SEX
I know, a catchy title. A little unfair maybe, since there’s nothing particularly titillating in what follows. Or maybe there is, depending on what–what’s the saying?–“pumps yer nads!” But in view of Erich’s post about our newly appointed head of Family Planning, I thought this might be the time to indulge more than a little in a topic rather close to my heart (depending on where one locates said metaphorical organ).
Did you know that the last week of October is national Protection From Pornography Week? Yes, indeed, signed into law by our illustrious president, Mr. Bush back in 2003. I for one had no idea I needed to be protected from it. How reassuring to know that we are being defended from dangers both real and imagined by the ever watchful gaze of our very own homegrown clerics.
We’ve spent tax dollars on this. Here is the link to the official White House proclamation.
Seems innocuous enough, even homey. All that stuff about the destructive effects of porn on children, who can argue?
Has it occurred to anyone throughout the last two decades (beginning, in my opinion, with Ed Meese–anyone remember him?) of the war on pornography that–like alcohol and tobacco–pornography is simply not for children? It seems a ludicrously simple idea to me–it was never intended for them. We manage to have reasonable laws about things not intended for children. We don’t let them drive cars (except at amusement parks, in specially constructed rides), we don’t let …
