10 Most Controversial Topics (according to Annie)
I was thinking back to many discussions I've had with family, friends, and classmates. Here I've listed the TOP 10 MOST CONTROVERSIAL topics (or unanswered questions) that always find a way to provoke me...and I've never been fully convinced of one's argument, as well, I've never been able to fully convince someone else either concerning any of these topics (unless that person share the same view right from the beginning). If you like, choose a topic or question that you'd like to answer here on my blog and I want to see what the rest of you are thinking and how convincing your argument can be. Just mention (by number) which topic you've chosen!
1) As we head into another decade of unrelentingly high divorce rates, could you give a reason (or theory) as to why people just can't stay married???
2) Perhaps this is a similar question, but do you think there has been less emphasis on family structure in the past 20 years? If so, what do you think has contributed to the growing destruction of the family system?
3) This may be a personal question...but are you conservative or liberal? other??? What are your reasons for your current position?
4) What do you think should be done about all the homeless people on our streets?
5) How do you feel about euthanasia?
6) Do you think that there should be more strict bans placed on pornography? what is your definition of "pornography" and do you distinguish it from "erotica?"
7) Do you think that the media has had adverse affects on kids these past 10-15 years? Why do some kids fall victim to media and the whole idea of "image" and others simply do not? Are schools or are parents responsible for educating these children?
8) How do you feel towards women in law enforcement, sports, or the military? Do you think that there are just some positions that a woman should not or can not hold?
9) How do you feel towards single women who purposefully become single mothers through a sperm bank? Do you think its important for a child to grow up with two parents (mom and dad) or do you think its not as important that the child grow up with both genders in their life? Is gender just an illusion then?
10) Are there ways to improve a capitalist society? Could socialism (given a few alterations) actually work? What do you think of our current capitalist society?
11 Comments:
i'll take 3, 5, 6 or 10. haha i like em all. assign me one... *licks lips in anticipation*
Hey Peter,
Okay...I'm going to make u discuss #6. I want to hear a male's perspective on this topic. So shoot!
cheers,
annie!
Beatnik,
Thank u so much for your posting. I'm not assigning out topics to specific individuals...people can choose to answer which ever topics they want! I can't wait to read what you've written!
Hey Beatnik,
Okay, so I've read your comments. I have many responses to what you've written, but right now I am going to discuss #6 (the distinction between porn and erotica). To begin, I think you and I can agree that one of the first differences between the two is artistic merit. The term "pornography" originates from the greek term "pornographia" which means to write about or draw a prostitute. The term "erotica" originates from the greek term "eros" which means love. Okay okay, so obviously some people prefer the "rough stuff" over the "soft core" baby blue stuff (which is fine), however, do you not think that the majority of pornography depicts women in very passive positions? I think that erotica doesn't always have to be of the soft core type with the cheezy spanish guitar playing in the back ground all the time, but erotica crosses into pornography when the roles change completely and sex is no longer a mutual act between the two people (or 3 or 4 or 5 or whatever!). I am a feminist myself, however, for all those extremists and conservative feminists out there that assume that all pornography is detrimental to women, or causes violence against them, well I don't share this view...because perhaps "some" pornographic films have helped women understand their sexuality and that they don't have to be these creatures who hate sex. However, there is always a fine line that is usually crossed...and the problem is that many men may become desensitized to the violence depicted in some films (example, when women are called "whores or sluts", "bitches", or when they're slapped around). A lot of times men will assume that this is what their partner wants in bed without even discussing it with her. This is the problem I have with pornography. So much of it is insulting to women and still pushes us into that world where women are suppose to actually hate sex.
Concerning : Do you think that there should be more strict bans placed on pornography? what is your definition of "pornography" and do you distinguish it from "erotica?"The first thing I should like to mention is that I am coming at this question from a Judeo-Christian perspective. Because I have certain philosophical and theological commitments, I am required to approach the question in a manner that is consistent with them. However, that does not mean I will be spewing dogma; my views are a lot less stringent than perhaps your regular fundamentalist might be.
I would like to see more stringent bans placed on pornography. I think that it is detrimental to the way that both men and women view sexuality. Notice here I did not say the way they view women. This is because I think that pornography creates a certain stereotype or image in men that men also have to live up to or follow. In a generic piece of pornography, you see the man as the aggressor and the woman as the submissive ‘bitch’ who takes it, and enjoys it. You rarely see overweight or plump men (with the exception of Ron Jeremy of course, ha!), even though there is a definite market for BBW’s (Big Beautiful Women). The man makes a woman moan, he makes her beg him for it, he cums, and it’s done. I’m sorry, but as far as I know, and I’m certainly no expert, there’s a lot more to the sexual act than the raw physical actions, culminating in male ejaculation. There are stereotypes and images being created of the woman (which is typically focussed on in feminist literature), but there are also stereotypes being placed on the man. Trust me, not all of us think solely of ourselves when it comes to the sexual experience. Unfortunately, that is the attitude being broadcast through pornography, one which men learn and apply in their own sexual lives, doing damage to themselves, and to the woman they are with.
One thing that I do object to when it comes to the definition of pornography is its focus on sexual acts towards women. This seems to be plainly false: any sexual act involving two people concerns both actors. If the piece is of one person, then it concerns the sexual acts of one person. But to construct a definition of pornography which looks at the positives and negatives purely in terms of effects on women is wrong. The feminist philosopher Catharine McKinnon uses this definition for pornography: “graphic sexual explicit subordination of women through pictures or words that also includes women dehumanized as sexual objects, things or commodities; enjoying pain or humiliation or rape; being tied up, cut, mutilated, bruised or physically hurt; in postures of sexual submission or servility or display; reduced to body parts, penetrated by objects…” [Catharine MacKinnon, Feminism UnModified: Discourses on Life and Law, (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1987)] I argue in a paper concerning speech acts and their relation to pornographic material that this definition is far too narrow to encompass all forms of what might be considered pornography. What is gay porn? Or porn designed specifically for women, in a way that a woman can understand? I write, “there is a small, but very vibrant market of pornography marketed towards women. Is this to say that pornography institutionalizes the subordination of women by women and for women? It is also safe to say that pornography made for women does not usually involve the brutal elements of subordination that the definition MacKinnon gives. Is an exception made in the definition of pornography for erotic material made by women for women? The definition that MacKinnon gives brings to mind images or torture, bondage and death. MacKinnon claims in her definition of pornography that the suffering of women is revelled in; the action of subordination and causing women to suffer actually occurs, following Austin’s speech act parts. Most erotic material designated for women does not subordinate women; erotic material for women tends to celebrate female sexuality, and describe sexual acts in ways that appeal to women. Not only that, but to paint pornography completely in light of the subordination of women in a patriarchal society is to ignore the presence of lesbians within the fabric of society. An assumption is made that no women would appreciate pornography; if a woman were granted the sexual agency required to produce pornography for women, it would be an illegitimate expression of female sexuality, as it would necessarily be co-opted automatically by the male majority.”
In terms of erotica, I would put it to you like this: Erotica is what pornography ought to be. It is the depiction of all the other aspects of sexuality that pornography leaves out. It is the depiction of a loving sexual relationship, encompassing all the elements of a complete relationship. In order to account for the various fetishes that are out there (many of which I have no problem with), and to account for the enjoyment of rough sex between couples, I would suggest that erotica is something shared only between two consenting adults, of themselves. So that a piece of erotica would be images or stories or videos made by the couple or for the couple. The problem with this is that there are obvious pieces of erotica which are useful and indeed good outside of that structure. Take for example Song of Songs, in the Old Testament. At first glance, it’s obviously a piece of erotica. It is not pornographic, but it sure is erotic. Or other pieces of art which are erotic, but I surely would not want to censor. (I’m not very knowledgeable about art, I can’t think of any names off hand). I don’t exactly know what to say about them.
One distinction that McKinnon does make that might be helpful (and which I agree with, to a limited extent) is the difference between obscenity and pornography. Obscenity is something to be discussed on the moral level, in terms of right and wrong. On McKinnon’s view, pornography is the subjugation of women (which I disagree with), but is not necessarily a distinctly moral question. I think some sort of distinction like this could be made between erotica and pornography: there might be some way in which pornography is a moral evil, where erotica is not a moral evil. What that way is, and exactly how it is to be defined is a different question, one to which I don’t think I have the answer to.
A further question to be asked on this issue, one that I was talking about with my roommates yesterday: is there anything intrinsically wrong with a nudist lifestyle? I don’t think that there is; Christian orthodoxy would be throwing fits at me for saying this. But I’ll leave that as a teaser, maybe I’ll outline my argument at another time. Something to think about though ;)
Concerning : Do you think that there should be more strict bans placed on pornography? what is your definition of "pornography" and do you distinguish it from "erotica?"The first thing I should like to mention is that I am coming at this question from a Judeo-Christian perspective. Because I have certain philosophical and theological commitments, I am required to approach the question in a manner that is consistent with them. However, that does not mean I will be spewing dogma; my views are a lot less stringent than perhaps your regular fundamentalist might be.
I would like to see more stringent bans placed on pornography. I think that it is detrimental to the way that both men and women view sexuality. Notice here I did not say the way they view women. This is because I think that pornography creates a certain stereotype or image in men that men also have to live up to or follow. In a generic piece of pornography, you see the man as the aggressor and the woman as the submissive ‘bitch’ who takes it, and enjoys it. You rarely see overweight or plump men (with the exception of Ron Jeremy of course, ha!), even though there is a definite market for BBW’s (Big Beautiful Women). The man makes a woman moan, he makes her beg him for it, he cums, and it’s done. I’m sorry, but as far as I know, and I’m certainly no expert, there’s a lot more to the sexual act than the raw physical actions, culminating in male ejaculation. There are stereotypes and images being created of the woman (which is typically focussed on in feminist literature), but there are also stereotypes being placed on the man. Trust me, not all of us think solely of ourselves when it comes to the sexual experience. Unfortunately, that is the attitude being broadcast through pornography, one which men learn and apply in their own sexual lives, doing damage to themselves, and to the woman they are with.
One thing that I do object to when it comes to the definition of pornography is its focus on sexual acts towards women. This seems to be plainly false: any sexual act involving two people concerns both actors. If the piece is of one person, then it concerns the sexual acts of one person. But to construct a definition of pornography which looks at the positives and negatives purely in terms of effects on women is wrong. The feminist philosopher Catharine McKinnon uses this definition for pornography: “graphic sexual explicit subordination of women through pictures or words that also includes women dehumanized as sexual objects, things or commodities; enjoying pain or humiliation or rape; being tied up, cut, mutilated, bruised or physically hurt; in postures of sexual submission or servility or display; reduced to body parts, penetrated by objects…” [Catharine MacKinnon, Feminism UnModified: Discourses on Life and Law, (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1987)] I argue in a paper concerning speech acts and their relation to pornographic material that this definition is far too narrow to encompass all forms of what might be considered pornography. What is gay porn? Or porn designed specifically for women, in a way that a woman can understand? I write, “there is a small, but very vibrant market of pornography marketed towards women. Is this to say that pornography institutionalizes the subordination of women by women and for women? It is also safe to say that pornography made for women does not usually involve the brutal elements of subordination that the definition MacKinnon gives. Is an exception made in the definition of pornography for erotic material made by women for women? The definition that MacKinnon gives brings to mind images or torture, bondage and death. MacKinnon claims in her definition of pornography that the suffering of women is revelled in; the action of subordination and causing women to suffer actually occurs, following Austin’s speech act parts. Most erotic material designated for women does not subordinate women; erotic material for women tends to celebrate female sexuality, and describe sexual acts in ways that appeal to women. Not only that, but to paint pornography completely in light of the subordination of women in a patriarchal society is to ignore the presence of lesbians within the fabric of society. An assumption is made that no women would appreciate pornography; if a woman were granted the sexual agency required to produce pornography for women, it would be an illegitimate expression of female sexuality, as it would necessarily be co-opted automatically by the male majority.”
In terms of erotica, I would put it to you like this: Erotica is what pornography ought to be. It is the depiction of all the other aspects of sexuality that pornography leaves out. It is the depiction of a loving sexual relationship, encompassing all the elements of a complete relationship. In order to account for the various fetishes that are out there (many of which I have no problem with), and to account for the enjoyment of rough sex between couples, I would suggest that erotica is something shared only between two consenting adults, of themselves. So that a piece of erotica would be images or stories or videos made by the couple or for the couple. The problem with this is that there are obvious pieces of erotica which are useful and indeed good outside of that structure. Take for example Song of Songs, in the Old Testament. At first glance, it’s obviously a piece of erotica. It is not pornographic, but it sure is erotic. Or other pieces of art which are erotic, but I surely would not want to censor. (I’m not very knowledgeable about art, I can’t think of any names off hand). I don’t exactly know what to say about them.
One distinction that McKinnon does make that might be helpful (and which I agree with, to a limited extent) is the difference between obscenity and pornography. Obscenity is something to be discussed on the moral level, in terms of right and wrong. On McKinnon’s view, pornography is the subjugation of women (which I disagree with), but is not necessarily a distinctly moral question. I think some sort of distinction like this could be made between erotica and pornography: there might be some way in which pornography is a moral evil, where erotica is not a moral evil. What that way is, and exactly how it is to be defined is a different question, one to which I don’t think I have the answer to.
A further question to be asked on this issue, one that I was talking about with my roommates yesterday: is there anything intrinsically wrong with a nudist lifestyle? I don’t think that there is; Christian orthodoxy would be throwing fits at me for saying this. But I’ll leave that as a teaser, maybe I’ll outline my argument at another time. Something to think about though ;)
Peter,
Thank you SO much for your message! I honestly can't find any way to argue with you, since you and I completely see eye to eye regarding this topic.
Furthermore, I'd like to thank you for pointing out that it is not just a problem for women..but that it is also a problem for men. Pornography DOES imply that men have to be the aggressors...and perhaps less loving during sex (I'm not saying that all men are like this.....and that this is expected of men in bed). All I am saying is that the problem with pornography is not just in the way women are viewed...but like you said...in the way men and women view sexuality! I am going to discuss this further with some of my other male friends and see how they view pornography and what kind of an impact its had on them!
Thank you once again! :)
Annie!
Jenny,
You are one smart cookie! I agree with you. There is obviously nothing wrong with trying to get the best education possible..or going back to school to upgrade and there is nothing wrong with both parents being out in the work force. However, I agree with you, that our children are becoming neglected, left to be raised by television, computers, and babysitters. There are less families having dinner together and spending weekends together. So how do we keep up with a society that is changing so quickly? Do we work less? Do we make a conscious decision to live a more simple life...do we have less children? There must obviously be some solution(s) here...but the only things I've had thrown at me is that women should never have gone out to the work force and left the children at home. WTF? Maybe men should take on a more nurturing role overall and spend some more time with their children? I dunno...
That's a great story. Waiting for more. dental insurance Pain relief acti activest back backer belt b internet blackjack Top five ways to quit smoking Alpine s611 cd changer Acura interga and honda competition parts Easter bingo cards
good evening dudes. I'm really into shoes and I had been looking allowing for regarding that exact model. The prices seeking the boots were all over 250 bucks everwhere. But completely I base this site selling them as a remedy for half price. I absolutely love those [url=http://www.shoesempire.com]prada sneakers[/url]. I will definetly buy those. what do you think?
hi bros. I'm actually into shoes and I was digging allowing for regarding that singular brand. The prices as regards the sneakers were around 340 dollars on every page. But definitively I base this location selling them as a remedy for half price. I exceptionally want these [url=http://www.shoesempire.com]gucci sneakers[/url]. I will probably buy them. what can you tell me about these?
Post a Comment
<< Home