3 ms·

There seems to be a propensity on HN to question everything no matter how absurd it is on it's face. "I can assure you that Obama wouldn't be happy if his daug

by larrys 14y ago

There seems to be a propensity on HN to question everything no matter how absurd it is on it's face. "I can assure you that Obama wouldn't be happy if his daughter became a porn star". "Oh yeah, how do you know that he wouldn't be happy? Do you know him and have you spoken to him about that specifically????"

true_religion 14y ago
Depends on what kind of 'porn' star she is. Playboy puts out an annual edition called the girls of the ACC, going to college campuses' to recruit. In that context, I don't see anyone who was shamed by participating, and some people I know had relatives who were "okay" with it... albeit not ecstatic. Seeing how nuanced the above can become, lets look at the USOC.... 1. Do they have government oversight? 2. Are they required to pick the highest bidder? 3. Can they legally say X is not acceptable by community standards? Whose standards? Why would pornography be against community standards (nationwide) if it isn't consider obscene (legally speaking)? Now I bet you that no porn company has actually tried to make a case, but it'd be interesting to see how far they could go with one.
anamax 14y ago
> There seems to be a propensity on HN to question everything no matter how absurd it is on it's face. There's a tendency on HN (and other places) to make statements based on "facts" that aren't actually known by the person making the claim. > "I can assure you that Obama wouldn't be happy if his daughter became a porn star". Unless you have specific knowledge about Obama, you can't accurately "assure" that. Yes, it's likely that Obama, like most fathers, would prefer that his daughters not be porn stars, but some fathers are different in this respect. To "assure" in this case requires Obama-specific information. > Oh yeah, how do you know that he wouldn't be happy? Do you know him and have you spoken to him about that specifically????" You seem to think that that's wrong. How about explaining why? I agree that speaking to Obama isn't necessary, but surely some Obama-specific information is. Do you disagree?

by larrys 14y ago

true_religion 14y ago

Depends on what kind of 'porn' star she is. Playboy puts out an annual edition called the girls of the ACC, going to college campuses' to recruit. In that context, I don't see anyone who was shamed by participating, and some people I know had relatives who were "okay" with it... albeit not ecstatic. Seeing how nuanced the above can become, lets look at the USOC.... 1. Do they have government oversight? 2. Are they required to pick the highest bidder? 3. Can they legally say X is not acceptable by community standards? Whose standards? Why would pornography be against community standards (nationwide) if it isn't consider obscene (legally speaking)? Now I bet you that no porn company has actually tried to make a case, but it'd be interesting to see how far they could go with one.

anamax 14y ago

> There seems to be a propensity on HN to question everything no matter how absurd it is on it's face. There's a tendency on HN (and other places) to make statements based on "facts" that aren't actually known by the person making the claim. > "I can assure you that Obama wouldn't be happy if his daughter became a porn star". Unless you have specific knowledge about Obama, you can't accurately "assure" that. Yes, it's likely that Obama, like most fathers, would prefer that his daughters not be porn stars, but some fathers are different in this respect. To "assure" in this case requires Obama-specific information. > Oh yeah, how do you know that he wouldn't be happy? Do you know him and have you spoken to him about that specifically????" You seem to think that that's wrong. How about explaining why? I agree that speaking to Obama isn't necessary, but surely some Obama-specific information is. Do you disagree?