Students at UNH's annual University Day were asked how they felt about their university having a porn policy on their campus. This policy, in theory, could potentially be limiting access to pornography sites over their internet connection, in hopes to prevent public users of the campus library viewing pornography in an academic setting.
Questions began to get asked like, "If you blocked words saying pornography (or child pornography in the case of what occurred here on campus) then you wouldn't be able to find articles talking about the issues of porn like many students have done in research papers and other essays." Then you get into the discussion of pornoogprahy on the internet in general. especailly when you talk about the contents of our constitution. Yet we still continue to try and communicate to others that it is wrong to put these images on the internet which is free for all viewers because proclamations in our constitution say we have a freedom to post such content. It's called the WORLD WIDE WEB for a reason. The issue for a porn policy at UNH is about a web system filtering all pron/child pornogrpahy websites, a web system which has been employed by our government. Should those guilty of posting or consuming child pornography be arrested? Or do we go the other direction and put offenders into a psych ward for mental evaluation?
Many people are uncomfortable when talking about sex and the naturalness of it. For humans sex is not just procreation, it is desirable and pleasurable. It is artful and naked and pure. Where is the line drawn between erotic pleasure, pornographic positions and art? A male and female couple once had a gallery, with an audience, with them performing sexual acts with one another, trying to express its beauty. Can pornography not also be described as erotic sexual acts performed for a viewer? I don't know, it gets me all confused because there are so many different sides when talking about sex as it is so personal and private for some people. It means different things for so many different people. So we have to consider tthe definition of pornography. It's defenitions are so complex that one cannot distinguish art and pornography, pornography and sexual freedom. They're too complex to discuss in a court of law. So really, asking UNH to put a filter on all pornography could potentially lead to a tangled debate in the justice system.
Child pornography would still exist in the homes of millions across the world. As Daniel Quinn puts nicely in his book, The Story of B, Quinn elaborates how we cannot just make programs to change things we've ruined to make them better, we need to see the vision of what we're aiming to fix. We want the vision to be for all people to know that children are sacred spririts to us and not to abuse their youth and their bodies as ways to get aroused- let alone put it on the internet.
Should the very fact my blog says pornography in it be filtered by a porn policy? Having this blog means to publicly have my ideas on the internet, even though it may just be for a class. My blog can be found by thousands who already have accounts on blogpost and other blog websites. Our culture - and others who rely on the internet - has been so accustomed to the quick, unlimited access of the internet. We really only use so many websites that it is forgotten what it really means to be on the "world wide web". Pornography on the internet is just one of the many problems the internet has brought in to our society.
No comments:
Post a Comment