Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site unccvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!mcnc!unccvax!dsi
From: dsi@unccvax.UUCP (Dataspan Inc)
Newsgroups: net.books
Subject: Re: Porn and the evidence -- short, really!
Message-ID: <123@unccvax.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 19-Jan-85 11:51:56 EST
Article-I.D.: unccvax.123
Posted: Sat Jan 19 11:51:56 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 22-Jan-85 04:52:52 EST
References: <5286@duke.UUCP>
Organization: UNC-Charlotte
Lines: 22


      I don't think the point is whether or not crm@duke should or should
not be told what to read, write, or think. On the other hand, there is a
fairly good argument (which I've cited before) defending the ** RIGHT ** 
to suppress one form of expression, particularly when it already suppresses
other forms of expression.

      Not that I'm against pornography per se, but it does seem to me that
when one can't exist in mainstream America without being obliterated with
continuous sexual messages (again, not that any given message is bad), including
but not limited to pornography; pretty much gives some individuals the ** RIGHT**
to decide what environment they'd like to live. 

      Continuous impersonal sexual harrasment can and does lead to the suppression
of other forms of behaviour which people also have the right to enjoy.

Reference:
Marcuse, Herbert: A Critique of Pure Tolerance
.

dya