The Battalion
iesday • July 7,1998
PINION
:ril
P'heAsJ
told ]]||
in a
anstop
efense ti
accurarJ
thy typj
as then
to
He
when)*
Mansfiei
'« l ovem
ww.pervert.com
'J 16 ‘male pig’ stems from the adolescent perversion of Internet pornography
nee again, American
males have proved what
sick and perverted crea-
are.
they
April
Towery
opinion editor
t
n
reij
|h
ial ca
ing to
^ast
eetinl 'eek, a col-
t on B Th e
s aid, 'omton
ioss anc hrenicle
s who Hd the
ot Gr< o| 10 most
■ched
the wh wds on the
knk Hemet.
•’uldpliBmong
CogdtHe words
vvitotiSj in order,
Iwith gl XXX,
lay boy,
ht ak u|e, porno and porn. Addition-
■ only four human beings ap-
cutor ear in the Top 100. They are
to divamela Anderson (No. 12), Jenny
p w; IcCarthy (31), Cindy Crawford
|tors a::land Madonna (74).
trial H)K, guys, get off the computer
n ^P n ■ g e t a hfe. I don't expect 21-
to r. ear-old males to not have sexual
witaaBosity, but looking at dirty pic-
fesiAs doesn't quench the curiosi-
Jtonly fuels the fire.
On the "Friendsnet" site, more
h 1,300 repulsive sexual pro-
iles are listed. The explicit lan-
ige and pictures warn Web
ijfers not to go further unless
V are 18 years old or older.
|l, no one's going to know
many high school students
even younger males are
leaking a few peeks on their
hotne computers.
Bmd it's everywhere. I was re
searching the cure for impotence
ve 1V M Viagra for a past column and
ich found a site that invited Internet
’ ( ,1, surfers with the slogan, "After
pou see these pictures, you won't
-d Viagra."
fomen aren't looking at se-
n Jdive nude photos of male
“dels every chance they get.
Internet sites that offer
nographic material are very
ich female-dominated.
[it is so sad that men have be-
e so obsessed with sex they
e to look at dirty pictures on
Internet and read about "Per
il Kitty" and her fantasies to
la thrill.
pornography also is the start-
point for much more serious
lin, v Issues.
|dus, I Almost every human has some
ittinif Prt of sexual desire or curiosity.
iedAf Bs is normal. What is not nor-
l e ‘ s to trivialize and de-sani-
|etries |e something that was created
, vve ,?P )e a beautiful expression of
liece, |febetween men and women,
fcdfically husbands and wives,
easier said than done.
bare,
been
: tlie .
ire li?# omin g involved in pornogra-
“y adds to the downward spiral.
lsS tafi Seria l killer Ted Bundy had a
Ikmind and perverse desire to
| n ,ot I 1 beautiful women. In inter-
Bvvs before his death, he attrib-
said fd much of his mental illness
mcblbis early obsession with
isk^B m ography.
himBTrue, not everyone who looks
m
the I
Veset
wy students struggle with lust
|d sexual desires. These things
se internal destruction. And
at a few Playboys becomes a seri
al killer. However, the men who
spend their spare time entertain
ing pornography do have less re
spect for women and thus the
"typical male," the disgusting,
insensitive and perverted pig, is
born.
If men would stop looking at
pornography, they would stop
seeing women as sex objects.
True, some women act like sex
objects. It could be argued some
women deserve to be treated like
sex objects.
I disagree.
Women are humans. They may
act or dress a certain way because
of insecurity, their upbringing or
another reason. However, even
Persian Kitty has feelings that
can be hurt. And treating some
one like a prostitute is unaccept
able in any case.
Men who entertain pornogra
phy treat women this way with
out even thinking about it. It has
become socially acceptable.
The old saying "garbage in,
garbage out" rings true in this
situation. If people put filthy
trash in their minds all the time,
it reflects in their words and ac
tions.
However, the men
who spend their
spare time enter
taining pornogra
phy do have less
respect for women
and thus the “typi
cal male,” the dis
gusting, insensitive
and perverted pig,
is born.
It's just like watching a horror
movie. The pictures and images
remain in the viewer's mind long
after the movie has ended. It
causes nightmares.
Similarly, pornography causes
its viewers to constantly enter
tain the images in their minds. It
affects their views toward
women and sex in general. It triv
ializes an act that should be very
special.
The Bible states the message
best. Those who utilize their
thoughts for good will find peace
of mind.
"Whatever things are true,
whatever things are noble, what
ever things are just, whatever
things are pure, whatever things
are lovely, whatever things are of
good report, if there is any virtue
and if there is anything praise
worthy, meditate on these things
. . . and the peace of God will be
with you." — Philippians 4:8
€
//
ft
'll,
&
f
Graphic By Brad Graeber/The Battalion
Playboys and prisoners do not mix
John
Lemons
columnist
April Towery is a senior
journalism major.
T he recent 4th of July
holiday offered a stir
ring reminder of the
strengths of our great land.
Indeed, this is the freest
country in the world.
But if one has kept up with
the news during the past
several weeks, one cannot
help but notice that the
United States is a bit mixed
up at times. Recent head
lines show the list of inalien
able rights Americans claim
as their own is changing.
Unfortunately, the revised list of American
rights do not mark progress nor do they make citi
zens more free. On the contrary, the new American
rights are signposts marking this country's journey
along the road to becoming a modem-day Sodom
and Gomorrah.
Consider the court case resolved last Thursday
in which the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
ruled convicts have a right to pornography. That is
right, along with leg irons, lock downs and license
plate making. Playboy and Hustler are now offi
cially part of the prison experience.
The suit was prompted by a 1993 ban on nude
pinups imposed at Arizona's Maricopa County
Jail. The county said that inmates harassed female
guards by waving pictures from sexually explicit
magazines at them. The court, however, ruled that
banning nude pictures could go too far.
"We question whether all materials depicting nudi
ty are reasonably likely to be the cause of violence
or a tool of harassment," Judge Betty Fletcher said
in an Associated Press report.
The court feared that a ban on nude pictures
could apply to more socially acceptable images like
classical art or National Geographic photos.
What is truly reprehensible about this case is how
the court has undermined the Maricopa County
sheriff's ability to maintain discipline in his jail.
Here is a situation where it was prudent to ban
nude pictures. Female guards, who were just try
ing to do their job, were being sexually harassed.
Surely, those guards are entitled to work in a ha
rassment-free environment.
Moreover, allowing inmates to have pornogra
phy seems to be an ineffective way to run a prison.
After all, the purpose of prison is to punish and re
habilitate criminals. But allowing prisoners to pin
up nude pictures is no punishment, nor does it aid
in prisoner rehabilitation. No, if anything, pornog
raphy is a destructive force. It is thought by many
psychologists to be addictive.
Indeed, one wonders if pornography was what
the framers of the Constitution had in mind when
they were laying out the Bill of Rights. Apparently,
the core of American rights is life, liberty and the
pursuit of adult magazines.
The Maricopa county jail case, however, is not
the only disheartening story to appear in the news
during the past few weeks. Although Americans
can have pornography while serving time in jail,
they cannot have prayer while spending time in
public school. Just ask Mildred Rosario.
Rosario was fired last month from her teaching
job in a Bronx, N.Y. middle school after leading her
sixth-grade class in a prayer. On June 8, a student
in Rosario's class asked if a schoolmate who had
drowned had gone to heaven. Rosario led the class
in a religious discussion that ended with a prayer.
During the prayer, Rosario placed her hand on
each studenfis head.
After a parent complained, the Bronx school
board fired Rosario.
Rosario's case offers another example of rights
being distorted. This time, Rosario's right to ex
press herself has been trampled. Here is a woman,
who in good faith, attempted to console her stu
dents grief over the death of a peer.
Although public school classrooms are not the
place for teachers to proselytize their religious be
liefs, Rosario deserved better treatment than being
terminated.
Rosario caused no harm. She left no scars on her
students. If anything, she comforted them. Surely, a
warning or temporary suspension would have
been more appropriate than firing Rosario.
But these days, Americans have so twisted their
rights that they want to be free of what is helpful,
i.e., prayer, and want to embrace what is harmful,
i.e., pornography.
The country is in a frightening state when cons
can have pom, but kids cannot have prayer.
At least this cloud has a small silver lining — the
courts have not yet ruled that kids can have
pornography or that convicts cannot pray. Maybe
there still is hope.
John Lemons is a graduate student
in electrical engineering.
ational interests fuel the U.S.’ foreign policy
or many people, foreign
policy is like another uni
verse — as far beyond
| e ! r perception as it is from
r lr daily concern. However,
resident Clinton's recent state
| Slt 1:0 China incited a fire
|° rm controversy as many
rationed the real objective of
| p C d States foreign policy.
I v en before the official an-
[ ff Ur| cement was made, an en-
M eCh ° rus P rotes t was raised
J ai * st visit. The reasons
rs*, 0 i ec ting were as varied as the organizations
lM|t madethem -
1 embers of the religious right charged that the
I n Hed States should not communicate with any
t ntr y that violates an undefined, yet oft repeated
F 0r al code," while human rights activists pointed
\ |ri ar d s China's record of suppressing democracy
T* 1 '"dividual rights.
Steven
Gyeszly
columnist
On their own, in a domestic setting, these are
valid complaints. Yet in the field of foreign rela
tions, these views are woefully naive in their focus.
Diplomats are envoys, not missionaries. Ameri
can foreign policy has never been about creating a
global utopia; it is, to paraphrase Daniel Vare, the
art of letting another country do what we want. Is
sues of morality and questions of human rights do
have their place in American international diplo
macy, but they never interfere with what our coun
try is truly after.
Most Americans use terms ranging from moral out
rage to mortal sin in describing the Chinese procedure
of the forced organ harvesting of prisoners. As grue
some as this procedure is, we have historically main
tained, and even cultivated, relations with other coun
tries guilty of inhumane acts as long as they did not
interfere with American interests.
Ironically, if foreign relations were determined
strictly on the basis of morality, countries such as
France, Germany and Great Britain would cut off
all diplomatic ties with us because the United
States maintains the death penalty while all of the
European Union nations have abolished it.
Clinton's state visit to China also brought to
light the U.S.' relationship with countries that deny
their citizens basic human rights.
China is not a democracy and does not pretend
to be one. Yet the absence of democracy has never
interfered with the U.S.' diplomatic ties to foreign
countries.
After all, look at the U.S.' two closest allies in the
Gulf: Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. In terms of free
dom, about the only difference between commu
nism and a monarchy is that in a monarchy, the se
cret police have better-looking uniforms.
This nation's history is evidence of the reality of
foreign policy. One of the best illustrations is to
look back at the events of late 1956. Despite our
government's vow to "roll back" communism, the
United States refused to help as Soviet tanks invad
ed Hungary, crushing a Hungarian revolt against
the communist regime. Yet at the very same time,
the U.S. is willing to start a war in an effort to pro
tect shipping interests at the Suez Canal.
The U.S.' foreign policy is fueled by domestic
needs. We practice international diplomacy because
we want something from the other country.
Whether it is better access to a foreign marketplace,
continued cooperation in regional political affairs
or a pledge to send peacekeeping troops, the U.S.
gets what it is after, and only then begin discussion
on a Joint Declaration of Human Rights.
Some argue that the best foreign policy is one that
keeps the U.S. away from most countries. Yet the gov
ernment practices international diplomacy for one rea
son — to advance national interests. It is because of
our idea of foreign policy — getting what the govern
ment really want from other countries while paying
lip service to morality and human rights that we have
preserved those rights where it counts most: here at
home.
Steven Gyeszly is a junior
finance major.