5 ms·

Yeah nice try, buddy. If I post the blowjob scene from Gender Queer here u/dang is going to ban my account, but you’re free to google it and say whether or not

by taxyz 4y ago

Yeah nice try, buddy. If I post the blowjob scene from Gender Queer here u/dang is going to ban my account, but you’re free to google it and say whether or not it’s more explicit than a woman baring her breast. While we’re at it, how un-feminist and objectifying to imply that a woman’s body should be overly sexualized. Isn’t treating men’s and women’s nipples differently how we train kids to objectify women? If anything we need more Playboy in schools to destigmatize a women’s bare body. #FreeTheNipple

a_shovel 4y ago
Yes, a blowjob is more explicit than a bare breast. This is not relevant to the topic currently being discussed, which is about how dishonest it is to compare a depiction of a sex act in a memoir about coming to terms with one's own identity and sexuality with pornography.
- taxyz 4y ago
  You’re hiding behind it being a memoir as if that’s a meaningful distinction or somehow the interest in discovering identity outweighs the harm in having sexually explicit material in schools. If Riley Reid put out a graphic memoir about tearing down taboos in sex and confronting “slut shaming” you wouldn’t advocate for it to be in schools. If you’re trying to claim I’m making some sort of false analogy or moral equivalency then you should try to answer my original question: what is the limiting principle? Because if it’s as weak as “it’s a memoir that’s about discovering identity” it’s not only a weak argument that few would agree with but it opens the door to a lot of other stuff that you’re already trying to rule out. What if Playboy helps some boys discover their straight identity? Is that not worth discovering? Some young girls might find Playboy helpful in discovering their lesbian identity. Wrap a story around it and it’s apparently good to go for schools.
  - a_shovel 4y ago
    My "limiting principle" is "not being porn." I'm not going to try to fully define porn, otherwise I'd be here all day, but I think one obvious requirement is that it is designed primarily to cause sexual arousal. Based on the excerpts from Gender Queer that I've seen posted to support its ban, this is a test that it plainly fails. It is unclear what harm you believe Gender Queer might cause to teenagers.
    - taxyz 4y ago
      In the words of Sandra Day O'Connor "I know it when I see it." The problem you've highlighted with defining what porn is is not a new debate and as you've admitted we'd be here all day - and likely still not agree on a definition. The problem with your definition is that what people find arousing is a pretty wide spectrum and would include things that are not traditionally regarded as porn. Going back to our thought experiment, at what point would my theoretical graphic memoir of Riley Reid no longer be porn? What would the words to picture ratio have to be? You can make this same argument about Gender Queer; does the inclusion of the illustrations add any significant value to a memoir about someone discovering their identity? As far as whats appropriate for minors in a public school setting, society decided a while ago that once sexually explicit material is included, there is no countervailing interest. This is a pretty black and white standard that until recently all parties found agreeable. If you are advocating for changing that standard, you'll have to defend why children/teens/minors have more of an interest in seeing illustrations of a minor boy performing oral sex on another minor boy than seeing an adult woman in the nude. Claiming it not being porn can be argued both ways for both.

by taxyz 4y ago

a_shovel 4y ago

Yes, a blowjob is more explicit than a bare breast. This is not relevant to the topic currently being discussed, which is about how dishonest it is to compare a depiction of a sex act in a memoir about coming to terms with one's own identity and sexuality with pornography.

taxyz 4y ago
You’re hiding behind it being a memoir as if that’s a meaningful distinction or somehow the interest in discovering identity outweighs the harm in having sexually explicit material in schools. If Riley Reid put out a graphic memoir about tearing down taboos in sex and confronting “slut shaming” you wouldn’t advocate for it to be in schools. If you’re trying to claim I’m making some sort of false analogy or moral equivalency then you should try to answer my original question: what is the limiting principle? Because if it’s as weak as “it’s a memoir that’s about discovering identity” it’s not only a weak argument that few would agree with but it opens the door to a lot of other stuff that you’re already trying to rule out. What if Playboy helps some boys discover their straight identity? Is that not worth discovering? Some young girls might find Playboy helpful in discovering their lesbian identity. Wrap a story around it and it’s apparently good to go for schools.
- a_shovel 4y ago
  My "limiting principle" is "not being porn." I'm not going to try to fully define porn, otherwise I'd be here all day, but I think one obvious requirement is that it is designed primarily to cause sexual arousal. Based on the excerpts from Gender Queer that I've seen posted to support its ban, this is a test that it plainly fails. It is unclear what harm you believe Gender Queer might cause to teenagers.
  - taxyz 4y ago
    In the words of Sandra Day O'Connor "I know it when I see it." The problem you've highlighted with defining what porn is is not a new debate and as you've admitted we'd be here all day - and likely still not agree on a definition. The problem with your definition is that what people find arousing is a pretty wide spectrum and would include things that are not traditionally regarded as porn. Going back to our thought experiment, at what point would my theoretical graphic memoir of Riley Reid no longer be porn? What would the words to picture ratio have to be? You can make this same argument about Gender Queer; does the inclusion of the illustrations add any significant value to a memoir about someone discovering their identity? As far as whats appropriate for minors in a public school setting, society decided a while ago that once sexually explicit material is included, there is no countervailing interest. This is a pretty black and white standard that until recently all parties found agreeable. If you are advocating for changing that standard, you'll have to defend why children/teens/minors have more of an interest in seeing illustrations of a minor boy performing oral sex on another minor boy than seeing an adult woman in the nude. Claiming it not being porn can be argued both ways for both.