"But just because we are post doesn't automatically mean we are feminists. There is a widespread assumption that simply because my generation of women has the good fortune to live in a world touched by the feminist movement, that means everything we do is magically imbued with its agenda. It doesn't work that way. "Raunchy" and "liberated" are not synonyms. It is worth asking ourselves if this bawdy world of boobs and gams we have resurrected reflects how far we've come, or how far we have left to go." (Levy) 

  Levy brings an interesting point to the table in that just because the previous generations of women have fought for feministic rights does not mean that the latter generations will still keep them and their ideals true.  Many things have changed since then, but why is the idea of feminism so up in the air?  Have all that the prior generations of feminists fought for been lost on "powder puff" women whose main goal in life is to be as sexually appealing as humanly possible?  I sure hope not otherwise that leaves us in a dire state.

  This book is the first one in awhile that addresses the woman's role in keeping to these overly sexualized roles.  The question remaining is why since we've fought so hard, have we allowed regression?

  The children that are made to participate in these acts are forever scarred, and will never recover fully.  While the effects may not appear immediately they will come full force and will lead to lifetime of harm.  The children are ripped from their childhood and placed square into an adult, seedy underworld.  The children have no choice in the matter truly.  What child have you met that wasn't eager to please an adult at any cost?  The adults that have the child participate in these horrendous acts are preying on the innocent youth.  They are terrible creatures that hunt for innocence and attack needing children. 

  Children's stories are lined with imagined creatures and monsters.  Unfortunately in today's world we have to tell the children about a very real monster that exists right in your neighborhood or town. 

    As mentioned previously, the limits and standards of decency or obscenity are too arbitrary.  Who decides what is indecent and what is not?  In most cases only a few decide for everyone what is considered obscene.  That is an awful lot of power given to a few which has an effect on many people.  When those people decide to arbitrarily place limits on freedoms then our rights are being trampled upon.  I understand that protecting children is of the utmost importance, but there are better ways to do so that will not impede our 1st amendment rights.                               

  Paul uses research, narratives, and interviews which explains how men, women, and children are affected by the porn saturation on the internet.  She also discusses how children are being affected by early exposure to mature viewing and pornography.  Paul acknowledges that since the internet provides anonymity that porn use on the internet has been on the rise steadily. 

  Finally, Pornified shows why it's important for all Americans – those who look at pornography and those who do not – to understand how porn has changed the world we live in and how to understand it.

  If you look at this country in particular, the defintion of obscenity can differ based on whose in office and who is the leading majority.  For example, the FCC has suddenly decided to crack down on obscenity and ladies and gentleman be advised to watch out.  Who knows what will be labeled as obscene next!  While I don't understand how shows that depict situations that do happen in real life (teen sex) will be slapped with an obscenity label and given outrageous fines, but ahhh so says the moral majority. How is it that a call for assasination of a world leader that is against the moral majority is able to slide under the offensive filter? (A 700 Club host called for the assasination of a world leader in the name of the moral majority on air and was asked to apologize)  I suppose when one is a puppet of the morality police then certain actions can be given a blind eye to.  There is a very skewed census of obscenity when looking across the spectrum of opinion.  I personally don't find an exposed nipple offensive, while others don't find a call for someone's life offensive.  It's all in what beliefs you hold I suppose.

  Porn does not cause violence in and of itself.  It may give ideas or show violence, but by watching it does not mean that the viewer will indefinitely become violent or destructive.  I am dismayed that this site makes a correlation to men being to able to suppress their violent tendencies through watching porn.  The statement is very presuming and assumes that all men are the same.  The site portrays men as unable to control themselves without porn, and have basically been demoted to creatures that cannot act of their own free will and desire. 

  The author should use a bit more common sense when making a highly provactive comment as such, and should not lump men all together.  While her scenario may be true of some men, it certainly does not apply to all.  This site is a bit reckless with the man bashing, and frankly if I was a man that does not fall into one of her painted scenarios as perpetual rapist and unrequited sex machine then I would be angry.  Reckless comments should not label an entire group.

  I like pornocali's blogs because they make realworld examples of whatever they are discussing or point they are trying to get across.  It makes the blogs easier to read and makes me think of relative examples.

  I like Casey's blog because they seem to have a really good handle on the course material.  They make good points and is easy to read.

  I like SILKSBLOG because it is direct and to the point.  The points are consistent and relative to class.  It is a good supplement to our class material. 

  There are so many sites out there that display so many graphic images of children engaging in sexual activity or just posing that it is beyond total control.  How can you control a beast like that?  There are so many ways to access such material that it is overwhelming to keep track of all the sites.  It requires it's own task force just to keep tabs on it all.  I am not even positive if it's possible to shut down the sites as fast as they pop up.

  The children that participate in child porn are forever scarred and have lost their innocence forever.  Their childhoods have been ripped from their hands and they have been pushed into adulthood.  Sex is an adult act that has many adult consequences.  A child is not capable of handling the consequences associated with sex.  The impacts of this act are far reaching and will have effects on their life forever.  The effects are psychological, emotional, and physical.  These children are victims that have been preyed upon by predators that knew how to manipulate them to get what they wanted.  These children are left with life sentences of psychological and emotionl scars.

  When someone views violent porn that depicts rape for example, plants a seed in that person that in a sense makes the violent act “normal”.  People search for violent porn for a reason, be it that they are just curious, or are looking to satisfy some sort of violent tendency.  Ted Bundy himself admitted that while porn did not make him kill and torture women, it definitely introduced him to the violent sub- culture that exists.  The exposure to violent porn made this activity normal, and he acted on it.

  There was an interesting argument that porn is sort of like drugs.  There is a gateway of sorts in both:  drugs have a gateway that introduce the user to the drug culture and make the user need and want more.  Eventually, these introductory, moderate drugs lead to a craving for something more or stronger in order to achieve that same high.  The same can be seen when examining porn use.  There is a sort of introductory porn (gateway) found in Playboy or other similar magazines.  The viewing of the material will eventually lose it’s beginning appeal, and some harder will be needed.  This leads to looking for harder pornography, and it’s basically a sort of snowball effect.  While all pornography viewers do not end up seeking this harder porn that leads into violent porn, there are some users that this does happen to (eg. Ted Bundy).  My basic point would be then why do we have violent pornography available?  If it could not be accessed then maybe that violent idea would not be introduced to the person. 

Businesses always have protection measures in place so that their product is secure, and will remain so. No one would want to find themselves in legal turmoil because they had not done whatever they could to ensure the best product for their consumers. So why wouldn’t the porn industry do the same? One would think that logically, the industry and web developers would want to take every measure possible to ensure that the best product is available for their consumers , and one that will be available to only those who should see it.

I would imagine that an industry as large and successful as the porn industry would use every resource they had in order to stay out of trouble and able to distribute their product to the intended consumer. Something such as a the AVS is a security measure that should be mandatory for porn sites. This way the intended audience is met, and the porn industry heads can sleep at night knowing they’ve done all they could to keep explicit materials out of the hands of children.