Nudity & ad hominem attacks &c

[P3D John Bercovitz <bercov@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Getting _way_ off subject, it was rather embarrassing to watch the 
attacks on a list member who advocated keeping some types of "art" off 
the screen in the public NSA meetings.  I thought it was pretty clear 
which types of nudes he was talking about, but I could be wrong.  He was 
certainly forceful but he did also include an IMHO.  Apparently, though, 
he must alter his viewpoint so that it falls in line with that of the 
vast majority of this group or continue to be ridiculed.  Nice going 
folks.  This is your idea of free speech?  Tyranny of the majority?  
 
Through time the majority opinion on nudity has swung back and forth 
like a pendulum.  At the present time you're retarded if you don't opine 
that even rather kinky stuff is art.  [My guess is that in 20 years (if 
AIDS isn't broken in 5), it will have swung the other way and you'll be 
considered a wanton person if you hold to today's majority moral view.  
In other words, in this case, a sexual-disease driven change 
(interesting) could be imminent.]  So what's history got to do with it?  
I think it shows that all of these views are valid human perspectives.
 
And that brings me back to my opinion that it is time for society in 
general to learn to hear others' opinions and make logical _and/or_ 
emotion-based counterarguments but not ad hominem attacks.  I think the 
need for a change in type of argument especially applies to the internet 
if the internet is ever going to be valuable in the political arena.  
And we may as well start here, kinder and gentle persons.  8-)
 
This post is already too long (and very difficult for me to write) but I 
suppose I should give my opinion on the nudity thing.  Not sure if a 
moderator should do that; hope it's OK.  Well first, let me say that 
many of us bring our kids to the meetings from time to time.  I think it 
would be good if there were some prior mention of the type of nudity if 
there is to be nudity.  It gets into the opinion area but I think some 
of the art folks could give us a semi-solid working definition of the 
classic nude, for instance.  Surely someone could crib from an art book.  
So I guess what I'm asking for is a sign at the door notifying folks 
that what's to be shown may be unsuitable for some folks' tastes.  It's 
like at the NSA convention tables; responsible vendors put up signs that 
say no one under 18 is allowed to pick up the old (and pretty tame) 
porno slides; hell, that's a clear enough warning and it's good 
advertising to boot.  Well, I'm certainly rambling now but let me say 
what's really driving me here.  Some of the stuff my kids have seen at 
NSA shows has been at least questionable for them and even more 
questionable for the younger kids.  One slide was a closeup of the 
functional parts of a couple engaged in delicto aardvarkus.  Fortunately 
it was a close enough closeup that my kids didn't understand it at all; 
not so sure about the other 10 kids in the audience of 70.  But they did 
understand some of the more salacious nudes.  They don't have any more 
problem with classic nudes (such as are shown at OCC) than the adults, 
as far as I can tell.  So what are we going to do for the minority which 
is the people of finer moral sensibilities and for the children?  Taunt 
them into conforming?  Does the NSA have a sex problem?  I don't think 
so; not nearly.  I think it may sometimes have a problem with the 
contents label.
 
John B


------------------------------

End of PHOTO-3D Digest 1258
***************************
Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 21:46:02 -0600
Reply-To: photo-3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Originator: photo-3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: photo-3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Precedence: bulk
From: photo-3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To: Multiple recipients of list <photo-3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: PHOTO-3D digest 1258
X-Comment:   The Stereoscopic Image (Photo-3D) Mailing List  
X-Comment: MESSAGE FROM SERVER
Status:   

			    PHOTO-3D Digest 1258

Topics covered in this issue include:

  1) Oliver Wendell Holmes
	by P3D Michael Kaplan  <mkaplan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  2) Re: Muybridge on U.S. stamp
	by P3D Alexander Klein <klein@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  3) Re: Shutter glasses
	by P3D Marvin Jones  <72657.3276@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  4) Re: Camp, Diners,Boomerangs, Boomers, amateur 50s 3-Ds
	by P3D Josh Rubin  <jnr@xxxxxxxxx>
  5) Revere 33 Camera
	by P3D  <bsharp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  6) Re: Shutter glasses
	by P3D William Carter  <wc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  7) Re: Revere 33 Camera
	by P3D Patrick Boeckstijns <pboeckst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  8) Re: Owla results (p3d 1255)
	by P3D Patrick Boeckstijns <pboeckst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  9) Micro 3-D
	by P3D William Carter  <wc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
 10) ViewMaster to Slides
	by P3D  <AAPRMikeC@xxxxxxx>
 11) Driver for field sequential tv
	by P3D Elliott Swanson  <elliott@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
 12) Rochester Holiday Inn Reservations
	by P3D John D. Roll <johnroll@xxxxxxx>
 13) Christie's auction
	by P3D Richard A Wood  <JSRAW2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
 14) Re: PHOTO-3D digest 1255
	by P3D  <MarkKernes@xxxxxxx>
 15) Re: PHOTO-3D digest 1256
	by P3D  <MarkKernes@xxxxxxx>
 16) THIS LIST!
	by P3D  <JakeKristy@xxxxxxx>
 17) Advanced Solutions for Splicing
	by P3D  <JakeKristy@xxxxxxx>
 18) comet stereo pair
	by P3D Richard M. Koolish  <koolish@xxxxxxx>
 19) Re: comet stereo pair
	by P3D Roger D. Curry  <rcurry@xxxxxxxxxx>
 20) Nudity & ad hominem attacks &c
	by P3D John Bercovitz <bercov@xxxxxxxxxx>

----------------------------------------------------------------------