Vice Pornographer? - A Response
November 5th 2007 11:59
I find that the right can often lie and distort beyond reason. After reading the outrageous accusations that a US senator has been writing books about kiddie porn I decided to look into the situation for myself.
You can find the post here as well as my response, which I've also posted here:
You can find the post here as well as my response, which I've also posted here:
I'd give you the benefit of the doubt but no.
I looked up Jim Webb and right from the get go I realized you're twisting facts, he's actually been to a war zone. The Vietnam war to be exact. Like John Mccain he stands up there with those who have served their country, unlike George Bush who went out of his way to avoid conscription.
But who am I to bring the do-no-wrong president?
You say he's written books about porn, yet I've looked high and low and can't find anything, he's best known for his novel 'Field of Fire' which was critically praised for its depiction of the vietnam war.
Suffice to say I haven't read any of his work but from what I understand he has not romanticized the idea of 'kiddie porn', in fact what he was doing was describing something that is seen as culutrally acceptable. In fact he was describing something he saw first hand in Bangkok, he was not making it up, he was describing an event.
Before going crazy and accusing the Thai of being pedophiles you have to look into the nature of the supposed crime. He describes the father kissing an infant boys penis which as seen in Thai culture is perfectly normal and, also as viewed by the Thai, has no sexual aspects about it. Does it sound wierd? Well yes, but we are talking about different cultures here. I'm sure they find a lot of Western culture to be wierd.
But wierd does not mean bad, and describing a foreign culture is not at all bad. Let me tell you why not, in certain circlces of Judaism,
Source
Is that wierd? Well yes, to me thats kind of oddball, do I automatically assume theres some sort of sexual aspect to it? No, as wierd as it is, it's just that.
In essence all this controversy about Jim Webb writing about child porn is no more than his recollections of experiences in a foreign land, which initself was not even sexually motivated.
Heres a more direct example of the misunderstandings of culture (passages taken from the article linked):
Source
I looked up Jim Webb and right from the get go I realized you're twisting facts, he's actually been to a war zone. The Vietnam war to be exact. Like John Mccain he stands up there with those who have served their country, unlike George Bush who went out of his way to avoid conscription.
But who am I to bring the do-no-wrong president?
You say he's written books about porn, yet I've looked high and low and can't find anything, he's best known for his novel 'Field of Fire' which was critically praised for its depiction of the vietnam war.
Suffice to say I haven't read any of his work but from what I understand he has not romanticized the idea of 'kiddie porn', in fact what he was doing was describing something that is seen as culutrally acceptable. In fact he was describing something he saw first hand in Bangkok, he was not making it up, he was describing an event.
Before going crazy and accusing the Thai of being pedophiles you have to look into the nature of the supposed crime. He describes the father kissing an infant boys penis which as seen in Thai culture is perfectly normal and, also as viewed by the Thai, has no sexual aspects about it. Does it sound wierd? Well yes, but we are talking about different cultures here. I'm sure they find a lot of Western culture to be wierd.
But wierd does not mean bad, and describing a foreign culture is not at all bad. Let me tell you why not, in certain circlces of Judaism,
Metzitzah b'peh ("suction by mouth") is a practice in Haredi and Hasidic circles in which, after removing the foreskin, the mohel will suck out the blood from the wound to clean it. The mohel spits the blood into a receptacle provided. Afterwards the circumcised penis is bandaged, and the brit considered complete.
Source
Is that wierd? Well yes, to me thats kind of oddball, do I automatically assume theres some sort of sexual aspect to it? No, as wierd as it is, it's just that.
In essence all this controversy about Jim Webb writing about child porn is no more than his recollections of experiences in a foreign land, which initself was not even sexually motivated.
Heres a more direct example of the misunderstandings of culture (passages taken from the article linked):
Such kisses are signs of affection, not sexual abuse, ruled the Maine Supreme Court in 1996 when it overturned a sexual assault conviction of an Afghan immigrant who was similarly photographed with his 18-month-old son. The court ruled that the father kissing his son's penis was a common cultural practice and not a sexual act.
"Kissing a young son on every part of his body is considered a sign only of love and affection for the child," the court said in its ruling. "There is nothing sexual about this practice."
"It shouldn't be looked at as a crime," said Ludwig Adamec, a professor emeritus of Middle East history at the University of Arizona's Center for Near Eastern Studies, who testified as an expert in the Maine case.
"Kissing a young son on every part of his body is considered a sign only of love and affection for the child," the court said in its ruling. "There is nothing sexual about this practice."
"It shouldn't be looked at as a crime," said Ludwig Adamec, a professor emeritus of Middle East history at the University of Arizona's Center for Near Eastern Studies, who testified as an expert in the Maine case.
Source
| 38 |
| Vote |
Subscribe to this blog
