rules against this I feel that it should be in unison across the entire country.

Cartoons

  While looking over some of the blogs from other students in our class, I came across this blog.  When I first read the title, "There’s this black boy and this Oriental girl and they get naked and proceed to take a bath together…" and after reading the first line of the entry, stating that the two year old nephew was watching television, I instantly thought it was going to be about some pornography that the child gained access to. 

   After finding out it was a friday morning cartoon, I find it amusing myself as well.  I agree with this person as to how before taking this class I would have thought nothing of it as being inappropriate, but now have to some what believe that other people would tend to think otherwise.  It is amazing how this class taught me as to how people differ as to what they judge is appropriate for viewing and what is not.

Censorship

After hearing lecture 25 and listening about all the books, pictures, art, etc. that have been banned from a variety of places I am disappointed.  I feel, and have always felt this way, that censorship is not right.  I believe that no piece of work should be censored.  People have their rights, and if they wish to publish something, let them.  I also feel that all libraries and stores should carry these items.  If a parent believes that the work is not for their children's eyes, then do not allow them to look at them, or purchase them.  It is almost the same thing as pornographic magazines, with an age for purchasing them.  If a book is considered that obscene, then only allow persons over 18 to purchase them. 

   The fact that censorship is not only state based and that libraries, schools, etc. have the right to censor according to their own feelings I feel is also not right.  The one library in Tennessee that banned "How to Make Love like a Porn Star" by Jenna Jameson even though it was on a waiting list, I feel was wrong.  I think they should allow the people coming to the library to depict whether or not that book is appropriate to read, and if they feel that it is not, then they should not check out that book from the library.  But the opportunity for them to take it out if they wish should be there.  Banning the book only shelters people even more from every day topics.