--------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 190 INTER. COOKING Ref: DFL00096Date: 11/17/96 From: THOMAS BLAKELY Time: 03:01am \/To: MIKE PHILLIPS (Read 6 times) Subj: Re: BBS Law Quoting MIKE PHILLIPS to LISA TUOHY regarding Re: BBS Law in message #688 on 03-29-95 at 05:03: MP>There's not much uncertainty. If you give someone outside your state MP>access to adult areas, then you are under federal jurisdiction and are MP>subject to federal laws since you are engaging in interstate commerce. he MP>FBI have busted BBS's for GIFs no dirtier than pictures found in Playboy. MP>I would strongly recommend not giving access to out of state persons. MP>Mike Phillips MP>INTERNET: phil4086@utdallas.edu Smart idea, but it begs the question "What about the internet?" I mean, let's face it, if you want pornography, then the inet's the place. There's probably more "adult" material available there than at any other place on the earth. And it was created, and is paid for (mostly), by the Government of the United States of America. Doesn't this effectively mean that since they themselves are conducting pornography across state lines, and indeed worldwide, that they are guilty of entrapment of anyone else who does so? Regards, -Tom- * Apex v4 * A good slogan can obscure mere fact for decades! * -=T.R. Blakely=- Internet : tblakely@freenet.vcu.edu * LAKOTA v1.4 * SHILOH v1.0j * The Cheers BBS, 804-526-6006, 28.8 * Origin: The Cheers BBS * Node_ID: A0804003 --- Alexi/Mail 2.02b (#10000) * Origin: Don's Den Of Iniquity * 28.8 * 515.792.8286 (1:290/110) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 190 INTER. COOKING Ref: DFL00097Date: 11/17/96 From: THOMAS BLAKELY Time: 03:01am \/To: JIM WALSH (Read 6 times) Subj: Adult Areas 1/ Quoting JIM WALSH to THOMAS BLAKELY regarding Adult Areas in message #691 on 03-31-95 at 01:52: JW>Hello Thomas..... JW> Just couldn't resist ;) That's okay. :) JW>TB>DL>That's my point. It's not censorship. I'm not saying take them off t JW>TB>DL>air, just clean up their act. JW>TB>Uhm, to who's standards? Yours? Mine? The pedophile in another town? JW> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ JW> How about S O C I E T Y? Jim, the problem here is that even society is a relative term. For instance, no one would argue that we should still have the same standards the Puritans did when they came over. They were a society, and we are a society. A society's morality, is a fluctuating thing, depending on where you are, when you are there, and of course background. For instance, we put people to death for committing murder in this society, yet we still engage in warfare with other nations where we bomb them, and send in the Marines, etc. and unfortunately, innocent people get killed by us. If Morality is totally static, then we are just as guilty of murder of the innocents in a bunker in Iraq as Iraq is of the innocents in their gas attacks on the Kurds. The point being, that even murder is a relative term, and so, you can't really expect television standards to be set in concrete either. JW>TB>DL>Not at all. What if you had Bart Redneck running around poking fun at JW>TB>DL>black children's big lips or calling them the "N" word. I'm quite sur JW>TB>DL>there would be quite a following of KKK members and other assorted JW>TB>DL>bigots who would support just such a format. JW>TB>Interesting comparison, but not valid. Hate, and sexuality, have very JW>TB>little to do with each other. JW> Unfortunately, hate and sexuality have MUCH to do with each other in JW> our all too confused world. Rape has EVERYTHING to do with HATE, and JW> it is the ultimate SEXUAL assault. Rape is horrific, but it has more to do with dominance than hate, per se. For instance, a Rapist doesn't attack women he hates, he attacks women he is afraid of, and who he feels a need to dominate physically. The actual intercourse (if present) is a means of conveying his dominance. He is saying "I WILL TAKE YOU!" He is not saying "I HATE YOU!", and there is a difference. Or, by comparison, look at the assassin of Martin Luther King Jr. He HATED him, he would not have slept with Corretta, or any black woman for that matter. Do you see what I'm saying? (I'm not putting it very well, I know) JW>TB>Most people have no idea what real censorship is. But that's beside e JW> Censorship is perhaps THE most overused word in our English language. JW> And, it varies from case to case. The same people who cry censorship JW> on one hand, would change that cry to "can't somebody stop this?", JW> given a different set of circumstances. So, I feel that even using JW> this word anymore is really a waste of time, as it obviously defines JW> anything any one group wants it to, at a given time. Good point, but it shows that even censorship is relative. JW>realistic TB>writing, and that make an editorial point about the society JW>we live in. TB>I mean, in terms of pure violence, Sea Quest DSV has more JW>violence per TB>minute than NYPD Blue. But NYPD Blue is the one everyone JW>is all upset TB>about. Realistically, if you want to censor shows, then JW>you should have TB>an absolute formula, and should not JW> Where did you read this? Has someone taken a survey of this? I would JW> be interested in seeing this data if you have it. Look forward to JW> hearing from you THomas, bye. JW>--- To be honest, I've not counted the deaths on either show, but I've seen both, and to my knowledge, in the same week, NYPD Blue had 3 incidents of violence, one direct, and two implied (bodies), while DSV had 6 violent acts, of which 4 were direct and two were implied. The problem, is that even these numbers must be looked at in context. Otherwise, you assume guilt by numbers. Now, I know of a document that has numerous referances to Satan, bigamy, incest, murder, and general violence and mayhem, including a part where an entire city is wiped out. Yet this document has numerous shows, and even a couple of channels dedicated to propagating what it says and based upon it. It's called : "The Holy Bible" This is an obvious demonstration of why the "context" of violence, or other things, is so important. The Bible is not a satanic document by any means, but if you just count the numbers, while not looking at the overall message, you could easily conclude that it should be censored, and that our kids should not be exposed to it. People yell and whine about Barney, but when it comes down to it, it teaches respect, kindness, sharing, and other ideas we all want our kids to believe in. Who cares if it's sappy, that's not the point. However, if the networks were to respond only to the few that yell loudest, it, like a lot of admirable shows, would be off the air. But getting back to adult areas, which this has wandered a bit from, the point that a lot of people seem very stuck on is the belief that pornography leads to violence against, and the degradation of, women. They most often cite the Rape statistics from Nevada, and Alaska, two areas that have the highest numbers of consumers of pornography, and more specifically, playboy magazine. What they overlook, or don't know, is that, in fact, these areas also have higher numbers of smokers, and higher levels of consumption of alcohol. The problem is that obviously cigarrettes aren't responsible for the rape figures, nor is budweiser. But they assume playboy is. It's a WRONG assumption, it's false, it's incorrect, it just ain't true. The REAL reason these areas have higher numbers of rapes and violence isn't a magazine. It's the little known, but very important fact that these areas also have many more men than women. THAT'S the real cause. See, you can establish a baseline of violent acts and rape, in the states where the Male and Female population is about even. Then you will notice two other trends. One, in places where the are more men than women, violence goes up, and rapes go up. In place that have more women than men, violence goes down, and rapes go down. Note, that in the places where the women and men are equal in number, or where the women outnumber the men, the sales of cigarettes, alcohol, and playboy and other pornographic materials is about the same consistently, yet the rape/violence figures remain relatively static, or decrease. It is ONLY in those places where men heavily outnumber women that sales of cigarettes, alcohol, and pornographic materials increase dramatically. As do the numbers of rapes, and the amount of violence. So, the cause of the increased figures isn't playboy, phillip morris, or budweiser, it's a lack * LAKOTA v1.4 * SHILOH v1.0j * The Cheers BBS, 804-526-6006, 28.8 * Origin: The Cheers BBS * Node_ID: A0804003 --- Alexi/Mail 2.02b (#10000) * Origin: Don's Den Of Iniquity * 28.8 * 515.792.8286 (1:290/110) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 190 INTER. COOKING Ref: DFL00098Date: 11/17/96 From: THOMAS BLAKELY Time: 03:01am \/To: JIM WALSH (Read 6 times) Subj: Adult Areas 2/ >>> Continued from previous message In addition, despite the increasing popularity of pornography and it's increased availability, the rape figures for ALL areas have remained relatively static over the past twenty years. The cause and effect that most sociologists, criminologists, and feminists ASSUMED to be there, simply isn't. Quite a few sociologists were surprised by this, as I was when I found out when I was studying it. However, they, and the criminologists now agree, after looking and looking, and looking some more at the data, that the relationship between pornography, rape, and violence SIMPLY ISN'T THERE. It seems that it should be, and in fact it was assumed to be true, but it simply isn't. Although, if you think about it, it does make sense after a while. Otherwise, the number of violent crimes should have absolutely SKYROCKETTED after the introduction of violence on tv. But, believe it or not, the percentages haven't changed that much. The only thing that's changed is the number of crimes being REPORTED, not the actual numbers committed per hundred thousand people. This has to do with less stigma being attached to rape victims, who are more willing to come forward than ever before, and the increase in communications technology. It's far easier to call a policeman than it used to be, and so people do it more often. We know this, because the fire and rescue units have ALSO experienced an increase in the number of calls for assistance, thanks to 911, and other communications advances. Some food for thought. :) Regards, -Tom- * Apex v4 * Cat bathing is a martial art. * -=T.R. Blakely=- Internet : tblakely@freenet.vcu.edu * LAKOTA v1.4 * SHILOH v1.0j * The Cheers BBS, 804-526-6006, 28.8 * Origin: The Cheers BBS * Node_ID: A0804003 --- Alexi/Mail 2.02b (#10000) * Origin: Don's Den Of Iniquity * 28.8 * 515.792.8286 (1:290/110) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 190 INTER. COOKING Ref: DFL00099Date: 11/17/96 From: MARK MAYFIELD Time: 03:01am \/To: DEAN LANE (Read 6 times) Subj: Adult Areas Dean, MM>Just one last question on this topic: What's to blame for the MM>violence that occurred before TV, before radio, before "left wing MM>agendas," before newspapers, etc.? And please, I know there was MM>less, but it existed. Can you explain why and, if so, is there any MM>difference from then to now, besides the amount? DL> Hello Mark, DL> Hope you don't mind me jumping in. DL> Back then a child was a community project. Everyone in the community DL> took and interest in his/her development. Today its none of your DL> #@$%*business what my kid does and don't you forget it or I'll see DL> you injail. DL> Back then most of what goes on today was socially unacceptable, today DL> itnone of your @$#^! business what I do. DL> Society, communities, standard, people were the difference. All DL> erodedand corrupted by that !@#$%@ tv. Hey, its fine if you want to jump in. But if you do so, how about answering the question? Seems to me that you only explained the difference in the amount of violence, which is the one thing I wasn't asking about. Or was your answer: the community, with the child as a project, made a iolent person? Maybe you need to take another shot at that one to clarify your point. Keep it coming. Mark * SPITFIRE v3.5 * SHILOH v1.0j * The Information Station,Gainesville Fla. * Origin: The Information Station * Node_ID: A0904000 --- Alexi/Mail 2.02b (#10000) * Origin: Don's Den Of Iniquity * 28.8 * 515.792.8286 (1:290/110) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 190 INTER. COOKING Ref: DFL00100Date: 11/17/96 From: MARK MAYFIELD Time: 03:01am \/To: JIM WALSH (Read 6 times) Subj: Kid's and TV Hey again Jim, Let me try this again: MM>JW> Well, my kids are like this because we have TAUGHT them this way. JW> JW> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^MM>Hmmm. I've seen this claim before. JW> Its curious to me how parents are only MM>too eager to claim that their children are "good" because the parents did JW> su MM>a great job raising them, but equally eager to blame TV, society, rock 'n JW> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ JW> Nothing up there about a great job I have done. I *taught* them, JW> that is my responsibility. I have also made many, many mistakes. JW> That's life. However, if I have a choice, I will exercise that JW> right to choose. It has nothing at all to do with blaming or taking JW> credit. It OK, I missed the exact language you used. Sorry. My point is still valid though. Your kids are good, well-behaved (I'm assuming at least most of the time ) because you TAUGHT them that way. Still sounds like you're taking credit. Let me ask this, then: if they become bad, ill-mannered little rats, would *that* be your responsiblity or would you say its someone's or omething else's fault, ie; TV? MM>We let anything we want to watch come in and we keep out things we don't MM>to watch. BUT, we don't make those decisions for other people. We live MM>let live. JW> Once again, what about the kids who's parents are either TOO JW> STUPID or DON'T CARE, and the end up watching all kinds of really JW> violent garbage all day??? See the above 3 lines. JW> I am talking about equal time here. If a child has NO choice, is JW> sat down in front of a tv, either in a playpen or some other JW> aparatus, and from the time the are very small are subjected to all JW> kinds of violent tv, are you telling me that they made a choice JW> here? That they like it "better"? How can we know what they like if JW> they haven't JW> seen anything else? Be realistic first. No child has ever grown up and seen ONLY violent TV and nothing else. They see other TV shows, they see mommy & daddy, they see school teachers, friends, etc., etc. So, with that realization in mind, YES, I am telling you that all children make a choice. The first choice they make is o watch those shows. Obviously, if they didn't like the shows, they wouldn't watch. Their eyelids aren't held open, their heads held in place as garbage" and "trash" are paraded in front of them over the TV screen from birth until they're 18. They live independent lives, uniquely different in what they are exposed to. And as the experiences accumulate, they repeat the ones they like. If its the Power Rangers, it is, simply put, their own choice to watch it. * SPITFIRE v3.5 * SHILOH v1.0j * The Information Station,Gainesville Fla. * Origin: The Information Station * Node_ID: A0904000 --- Alexi/Mail 2.02b (#10000) * Origin: Don's Den Of Iniquity * 28.8 * 515.792.8286 (1:290/110) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 190 INTER. COOKING Ref: DFL00101Date: 11/17/96 From: ROBERT MAUCHIN Time: 03:01am \/To: ALL USERS (Read 6 times) Subj: Initial Message This message initalizes this conference (FNPACK)! * SHILOH v1.0h * Home of the Submariners! * Origin: Torpedo Junction BBS * Node_ID: A0707000 --- Alexi/Mail 2.02b (#10000) * Origin: Don's Den Of Iniquity * 28.8 * 515.792.8286 (1:290/110) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 190 INTER. COOKING Ref: DFL00102Date: 11/17/96 From: SCOTT HUBICK Time: 03:01am \/To: DEAN LANE (Read 6 times) Subj: Adult Areas Hi Dean, I am a first time writer to you. I just won the mid heavy weight belt for Kung-Fu. I owe it all to the t.v. show Kung-Fu and the song Kung-Fu Fightinting, they both help shape my life. I first kung-fued someone in grade 8 and it went from they. JFT Scott NFX v1.3 [000] I can't hear you, let me turn down the music * LAKOTA v1.3 * SHILOH v1.0j * WHERE PEOPLE CONNECT! * Origin: Speedy Creek Bbs * Node_ID: A0306000 --- Alexi/Mail 2.02b (#10000) * Origin: Don's Den Of Iniquity * 28.8 * 515.792.8286 (1:290/110) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 190 INTER. COOKING Ref: DFL00103Date: 11/17/96 From: DEAN LANE Time: 03:01am \/To: SCOTT HUBICK (Read 6 times) Subj: Adult Areas SH>I am a first time writer to you. I just won the mid heavy weight SH>belt for Kung-Fu. I owe it all to the t.v. show Kung-Fu and the SH>song Kung-Fu Fightinting, they both help shape my life. I first SH>kung-fued someone in grade 8 and it went from there. Hi Scott, CONGRATULATIONS!!!! I and my whole family, except my 3 year old girl at the time, took Taekwondo for over two years from a local teacher. It was quit an experience. The two boys and I got up to green belts before school activities took its toll on our three night a week commitment. From that experience I think that I can safely say that you have acquired a great deal of respect for not only yourself, but your teacher, your fellow competitors, other people, and living things in general. I think the martial arts can be a wonderful experience for any young person. I was thinking about what you brought up here the other night after reading a few of the other responses people have written. I don't think it's so much the violence or the sex content of a show that is the most dangerous. It's more the attitude. There has been violence on tv since I can remember, maybe not as much, but it was there. What has changed is the attitude of people toward violence and that's what I see when I speak with young people today. I would be suprised if your teacher is not appalled by the attitudes of allot of kids he meets for the first time. When you have a regular diet of people on the tube with little or no respect for women, older people, their peers, or themselves and this usually is not challenged, it's going to take its toll. . Violence for the sake of violence, without purpose other than to entertain, can have a numbing affect on people after awhile. It gets to the point that if violence happens in your presence instead of on the tube it's just no big deal, you've seen it a million times before. That aspect of violence on tv is dangerous, but more dangerous is the attitude portrayed during most of these violent scenes. I think this is especially true when it comes to sex. Indoctrinating our youth with the idea that sex any time and as often as possible and with anyone who happens to be available is much more damaging that seeing the act of sex or nudity on tv. I was watching the end of a show a couple of months ago that took place in a bar, kind of like cheers but wasn't. A man and a woman were at one of the their places in bed. First she didn't want to, then he didn't want to, then they both wanted to but he couldn't get it up. Great fun. Was kind of funny if you could get past the fact of what message this has to be sending young people. I don't know why this show stuck in my mind so much. I guess it just kind of indicates the level to which they have sunk to get a laugh. I for one would be embarrassed to even say I watched most of the tv shows on today. There was a letter to the editor in our local paper a couple of years ago from a mother of a local young girl. In it she said her teen age girl had said to her "Mom, I know you and dad don't want me to have sex before I get married, but other adults don't care. They don't think there's anything wrong with it." If this is what we are telling our young people today through tv shows, movies, the media, and sex education classes, I think we are doing our children a very great disservice. I've rambled on enough for one day. I hope I have made some of what I think clear. I certainly do not think the show Kung-Fu was particularity damaging. It was one of the shows I looked forward to each week. It certainly did not portray a poor value system. But I also remember chopping my best friend in the back of the neck on an impulse in 7th grade and he's never spoken to me since. Thank god I didn't break anything. A little more emphases on not doing this to your friends and the damage it can cause before and after the power rangers might be a good touch. I think they already be doing some of that now. Good luck with your Kung-Fu Scott. Dean Lane Intenet:deanlane@cris.com CMPQwk #1.4 UNREGISTERED EVALUATION COPY * LAKOTA v1.4 --- Alexi/Mail 2.02b (#10000) * Origin: Don's Den Of Iniquity * 28.8 * 515.792.8286 (1:290/110) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 190 INTER. COOKING Ref: DFL00104Date: 11/17/96 From: DEAN LANE Time: 03:01am \/To: RON LAUZON (Read 6 times) Subj: Re: Adult Areas CMPQwk #1.4 UNREGISTERED EVALUATION COPY * LAKOTA v1.4 --- Alexi/Mail 2.02b (#10000) * Origin: Don's Den Of Iniquity * 28.8 * 515.792.8286 (1:290/110) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 190 INTER. COOKING Ref: DFL00105Date: 11/17/96 From: DEAN LANE Time: 03:01am \/To: BRIAN BOWMAN (Read 6 times) Subj: Adult Areas BB>DL>I hope you're trying to be silly. I don't want anything taken off BB>DL>the air because I don't like it. I want them to use sound BB>DL>scientific research. BB> Better start with some sound definitions if you're going to BB>parade around a modecum of "science." (See last reply.) BB> Like I said a couple times, when you start censoring or BB>restricting or whatever you wish to call it, where does it end? BB>Good-bye Arnold, good-bye Mark Twain, good-bye Bible. Since the BB>Inquisition, 100 Year War, etc. were based on Biblical principles, BB>it can be scientifically proven that... Hi Brian, I never mentioned any other medium besides the tv. In my opinion it's a special case. Like no other before it. It has way to much impact to leave to the whims of capitalism. Never before in history has anything had such a commanding influence over everything in society. Especially our children. Like I have said before, we already have restrictions. I just think they should pay a little more attention to what the subject matter may have on our kids. If they come up with irrefutable proof that tv is having a very negative impact on our kids would you still say "By god you will not tell them what they can put on the air!" If you would, then I guess we really don't have much to argue about. The first amendment was never intended as a license to poison our kids. And I've never mentioned the Bible once. Don't thing you have to to argue against this. Have a good day. Dean Lane Intenet:deanlane@cris.com CMPQwk #1.4 UNREGISTERED EVALUATION COPY * LAKOTA v1.4 --- Alexi/Mail 2.02b (#10000) * Origin: Don's Den Of Iniquity * 28.8 * 515.792.8286 (1:290/110)