With how much I go to FA...

[wolfwings]

...I have to say this.

If you're going to leave that archive because they chose the road both of least administrative work for a free site, but more importantly the road of least censorship, please ask yourselves why you were even there in the first place in a place that allows art depicting drug-use, openly sexual art at all, violence, robbery, or any number of other equally-illegal crimes, some of which carry higher penalties than being convicted of being a pedophile.

The "slippery slope" may be as overused as "It's to protect the children!" to my ears, but it doesn't make the former quote any less valid a way to refute the latter quote. If you support censorship of artwork at any level, you are still supporting censorship of artwork. Any 'moral' arguments you make to the contrary are still arguments supporting censorship. And at the same time, you can already opt out of seeing adult artwork at all, and FA is adding support for much higher-granularity blocking of artwork you don't want to see. Don't like it? Guess what, like LJ, you aren't being forced to view everyone's journal entries. Don't argue for a ban when a simple 'Ignore' will function just as well.

And if the above makes you want off my friends list, lemme know. This is just about the only time I'll ever actually remove someone from my actual friends list instead of just my default view, is over issues like censorship, and by request to boot. My outlook is that it is not for myself, or anyone else, to judge another's choices of artwork to draw or share. The risk is entirely their own, and they can and will be judged properly in their own time. But not by me. I may choose not to associate with them, but I have no right to make outright judgements on them.

Comments

[ruggels.livejournal.com]

..you mean like smoking?
and as to "memological Supremacy, Well so be it, because I do think there are ideas out there, like having sex with minors that do not deserve debate..

Scott

Sex + Minors = Bad!

[wolfwings.livejournal.com]

To risk sounding like a broken record though, defining what is a minor would be a topic worth debate. Defining sex is something that would be unlikely to take long, beyond possibly defining levels of sexuality. So while the combination of the two deserves no debate, the components of the two may?

Re: Sex + Minors = Bad!

[ruggels.livejournal.com]

You think like a programmer, and this is rules lawyering and splitting hairs, but you are correct. but the legal definitions of age of majority have been set by the states. The definition fo sex, well you could take a medical dictionary approach or take a former president'ss definition? :-)

Scott

Re: Sex + Minors = Bad!

[wolfwings.livejournal.com]

Touche.

And it may very well be because I am a programmer quite often by trade if not by hobby.

[aerowolf.livejournal.com]

I don't particularly like cigarette smoke, but I'm not about to ask smokers to stop smoking -- and I vote against ANY measure to increase cigarette taxes, or place limits on where people may smoke. As well, I offer smokers a safe haven, when I can, where they know that at least one person isn't about to preach to them to stop.

The problem with memeological supremacy is that it's the reason why Islam is so dangerous to Western culture -- it allows no room for debate, no room for other ideas, no room for other religions, no room for any question of the rites or rituals or trappings or the stamping of "WHORE" across every page of the passport of any woman who comes from a different culture who does something totally normal in her culture, but not in the culture within which she is travelling (such as sitting in the front seat of a car with a male driver, discussing business).

Thus, I reject any notion that memeological supremacy in any form is a good thing. (One bad apple spoils the whole barrel... and right now, we have more than a single example to reference. I merely chose Islam because the other examples I could cite are more incendiary.)

I do not debate that having sex with minors is a bad thing. (I'm a survivor of sexual abuse between the ages of 3 and 12, myself, and I know how much it fucked me up.) I must question, though, what your idea of a "minor" is. Does it mesh with mine? Does it mesh with the law? Does it mesh with, say, WolfWings's? And if it does mesh with the law, which jurisdiction?

Saying "the law is the most important guide in determining the age of majority" is a cop-out, as it has been shown time and time again that the law is made by self-serving politicians who have absolutely no connection with the real world. As well, it's been shown that in many jurisdictions, the age of majority is seriously... lacking. And in others, the age of majority is artificially high for no good reason.

Further, what about the other cultures where it's alright, where the social mechanics are in place such that kids who have sex young don't have to hide it, and don't have to go through many, many years of therapy in order to learn to deal with cultural normality?

There are certainly ideas that do not deserve debate... but there are many more that do, that are ignored by those too self-righteous to discern any kind of legitimate difference in the ideas that are brought up for debate.

Kyle