|
October 21, 2004
Gary,
This is in response to your posting of October 18. It concerns pornography. On this topic, Gombrowicz has written:
"There is ... an immaturity which culture batters us against when it submerges us and we do not manage to hoist ourselves up to its level. We are 'infantilised' by all 'higher' forms. Man, tortured by his mask, fabricates secretly, for his own usage, a sort of 'subculture': a world made out of the refuse of a higher world of culture, a domain of trash, immature myths, inadmissible passions... a secondary domain of compensation. That is where a certain shameful poetry is born, a certain compromising beauty....
"Are we not close to Pornografia?"
If there is a whole host of people out there with these inadmissible secrets that we've been able to discover because of technological advancements, is not our culture responsible? Who or what has battered these people that they have retreated into their secondary realms of compensation?
Meanwhile, the fascist hysteria continues. Did you see the so-called 'debate' on Insight on SBS on Tuesday night? There was not a single attempt to address the issue that Gombrowicz raised, simply a constant vilification. If they look at these pictures they'll go on to make contact with children, etc. What about all the people who like adult pornography - do they go out and rape? do they have to make contact? The answer is a resounding 'no'. But nobody had the guts to even raise such points.
If some poor bastards get off on child-abuse images, shouldn't we be ashamed of our social organisation? Shouldn't we be asking how we can change it to ease the torture? No. WE want to solve it through more torture. What a bunch of wankers!
|
No I didn't see the program. I've started reading the transcript.
One problem. At the beginning of the transcript it says:
"Child pornography is an absolutely abhorrent crime. If I can just explain that it can be anything from posing, children naked, through to the worst thing that you could ever imagine. These are the sort of photographs that are involved and on the web for sale to people."
A DET. SUPERINTENDENT KIM McKAY is saying that.
Read that again. A photo of children naked is pornographic.
That statement was not even challenged to add that it is images of children being sexually abused that is of concern.
The violence is elided and so the sexualisation of children becomes the concern.
Another problem. Towards the end of the transcript it says that there is something wrong with teenage sex.
There's a law in Australia about having sex with children under the age of 16 So a 15-year-old having sex with her 18-year-old boyfriend is a sex offence.
No one questioned that either.