POLL: Public Pornography

Remove all ads!

Should pornography be allowed in public libraries?

Poll Information
This poll contains 1 question(s). 69 user(s) have voted.
You may not view the results of this poll without voting.

Poll Results: Public Pornography (69 votes.)

Should pornography be allowed in public libraries? (Choose 1)
* No: pornography doesn't belong in libraries - 38% (26)
* Yes: it's a matter of free speech - 20% (14)
* Maybe: adults can see it, but children shouldn't be able to - 42% (29)

 

Let's see the Moral Majority stop free speech.

 

I don't really have any problem with porngraphy as long as it involves consenting adults. I don't think is should be easily accessable however. Having it in a library would make access just a little too easy for youths, even if it's restricted for adults. I can't imagine a library with a "privacy room" either. Library's are supposed to be for everyone.

 

What do you mean? How far should the notion of pornography be stretched: are we talking about libraries that should be provided with porno magazines?
Or maybe books conserning health & sexual education (with drawings etc..)?
Or does pornography consern only photographs (if not, the Kama Sutra and many art books are out )?

 

Hardcore magazines and videos should not be in the library, but ancient books like the Kama Sutra and art books and info books should all be readily availible.

People can buy their own porn.

 

I suppose it's a matter of what the library is for. Porn mags are not the greatest litary invention, so I don't think they belong in a library. I've never gone into a library and seen lots of other types of magazine publication, so why should pornography be special. If there were books charting the development of pornography, etc, then I believe that they should be there as they are, as far as I am concerned, litary material.

 

Should pornography be allowed in public libraries? No. One key reason: I don't want people flogging the dolphin in my library.

Works like the kama sutra and classical sex manuals don't really count as pornography, and they should be restricted to an adults-only section of a library. Same goes for classical pornographic artwork and etchings.

The rest - more modern fare - has no place in a library for one very good reason. And that reason is also - and let's be honest here - the only reason people look at porn in the first place. I'll give you a hint...it ain't for the friggin' articles.

If you wanna "test-fire the meat missile," which is everyone's god given right, the last place you should be doing it in is a public library, or anywhere in public for that matter. The inevitable result of porn in public libraries is people waxing the carrot in the research room, and that's not what libraries are for. Libraries are for research and education, not gratification.

It's also for that reason that libraries would soon begin to attract the wrong kinds of people, deterring parents from sending their kids there (who need to be visiting libraries as young and as often as possible). Besides...It's awefully hard to concentrate when you know some dude's roughing up the suspect in the next room.

 

I'm impressed with the number of different ways you reffered to masturbation you managed to squeese into your post. Well done.

 

There's free speech, and then there's free speech. Pornography is age restricted with good reason, just like violent movies and coarse language are moderated for works of art directed at certain age groups. A library is a "public" building, meaning that it should cater to everybody who can get a library card. Pornography is not appropriate for all ages, and should not be made so easily accesable to children.

Trying to justify something like this behind "free speech" is an idiotic interpretation of the spirit of the constitution, as far as I'm concerned. With enough twists in logic, you can justify ANYTHING by saying that it's your constitutional right to do so. If somebody does something I don't like, and I respond with "if you do that again, I'm going to take a brick and make hamburger out of your face (go Sopranos!)" I'll get in trouble, even if it's my "freedom of speech" to say something like that, because the norms of our society are against threatening another person in such a manner. Our society (by which I mean the US and Canada; I can't speak for others) treats sex as something that children should have limited knowledge of, and that is something I agree with. People use the constitution to justify some stupid things, which is why I believe the constitution is a mistake and should never have been drawn up.

 

Is there some reason that porn is age restricted? I was always a little confused about that? Little kids spank their monkeys probably more than adults. It's not like limited access to inspiration is keeping them from doing it.

 

When they're going to allow it, they must make a private room for it.
Then you must have a pass to get in, that pass contains your age and a picture.

So than the younger ones must not get in.

 

I'm agreeing with Mystra's chosen on this one, there is no reason why the subject of sexual intercourse should not be spoken of to minors. If they're old enough to understand then odds are they already know and I speak from experience here.

This may be my own inexperience with people speaking however I greatly doubt that people will go flogging the monkey in a public library even if they are provided with a private cubicle. The hypothetical inability to concentrate is really on your part, no other person can be responsible for what goes on in your mind.

 

I agree that sex isn't something that should be hidden away from children. They will learn about it long before you think they have. I just don't see the need for it in a library. If you want it you can get it from a newsagents pretty easily, or if you are embarresed, there's always the internet. A library should remain a place dedicated to housing literature. Not magazines which only purpose is for somebody to get off on.
Maybe if they were strictly for taking out, because anybody beating off in a library, where kids are about should be clubbed to death like a baby seal. But then, would you want to read a mag that some previous guy has taken out, and half the pages are stuck together?

 

Who are we to say what is "literature", that's just a term that can be given to anything and is a matter for personal belief. I think that it's also a matter of principle, when we can be open minded enough to allow all kinds of material inside a library that will be one more step into improving our society.

And to reiterate my eariler point, people are'nt THAT disgusting in general.

Shazam said

Why?

 

Because the more kids are exposed to and think about sex, and the more their hormones start dictating their actions (which is, in a nutshell, puberty) then this directly results in sexual activity which, given teenagers propensity for irresponsibility and not thinking about consequences, results in teen pregnancy, STD's, etc. I can't think of a single girl I knew who got pregnant in high school who's life wasn't ruined as a result.

Basically, I don't think it's healthy for kids/teenagers to be so exposed to sex, because the inevitable result is them wanting to do it. They'll have plenty of time for sex when they're older, more mature, and better able to deal with the consequences of sex. Remember, we're not talking about video games or eating too much candy here. Sex is an incredibly enjoyable activity (boy howdy, is it ever!) that also unfortunately comes with very heavy consequences. It's a question of responsibility.

Basically, while there's no way to stop kids from thinking about or being interested in sex, no good comes from encouraging it.

 

Asking the same question as Luthien: what is "pornography" defined as in the first post?

I think that there's a clear distinction between a book containing a picture of a woman in childbirth and stacks of Playboy (or even more hardcore) magazines shelved away somewhere in a library.

 

I agree with what Death Rabbit said exactly; exposing your children to sex would naturally make them want to experiment, regardless of the consequences involved. There is a reason why we have a codified age of consent, after all: youths that are dominated more by raging hormones are simply not capable of thinking their actions through with regard to sexual intercourse. I know what you're thinking; "That's a gross generalization, everybody is different, some kids are really mature, etc." and I respond with bull----. There is NO WAY a 14 year old will be able to consider the ramifications of sexual activity, the STDs, teenage pregnancy, social ostracization. The more easily accessible you make pornography to children, the more your society is encouraging sexual activity in those children. Most adults do not really think things through with regard to sexual conduct, leaving there no reason to think that teenagers will behave any better.

While the argument can be raised that pornography is not terribly difficult to access in the first place, that is a problem in and of itself. With sex displayed across all mediums the way it is, sexual activity among minors has become more prevalent, and the problems that go with it, such as the sickening poverty among single teenage mothers, and STDs reaching crisis levels. Making sexual images more accessible promotes sexual activity in your society, but without accompanying education, people are not made aware of the risks. Pornographic magazines are not responsible for education (nor should they be, as they are marketed towards adults), meaning that people who read them are only getting half the story, so to speak. Which is fine for adults, who should be aware of the risks already, but is not acceptable for children.

 

Again back to Luthien's and Oaz's posts; we need to establish some kind of definition for porn. But let me add another "type" (so far porn mags and ancient art/literature have been the only 2 given): books on and about sex. Books like "Sex for Dummies" and the like; or other more graphic books. For example, a few friends and I recently bought a book for another friend on his birthday, this book was entirely about sex: different positions, methods, and the like. This book had lots of pictures (not drawings) to illustrate the contents. This was no "porn mag" though, nor was it art.
Should this type of book be included as an educational reference, or excluded because it contains graphic pictures?

Also, I find the argument that libraries are "public" places to be irrelelvant. Video stores are public places, usually requiring some sort of membership, but many of them have curtained off "adult" video rooms. There are also many convenience stores that sell "regular" magazines that also sell pornographic magazines, which are usually stacked just a little higher.
(NOTE: I'm not really trying to make a point, just pointing things out...)

And I strongly disagree with the idea that younger people should be hidden from the truths about sex, especially during the onset of puberty. Kids need to know about this sort of thing, for better or worse. Regardless of whether they can make responsible decisions or not, at least let them make informed decisions. (This paragraph is targeted towards the statements made by Death Rabbit and Shazamdude about not exposing young teens to sex)

@Shazamdude- Strangely enough, I've known of many more people in their late teens/early twenties who've contracted STD's than younger teens. I'm not saying that's the way of it everywhere else, but that's the way it's been in my world.


And on an note, I'm very impressed by the number of euphemisms for masturbation have been used in this thread. Truly impressive.

 

@ Faerus

I define pornography as magazines, videos, and literature that depict sex in graphic terms, with the explicit purpose of arousing and sexually gratifying the reader.

There's a big difference between an instructional manual and pornography. The sole purpose of pornography is for sexual arousal and self gratification. It also presents an unrealistic picture of sexual activity. So it should not be included in a resticted reference section, whereas I think a serious sexual manual probably should. The other more traditional forms of actual "porn" I mentioned above shouldn't be in a public library. Again, libraries are intended for education, hence the materials included within should be of educational value. If you can prove there is significant educational value in this month's edition of "Bound and Gagged" or "Lucious Transexual Jugs," I welcome you to try and convince me.

Libraries are publicly funded. Video stores are private businesses. Big difference. My tax dollars shouldn't be paying for people to choke the chicken.

I agree, which is why I applaud school-sponsored sexual education and maturation programs, who put everything they need to know in a factual, educational context. The focus is on education, whereas the focus of Porno is strictly pleasure. Take your standard modern pornography: Some couple having wild unprotected sex, ending with the dude blowing his load all over the chick's face. Hardly the right message to send to curious teenagers, wouldn't you say?

I'd be interested to know how early many of those people you know became sexually active. I find there is a direct correlation between a person's early views on sex and their sexual conduct as adults. Which, actually, is kind of my whole point in this thread.

 

I'm not sure you can say a library is solely for educational purposes. I don't think fiction is all that educational. Unless horror stories contain some hidden meaning I haven't spotted yet. But it comes down to what you want your library for.