David Cameron Decides Porn is Bad for You, Blocks All Access to Pornography in UK

[Sam Owen]

Block it. I've got kids and I worry sometimes that when they're online, they'll learn about the birds and the bees. The net isn't all good..

 

[nickdnz]

Block it. I've got kids and I worry sometimes that when they're online, they'll learn about the birds and the bees. The net isn't all good..

But surely as a parent - its up to you to decide what your kids can and cannot see. Not the government. There are plenty of free site censors that currently exist if you want to block it.

 

[Draggs]

But surely as a parent - its up to you to decide what your kids can and cannot see. Not the government. There are plenty of free site censors that currently exist if you want to block it.

But that's too hard! I'll just blame everybody else until my problem goes away.

 

[Howzy]

Block it. I've got kids and I worry sometimes that when they're online, they'll learn about the birds and the bees. The net isn't all good..

There not safe forever. Someone once said to me that the more u hide stuff like drugs, alcohol and porn the less they understand therfor when they get to a teenager there more likely to try drugs as they havnt understood the dangers because they have been hidden

 

[TRF_heineken]

I guess the difference between you and I - is I didn't drop out and instead study media studies at post-graduate level.

phil·o·soph·i·cal (f

l

-s

f

-k

l) also phil·o·soph·ic (-

k)adj.1. Of, relating to, or based on a system of philosophy.
2. Characteristic of a philosopher, as in equanimity, enlightenment, and wisdom.



And no I totally disagree that 'pron' is destinct fom other genres. You say "its a porn scene from a non-porn movie" - that doesn't work. Otherwise every porn movie could be could a light comedy or w/e with a very long porn scene. There is something called generic mixing in films - and genres within films are almost always debatable.

I'd be suprised from your reaction if you've read any Foucault. Part of his study of genealogy is looking how things which are considered innate (which he argues any cultural product or practice isn't) are instead discursively produced and created as a part of the context within the culture.

He clearly hasn't watched the non-porno movie: "Zack and Miri make a porno"

 

[munstermuffin]

Just out of curiosity what the line. Like if there a movie with fair bit of sex like "Eyees Wide Shut" or Friends With Benefits do they block sex parts or what

 

[ZeFrenchy]

He clearly hasn't watched the non-porno movie: "Zack and Miri make a porno"

The film of the century surely. I seriously thought it was hilarious.

 

[TRF_heineken]

Just out of curiosity what the line. Like if there a movie with fair bit of sex like "Eyees Wide Shut" or Friends With Benefits do they block sex parts or what

What about Hall Pass??

I think the term they use is explicit. To me, any genitalia falls under explicit nudity. but that isn't always considered porn. Perhaps the difference comes in with movies like Eyes wide shut, is that during the sex scenes, they don't show the penetration of the penis with the vagina, nor the movement thereafter. What they usually show is the movement of the bodies from some sort of angle, where you can see a bit of bush, the female body and the breasts while most of the time they show the male doing the thrusting and his ass wobbling.

 

[Peat]

Block it. I've got kids and I worry sometimes that when they're online, they'll learn about the birds and the bees. The net isn't all good..

This way your kids will learn about the birds and the bees... and hacking at the same time.

Or at least some kids will.

Maybe this is what it's all about. Cameron wants a more tech savvy generation of kids.

 

[munstermuffin]

What about Hall Pass??

I think the term they use is explicit. To me, any genitalia falls under explicit nudity. but that isn't always considered porn. Perhaps the difference comes in with movies like Eyes wide shut, is that during the sex scenes, they don't show the penetration of the penis with the vagina, nor the movement thereafter. What they usually show is the movement of the bodies from some sort of angle, where you can see a bit of bush, the female body and the breasts while most of the time they show the male doing the thrusting and his ass wobbling.

But isn't that softporn ?? Laid Bare , Sin Cities the Telivision X previews these are all tv shows surely easier access than net

 

[TRF_heineken]

But isn't that softporn ?? Laid Bare , Sin Cities the Telivision X previews these are all tv shows surely easier access than net

to you and me, yes it is. But to broadcasters, there seems to be a difference.

 

[nickdnz]

He clearly hasn't watched the non-porno movie: "Zack and Miri make a porno"

The film of the century surely. I seriously thought it was hilarious.

I'm a massive Kevin Smith fan!

 

[Big Ewis]

I guess the difference between you and I - is I didn't drop out and instead study media studies at post-graduate level.

Actually there are more, and far greater, substantial differences between you and me nick :lol:
And going online to compare yourself to others is hardly going to make me respect you, and I know you'll say you don't care but the comment is made. Deal as you will.

And I enjoyed the random inclusion of the definition of "philosophy"...I was just briefly having fun with the way you spelled it there...
how would you assess your knowledge of Ancient Greek, nick ? Honest question.

Yeah it's almost hard to beleive there are some French speakers still there after two centuries of near constant assimilation. Oddly enough a small city near me Welland, has a number of French speakers, they moved down decades ago to work in steel and you can occasionally hear French spoken in the city at restauraunts etc.

interesting !
The thing that gets me is how South Africans have completely dropped the language. I'm sure there are street/place names in French everywhere, as their first names and surnames for example...but there isn't a trace of language it seems, though a BUNCH of Huguenots went there...


Finally:
about the non-pron films containing sex scenes, at this point we're just playing with semantics...calling it pron, NOT calling it pron...but basically yes, it would be simply a pron scene in a non-pron production.

Take the best movie of all-time for instance: when Neo is interrogated early in the film by all 3 agents, and his mouth closes up and they infiltrate him with the small robot/insect, the sci-fi masterpiece takes a turn into horror, temporarily, but for the benefit of the film as a whole. But as for the intrinsic nature of the scene, it is clearly horror (for specific, measurable reasons).
Elements may all contribute to a greater end, and may constructively apply to one, singular structure - but those remain heterogeneous, distinct elements inherently. Very simple math. I don't care that there is the expression "genre mixing" or wtvr you mentioned nick, there's more to debate and 'discursive' (a word you seem to fancy ) analysis than template words or expressions.

A very good example, but not well known, is the (for this mind) masterpiece film "Fire in the Sky". The entire film is based on the legislative, societal aspects of the tale, before the last 15 minutes of the film...which are PURE sci-fi horror. Masterfully directed...
Anyways, above: the points I defend.

 

[TRF_heineken]

interesting !
The thing that gets me is how South Africans have completely dropped the language. I'm sure there are street/place names in French everywhere, as their first names and surnames for example...but there isn't a trace of language it seems, though a BUNCH of Huguenots went there...

Okay, Now I understand.

You have never even read the History of South Africa and how the French, Dutch and British influenced our country. Before making stupid remarks, as always, please go and get your facts straight...

 

[Big Ewis]

Okay, Now I understand.

You have never even read the History of South Africa and how the French, Dutch and British influenced our country. Before making stupid remarks, as always, please go and get your facts straight...

Now, you wouldn't call your comment extremely uncalled for, unnecessarily aggressive and ultimately foolish, now would you friend ?
You need to take a pill and stop bothering people gratuitously heineken, if you have a problem with me send me a PM, but don't post silly replies unprompted. Where the FK do I insult you there, and where the HELL do I deserve such a stupid, thoughtless and ill-minded reply ?

As for the matter at hand, yeh I've got more important things to study up than the history of South fkn Africa, yes. There's more to my life than this as priority, and I never claimed anywhere that I did read it. "Get your facts straight" ?! Where the hell does your stupidity lead you ? There isn't a statement of fact or an attempt at it, I'm just wondering about smt completely relevant and natural for a Frenchman.

And stop with your pathetic generalization, I tell you, in truth, there's more intelligence in my current post you have gathered in your 3000 posts, so back off and let's cut the crap. You're a fkn idiot, and that's that. Don't bother for no reason, just don't. It's stupid, illogical, uncalled for.

 

[TRF_heineken]

Now, you wouldn't call your comment extremely uncalled for, unnecessarily aggressive and ultimately foolish, now would you friend ?
You need to take a pill and stop bothering people gratuitously heineken, if you have a problem with me send me a PM, but don't post silly replies unprompted. Where the FK do I insult you there, and where the HELL do I deserve such a stupid, thoughtless and ill-minded reply ?

As for the matter at hand, yeh I've got more important things to study up than the history of South fkn Africa, yes. There's more to my life than this as priority, and I never claimed anywhere that I did read it. "Get your facts straight" ?! Where the hell does your stupidity lead you ? There isn't a statement of fact or an attempt at it, I'm just wondering about smt completely relevant and natural for a Frenchman.

And stop with your pathetic generalization, I tell you, in truth, there's more intelligence in my current post you have gathered in your 3000 posts, so back off and let's cut the crap. You're a fkn idiot, and that's that. Don't bother for no reason, just don't. It's stupid, illogical, uncalled for.

Okay, fine, I'll do your homework for you.

The Huguenots who arrived at the Cape of Good Hope at the end of the 17th century, consisted of only a fraction of the large-scale Protestant flight from France after the revocation of the Edict on Nantes in 1685. Nevertheless their numbers were large enough to have a considerable influence and leave a lasting impression on the young settlement at the Cape. As early as 1671 the first Huguenot refugee, Francois Villion (later Viljoen), arrived at the Cape. In 1686 the brothers Guillaume and Francois du Toit arrived. After the main stream of Huguenots arrived during 1688 – 1689, they comprised approximately one sixth of the free burgher population, after which individual arrivals continued sporadically until the termination of the state subsidised emigration in 1707.
A complete surnames list (original spellings) of Huguenots who emigrated to the Cape and have descendants in South Africa, appears in the column at left. Not all of these surnames exist in South Africa today, since a number of Huguenot "stamouers" (founding fathers) only propagated in the female lines.

The potential emigrants from Europe were allowed to take only the minimum amount of necessary luggage along. After their arrival at the Cape, they were expected to make a living from agriculture, business or by practicing a trade. If they decided to farm, they were allotted free farms, and implements, seed and animal stock would be provided, the cost of which had to be later reimbursed to the Dutch East India Company in terms of produce or any other goods.

The Dutch East India Company encouraged the Huguenots to emigrate to the Cape because they shared the same religious beliefs, and also due to the fact that most of them were highly trained craftsmen or experienced farmers. Initially they concentrated on wheat and sheep farming, specifically as it would provide an income sooner that would have been the case with viticulture and oenology (the growing of grapes and making of wine, brandy and vinegar). They, as well as their descendants, proved that they were hard working and industrious, and their efforts later led to a marked increase in the improvement of quality Cape wines. A number of wine estates have French names to this day, as a reminder of their important contribution to this industry in the Western Cape. The number of vine plants increased from 100 in 1655 (three years after the arrival of Jan van Riebeeck at the Cape) to 1,5 million in 1700.

When John Ovington visited the Cape in 1693, he wrote:

"Their vineyards have been established over an area of more than seventy five English miles, yet they still have their eyes on large pieces of virgin soil before them. In this district they farm with livestock, plant maize, establish vineyards and improve everything conscientiously for the greatest benefit .... Their vineyards, which they have multiplied to a large variety of cultivars, can now also provide the passing ships…"
A number of Huguenots were listed as experienced "vineyard pruners". The De Villiers brothers in particular arrived at the Cape with a reputation for viticulture and oenology. Through the years the De Villiers brothers planted more than 40 000 vines at the Cape. They moved from the original farm allocated to them (which they named La Rochelle) to finally settle on individual allottments near Franschhoek with the names Bourgogne, Champagne and La Brie.
The legacy of the Huguenots was however far reaching. Today thousands of their proud descendants carry with dignity surnames of which the spelling is unchanged from the original, such as De Villiers, Malan, Du Toit, Du Plessis, Du Preez and Malherbe; the spelling of others were localised, such as Viljoen, Cronjé, Pienaar, Retief and Senekal. Certain first names which the Huguenots brought with them are poplular amongst their descendants, especially male christian names such as Francois, Pierre, Etienne, Jacques and Louis. Research has shown that the contribution of the Huguenot genes to the Afrikaner people amounts to some 24%. Their descendants are proud of ancestors who sacrificed a great deal - even their country of birth - and were willing to suffer personally for their religious convictions.

The Huguenots are characterised by their intrinsic pride, diligence and honesty. Although they strove to maintain their own identify at first, they soon intermarried with the other colonists to fully become just South Africans. Within two generations even their home language, French, largely disappeared.

As a group the Huguenots arrived at a very early stage of the settlement at the Cape when the white population was still relatively small in numbers . What they experienced as children of the Reformation in their own country, they brought as spiritual assets to their new country of choice.

Perhaps their most important influence on South Africa, is the fact that they - like their Dutch compatriots - were supporters of Calvinism. In his work Het leven van Johannes Calvijn ("The life of John Calvin") D'Arbez concludes:

"Nowhere on earth is the legacy of Calvin stronger than in South Africa, where the spirit of Calvin has not waned due to the influence of the twentieth century, as has been the case, and still is the case, in the countries of Europe".
A number of writers mention different characteristics of the Afrikaner nation which could be ascribed to the influence of the Huguenots: physical features such as a darker complexion and black hair, a cheerful disposition, stamina, artistic ability, individualism and a sense of independence, a love for personal and political freedom, courtesy, hospitality, humour and joyfulness, and ingenuity (the ability to make a plan).
A survey published in the Sunday Times Magazine of October 4th, 1981, indicated that of the 36 most common surnames amongst the white population, nine are of Huguenot origin. They are the surnames Nel, Du Plessis, Coetzee, Fourie, Du Toit, Le Roux, Viljoen, Marais and Du Preez. In the first four volumes of the South African Biographical Dictionary ("Suid-Afrikaanse Biografiese Woordeboek") articles of 25 individuals with the surname De Villiers appear, seventeen about Du Toit's, twelve on Malan's, nine on Joubert's, and eight on Viljoen's. Desendants of Huguenots can be found amongst the leaders and achievers on every terrain in South Africa - religious, social, economical, cultural, research and development in the areas of agriculture, science and engineering; sport and politics, as military leaders and statesmen, as poets and philosphers and authors.

The Huguenots did indeed leave a direct and indirect legacy in South Africa. They did not continue to live as an separate, clearly identifiable subgroup. Already early in the eighteenth century they were assimilated by the rest of the population at the Cape as a result of both political measures and their minority numbers. But despite their relatively small numbers, they nevertheless left an indelible mark on and made a valuable contribution during the early years of the settlement at the Cape of Good Hope to various areas - economy, education, technology, agriculture, culture, church life, religion, etc.

The legacy of the Huguenots is wide-ranging but subtle; throughout the years researchers looked in vain for a definitive French influence under the Cape colonists, and only the names of people and farms remain. Whatever their contribution, it can no longer be clearly identified separately from that of their fellow colonists. But the Huguenot sense for values remains, and romanticism still surrounds the French farm names in the Western Cape, reminding us of the Huguenot refugees. Nobody expresses it better that Maurice Boucher in his "French Speakers at the Cape":

"What remains of lasting value, is the proud heritage of men, women and children who suffered for a cause and followed the road of exile to retain their spiritual integrity. This was certainly true of most of the refugees, and the longing which they must have felt for the country which they left for ever is reflected in the names which they have chosen for their farms which they laid out along the hills of the Western Cape: Languedoc and Provence, La Brie, Calais and Cabrières; and many others which recalled memories of images from their childhood and the roots from which they sprang."

Courtesy of http://www.hugenoot.org.za/huguenots.htm

I will insult, call you out, etc. just like sifplay and all those before him for making stupid/false/inaccurate statements without facts.

Well here's the facts for you.

The French made a huge cultural contribution to SA, but their numbers were too small to overtake english and dutch...

 

[nickdnz]

Actually there are more, and far greater, substantial differences between you and me nick :lol:
And going online to compare yourself to others is hardly going to make me respect you, and I know you'll say you don't care but the comment is made. Deal as you will.

And I enjoyed the random inclusion of the definition of "philosophy"...I was just briefly having fun with the way you spelled it there...
how would you assess your knowledge of Ancient Greek, nick ? Honest question.

interesting !
The thing that gets me is how South Africans have completely dropped the language. I'm sure there are street/place names in French everywhere, as their first names and surnames for example...but there isn't a trace of language it seems, though a BUNCH of Huguenots went there...

Finally:
about the non-pron films containing sex scenes, at this point we're just playing with semantics...calling it pron, NOT calling it pron...but basically yes, it would be simply a pron scene in a non-pron production.

Take the best movie of all-time for instance: when Neo is interrogated early in the film by all 3 agents, and his mouth closes up and they infiltrate him with the small robot/insect, the sci-fi masterpiece takes a turn into horror, temporarily, but for the benefit of the film as a whole. But as for the intrinsic nature of the scene, it is clearly horror (for specific, measurable reasons).
Elements may all contribute to a greater end, and may constructively apply to one, singular structure - but those remain heterogeneous, distinct elements inherently. Very simple math. I don't care that there is the expression "genre mixing" or wtvr you mentioned nick, there's more to debate and 'discursive' (a word you seem to fancy ) analysis than template words or expressions.

A very good example, but not well known, is the (for this mind) masterpiece film "Fire in the Sky". The entire film is based on the legislative, societal aspects of the tale, before the last 15 minutes of the film...which are PURE sci-fi horror. Masterfully directed...
Anyways, above: the points I defend.

1. The comparrison was at your reaction to my response.
2. Ancient Greek the language or history? I know very little of Ancient Greek the language. I have a moderate knowledge of Ancient Greek history and mythology from doing classical studies in highschool the odd interest paper during first year university.
3. Oh right - you wanna make fun of me for typos
4. You say its semantics - but what you are claiming is that mainstream films contain 'porn scenes'. My first point is that there is nothing 'true' or 'innate' about what is porn - its a discursive production which meanings continuously negotiated and renegotiated. There is nothing instrinsic about it.
5. I use the word discursive because I don't know of another word which means the same thing. And I'm not sure you understand what it means. When I say something is discurvisely produced - I mean that the language and ideologies we attach to the topic - porn in this instance - define what the the topic is. For example - someone from 200 years ago may consider something as pornographic which I consider otherwise - however context changes and the only thing that remains is that something fills a space known as 'pornography'. If I'm wrong explain to me why there is an innate property to porn, and what exactly it is that will be agreed upon by everyone in every culture. If there isn't one - then it is discurviely produced and thus has no innate being.
6. Even if we accept that there is something innately pornographic. And movies just jump back and forward between genres (which are innate such as porn - and thus everyone agrees upon what a genre consists of). Does that mean that a ban in pornography would involve banning mainstream films based off one scene? That's why its problematic.
7. I hate comments like this "there's more to debate and 'discursive' (a word you seem to fancy) analysis than template words or expressions." because what it means to me is that instead of thinking and actually arguing against a point - you'll be lazy and try and discredit the point by saying its template, but not even explain why its template or what particular words and expressions you have the problem with.

 

[Big Ewis]

Okay, fine, I'll do your homework for you.



Courtesy of http://www.hugenoot.org.za/huguenots.htm

I will insult, call you out, etc. just like sifplay and all those before him for making stupid/false/inaccurate statements without facts.

Well here's the facts for you.

The French made a huge cultural contribution to SA, but their numbers were too small to overtake english and dutch...

Yeah I figured, I just said THE LANGUAGE GOT LOST. That's it...that's all I said....

1. The comparrison was at your reaction to my response.
2. Ancient Greek the language or history? I know very little of Ancient Greek the language. I have a moderate knowledge of Ancient Greek history and mythology from doing classical studies in highschool the odd interest paper during first year university.
3. Oh right - you wanna make fun of me for typos that wasn't a typo, you spelled it that way for a reason and you know it
4. You say its semantics - but what you are claiming is that mainstream films contain 'porn scenes'. My first point is that there is nothing 'true' or 'innate' about what is porn - its a discursive production which meanings continuously negotiated and renegotiated. There is nothing instrinsic about it. that's just so wrong fundamentally and on subsequent levels...
5. I use the word discursive because I don't know of another word which means the same thing. And I'm not sure you understand what it means. When I say something is discurvisely produced - I mean that the language and ideologies we attach to the topic - porn in this instance - define what the the topic is. For example - someone from 200 years ago may consider something as pornographic which I consider otherwise - however context changes and the only thing that remains is that something fills a space known as 'pornography'. If I'm wrong explain to me why there is an innate property to porn, and what exactly it is that will be agreed upon by everyone in every culture. If there isn't one - then it is discurviely produced and thus has no innate being. an ex-philosophy major who doesn't know the word "discursive". That sounds likely. I don't buy the "all things are relative" argument. There are norms, rigid definitions to everything. The fact of men's opinions and fashions of a time vs. another time can't account for an example of anything. It's just a fact of history...in certain cultures, killing is fine, in others it's reprehensible. Well obviously killing is wrong for specific reasons, practical but more importantly moral...and so on for any example. Pron is pron, as defined clearly above, no need to make a fuss.

6. Even if we accept that there is something innately pornographic. And movies just jump back and forward between genres (which are innate such as porn - and thus everyone agrees upon what a genre consists of). Does that mean that a ban in pornography would involve banning mainstream films based off one scene? That's why its problematic.
Yes. Because what is reprehensible to them in actual full-on pron, they find again in that film (if it fits the criteria). Obviously, yes.

7. I hate comments like this "there's more to debate and 'discursive' (a word you seem to fancy) analysis than template words or expressions." because what it means to me is that instead of thinking and actually arguing against a point - you'll be lazy and try and discredit the point by saying its template, but not even explain why its template or what particular words and expressions you have the problem with.
That's all wrong, I gave you my tangible, hard logic with arguments. Also, you DID just use a template of an expression.

But Nick, there are very childish ways in your last few posts there, obviously you'll retort by saying the same about me; so I'm really not interested anymore. I think we've exchanged enough. Comparing your academic progress to some guy online...looking for some sort of social recognition on some rugby forum...it's just...well, you know.

Pron is pron...just as much as a tree is a tree; all things are limited and intrinsically defined naturally, perfectly distinct from all other things. No one category mingles with any other, for it is its own category. No one is more 'you' than yourself. There are norms all around that constitute the world. There is Good, and there is Evil; even if you don't believe in God. Things are as they are, clearly defined, governed by rigid laws, and nothing more nothing less...

That, is clearly my standpoint. If you mean to criticize that, go ahead. I may not reply, depending on your response. No offense. Talking from the heart here, kindly.

 

[TRF_heineken]

Yeah I figured, I just said THE LANGUAGE GOT LOST. That's it...that's all I said....




But Nick, there are very childish ways in your last few posts there, obviously you'll retort by saying the same about me; so I'm really not interested anymore. I think we've exchanged enough. Comparing your academic progress to some guy online...looking for some sort of social recognition on some rugby forum...it's just...well, you know.

Pron is pron...just as much as a tree is a tree; all things are limited and intrinsically defined naturally, perfectly distinct from all other things. No one category mingles with any other, for it is its own category. No one is more 'you' than yourself. There are norms all around that constitute the world. There is Good, and there is Evil; even if you don't believe in God. Things are as they are, clearly defined, governed by rigid laws, and nothing more nothing less...

That, is clearly my standpoint. If you mean to criticize that, go ahead. I may not reply, depending on your response. No offense. Talking from the heart here, kindly.

Pron is Pron... Wow living up to your grammatically challenged award I see...

Bwhahahahahaha

 

[nickdnz]

an ex-philosophy major who doesn't know the word "discursive". That sounds likely. I don't buy the "all things are relative" argument. There are norms, rigid definitions to everything. The fact of men's opinions and fashions of a time vs. another time can't account for an example of anything. It's just a fact of history...in certain cultures, killing is fine, in others it's reprehensible. Well obviously killing is wrong for specific reasons, practical but more importantly moral...and so on for any example. Pron is pron, as defined clearly above, no need to make a fuss.

Yes. Because what is reprehensible to them in actual full-on pron, they find again in that film (if it fits the criteria). Obviously, yes.

That's all wrong, I gave you my tangible, hard logic with arguments. Also, you DID just use a template of an expression.

But Nick, there are very childish ways in your last few posts there, obviously you'll retort by saying the same about me; so I'm really not interested anymore. I think we've exchanged enough. Comparing your academic progress to some guy online...looking for some sort of social recognition on some rugby forum...it's just...well, you know.

Pron is pron...just as much as a tree is a tree; all things are limited and intrinsically defined naturally, perfectly distinct from all other things. No one category mingles with any other, for it is its own category. No one is more 'you' than yourself. There are norms all around that constitute the world. There is Good, and there is Evil; even if you don't believe in God. Things are as they are, clearly defined, governed by rigid laws, and nothing more nothing less...

That, is clearly my standpoint. If you mean to criticize that, go ahead. I may not reply, depending on your response. No offense. Talking from the heart here, kindly.

1. We'll have to agree to disagree that there is an innate nature to everything. Right is right and wrong is wrong is an extremely dogmatic way at looking at the world. Does everyone know what is right and wrong? Because if they do I'd assume we wouldn't be disagreeing as we'd both know right from wrong. And if we don't all know right from wrong, whose right is right? I've never heard of a philosophy major with that view, basically because its so impossible to argue. You say there are norms and then you say there are rigid definitions - as one and the same. Do you not see how that is a contradiction? If something is defined by a generally agreed upon consensus - then it is discursively produced and therefore not innate.

2. But now you are condoning censoring works of art that are not as a whole text pornographic. How do you not see that as problematic?

3. No you have not. You have made claims that things do have an intrinsic value and that porn is porn is porn - but you have given no logical reason as to why that is - or given me a reason to why porn is not a discursive product. If I've missed you genius logic somewhere feel free to redirect me.

4. I did just use a template in my expression? What are you talking about? By template do you mean a theoretical framework? If so then of course my arguments use frameworks of Foucault and Nietzche - because of relevance to the topic. I'd rather you used some kind of framework to work from other than what you feel to be true - and therefore needs to be accepted as so.

5. Once again point to where I am being childish - your using that lazy way of arguing yet again of just labelling something - without addressing it.

6. I'm not looking for any social recognition on a rugby forum - and I know I really hurt your feelings that I dismissed your expertise in Philosophy based off two years of uni, but really I think its you that seem to have a complex here. I'm sure that are people here with no uni experience and are extremely bright. Regardless I'm trying to have a discussion relating to the thread.

7. Well as I stated above we'll just have to agree to disagree - as you will not provide any logical reason why everything is innate.