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