At one point, I discussed what is porn? Porn to one person may not be porn to someone else. I went to websites with nude and not nude people and I went to the website involved in the case and I went to the Playboy web site. Unfortunately, because I went to those sites, my computer was getting popups from these places for a long time. I suppose they had put a cookie on my computer. That didn't stop until that computer died and I had to get a new one.
I also discussed nudity - what is it? If a woman's skirt stops at her knees, is that nudity? It might be to the Amish. If a skirt is above the knee, is that nudity? If a blouse is short and shows some abdomen, is that nudity? If an arm is bare, is that nudity? If a blouse is low cut approaching the breasts, is that nudity? If there is no back to a blouse, is that nudity? Is a two piece swim suit nudity?
Where is nudity on men? If they wear shorts above the knee, is that nudity? If they wear no shirt, is that nudity?
It's all in the eyes of the beholder to decide what nudity is. By the way, if you haven't been to the Playboy website, that is a place to decide what nudity is. I haven't been to that website for a number of years since that court case happened, but I imagine it's no different now than it was then. It's no different than other websites that show the body in various forms of dress or non-dress. Playboy is not considered a porn site plus all those other websites are not illegal or they wouldn't be there. The only illegal website would be of children and those are hunted down by the FBI and probably other law enforcement I don't know about.
In this court case, it was alleged the man had looked at a nude boy on line so he was charged with child pornography and that is sure prison time. That whole charge was because one Texas ranger who was a friend of the Democrat Judge, said, that person's image on the net “might” be underage. I knew the man charged and there was no way he was into kids. Between me and an IT person, we knew that image was NOT an underage boy and the attorney we worked with got that proof into the trial. The person charged was found not guilty.
Never, ever, use your work computer for your “personal” viewing.
I worked for the Cal Youth Authority when Playboys could be mailed in to the inmates who were over 18.
A superintendent cam in and told the suprvisors at a meeting he was banning porn.
One of the crusty old sgts asked, Mr. Kirk, would that be beavage only or both beavage and cleavage,
Still laughing. But one way to clarify your question.
Thanks for sharing your story.
It reminds me of two things:
IIRC, the Supreme court and the “definition of pornography”, unable to describe it but “I know it when I see it”
And
The “New Thought Police”
Nevertheless, the article and the point of the post seems to center around how the MSM is trying to desensitize both the public and our kids to sex and sexual deviance.
The indoctrination facilities that pose as educational institutions have worked very hard for many many years to promote the uncertainty of self and force, through peer pressure, the acceptance of beliefs and behavior that would otherwise been resolved as individuals mature.
The shy kid with very few if any friends is encouraged to explore gay sex in order to fit in.
It’s evil.
They ended up transferring her to a different foster home the next town over. That put a serious cramp in her style.