Free Speech? Robert Sheridan FawCawnahs firstname.lastname@example.org
A thoughtful, well-expressed post, Trollman, I was glad to see it.
One of the peculiarities of the field of obscenity regulation is the purpose behind it. Sometimes it's to avoid hurting feelings, and other times it's to protect against other people seeing a word, symbol, thought, etc., that the regulator thinks is going to corrupt the viewer.
A recent (and similar to another very old) photo of two English "Bobbies" escorting a naked man away from a soccer match is a case in point. One of the cops has his arm outstretched, at some effort, to hold his helmet over the naked guy's groin area. Like no one should see what's there. Why? Corrupting? [Maybe the cop just didn't want to be in the same, inevitable, picture with his prisoner's privates, it occurs to me, which would be smart].
I think there's a better argument for preventing hurting people than there is for preventing from seeing, hence thinking, about something.
Staten Island WebŪ Forums Index.