Weekend Feasts, Jammin', ROUS, Teh Stupid

[tcpip]

You know you've had weekend feasts when you weigh 2.5kgs more on Monday morning than you did on Saturday morning. Last weekend included an excellent and well-attended Christmas cocktail party with magnificent food hosted by txxxpxx, who deserves a medal for her efforts (and Mr.Pxxx too!). Spent much of the evening chatting to severina_242, horngirl, recumbenteer among others, including usekh, who was very entertaining. Following day was the Unitarian's christmas gathering; whilst I have a similar distate for such tunes as caseopaya (although my opposition is more towards humour than revulsion), the performance of the singers and Therese Virtue's choir was very good. Oh, and more food followed.

Other weekend events included working on Saturday, consisting of separating our mail and mailman/web servers and moving the former to Zimbra. On Sunday played through more of D3: The Vault of the Drow. The DM explained over dinner the complete lack of structure in the module; I haven't read through it yet, but he's doing a reasonable job under the circumstances. Currently debating with myself over what gaming to do next year. High on the agenda is a "classic RuneQuest" consisting of Borderlands, Pavis and Big Rubble which are undoubtably among the best gaming supplements of all time. Looking forward to imajica_lj's offer to run Call of Cthulhu's Masks of Nyarlathotep which, from all accounts, is pretty damn fine as well.

An excellent act of culture jamming against those wanting to block the ACTs Civil Partnership Bill (protected, essentially go here and use their resources to say what you really think). Rodents of Unusual Size (from gevauden. Please stop the stupid (again). Under a new German law, a 15-year-old who posts a picture of herself in a bikini on the internet would be guilty of disseminating pornography.

Comments

[zey.livejournal.com]

From the article on the German law you cited: "[The Bill] was triggered by a case in Pittsburgh, America, where a 15-year-old girl sent a friend nude pictures of herself over the internet. The girl was charged with distributing child pornography and faces a long jail term.

Urgh. My brain hurts. Why are American conservatives so mind bendingly thick? Huge gaol time penalty, massive social stigma of being labelled a child porn publisher, the case ignoring the obvious point that she is her own victim...

Every single person who was involved in that farce making it to trial needs their head examined.

Sing along!

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

You can't stop teh stupid, nobody can stop teh stupid
Take the cold from snow, tell the trees, don't grow,
tell the wind, don't blow, 'cause it's easier.
No, you can't stop teh stupid, nobody can stop teh stupid.
Take the spark from love, make the rain fall up
'cause that's easier to do.

As a matter of fact, I am at total loss for real comment on this topic. It just hurts my brain too much.

[amazinggoatgirl.livejournal.com]

the case ignoring the obvious point that she is her own victim...

See, the reasoning is that she can't think for herself. She's a non-person. (...but then how could she commit a crime if you can plead insanity..? Nevermind.)

Grah! Not Germany too! (Wisconsin, where I'm from, has a law like this except for the bikini and intent to assault parts.)

[zey.livejournal.com]

See, the reasoning is that she can't think for herself. She's a non-person.

(Actually, that's another thing about America that strikes overseas observers as pretty odd... the concept of children tried as an adult for crimes committed while as a minor.)

It all makes you wonder what's next from the US criminal justice system: young teenage boys being put in prison for 10 years for sexually assaulting themselves with a naughty magazine, hand lotion and a box of tissues?

[cptjohnc.livejournal.com]

I just about spit on my keyboard. I should have been ready... but you're right!

[tempusfrangit.livejournal.com]

Yep. You're totally correct! lol.

Someone get me out of this fucking country.

Genesis 38:10

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

"And the thing which he did displeased the LORD: wherefore he slew him also."

There's justification y'know..

Re: Genesis 38:10

[tempusfrangit.livejournal.com]

*rolls eyes* I reiterate my statement.

Someone needs to get me the fuck out of this country.

Re: Genesis 38:10

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

What no love for Arizona? ;-)

So will it be Canada or Mexico?

Re: Genesis 38:10

[amazinggoatgirl.livejournal.com]

Wait, dude killed god?

Re: Genesis 38:10

[demonhellfish.livejournal.com]

You fucking wish. No, it's god doing all the killing, as usual. (Yes, god is killing people for not fucking a widow and letting the new kids be considered as sired by the dead husband.)

It's worse than war, you know...

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

Just found this in a copy of Bruce Tapper's honours thesis... Thought you might find it appropriate..

"Masturbation outrages nature's sexual ordinances more than any or all the other forms of sexual sin man can perpetrate and inflicts consequences the most terrible. It is man's sin of sins, and vice of vices; and has caused incomparably more sexual dilapidation, paralysis and disease, as well as demoralization, than all the other sexual depravities combined ... Pile all the other evils together - drunkenness upon all cheateries, swindlings, robberies, and murders; and tobacco upon both, for it is the greatest scourge; and all sickness, diseases and pestilences upon them all; and war as the cap-sheaf of them all - and all combined cause not a tithe as much human deterioration and misery as does this secret sin."

(Professor O.S. Fowler, cited in Malfadden, "The Suberb Virility of Manhood", 1904, pp.72-73).

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

See, the reasoning is that she can't think for herself.

This is the part that really gets my goat. In part because it so antithetical to anyone who respects the ability of people to make their own decisions and in part because it's so unscientific. There are heaps of cognitive studies which show when the capacity to make "adult decisions" of this nature exist, but they are dutifully ignored because some "moral crusaders" of the age of majority have the vote and political clout, whereas those adult minors have no power.

[demonhellfish.livejournal.com]

I'm ignorant. Could you give a few sources? What is the science for age of majority? (I'm guessing about 14...)

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

Jean Piaget and Lawrence Kohlberg are two who started the investigations in cognitive and moral reasoning respectively. Adult reasoning is, of course, individually variable and indeed Kohlberg seemed a little concerned when he discovered that most adults, most of the time, don't use it.

It often makes me ponder on whether citizenship should not be automatic on age of majority but rather subject on evaluation on whether the person understands on how to behave as a decent human being... Like a driver's license...

[demonhellfish.livejournal.com]

Have I mentioned how annoying it is that you consistently make me feel stupid? I of course knew who Piaget was, but failed to think of him. I'd also known of Kohlberg's work, but quite forgotten his name.

*Grin.* Mind you, you seemed to claim that there was a well-established age at which youths start doing no worse than adults, and you haven't told me what you think this age to be.

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

I of course knew who Piaget was, but failed to think of him. I'd also known of Kohlberg's work, but quite forgotten his name.

;-) Easily done.

you haven't told me what you think this age to be

There certainly isn't one. It's individually variable but almost certainly post-pubescent: Although a presentation by Dr John Munro from the University of Melbourne - a specialist in "gifted children" - has led me to reconsider that in some instances. In the presentation he clearly implied that a tiny percentage of children are able to use "adult reasoning", which appeals to an intuitive sense, after all - some biological adults only have the cognitive abilities of children.

[amazinggoatgirl.livejournal.com]

Like a driver's license

Yeah... but that would be too easy to abuse, I think.

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

*nods* I agree. If I could be more certain about checks and balances, I would be more confident in the proposal. As it is, I'm not.

[zey.livejournal.com]

I don't think it's an issue of whether the girl of that age can make decisions. The age of consent laws are more about the impacts from ill considered decisions where they don't have enough life experience to make informed judgements on issues which can have catastrophic life changing consequences (early teenaged pregnancy, STDs, having pornographic photos exist which would haunt them and possibly limit their future career prospects, personal shame and how this can impact family/friend relationships, for example).

What annoys me about that particular case is they've taken a situation where the girl has done something risky and silly (what if that friend wasn't so trustworthy afterall and photocopied those photos for her entire school?), but, the law itself is harming what it was surely designed to protect.

Sure, if she'd distributed her photos to encourage and exploit paedophiles, or the friend she sent the photos to had, then that would probably be a different story. Instead, what seems to have happened is some lunatic wowsers have decided to completely destroy this girl's life just for some morals crusade.

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

Sure, I agree with you that the matters of knowledge as well as reasoning ought to be considered. But I really fail to see the harm in distributing a photograph of oneself in swimwear (no matter how provacatively posed) and, as you say, to the point that the person who distributes the photo is punished.

On another tangent, presumably teenagers wearing bathing suits has not been banned. Yet again we discover another case where the introduction of a recording device apparently radically alters the morality of an act. That one has always struck me as quite strange.

[zey.livejournal.com]

But I really fail to see the harm in distributing a photograph of oneself in swimwear (no matter how provacatively posed) and, as you say, to the point that the person who distributes the photo is punished.

Oh, definitely. That German law is beyond nutty. It's absurd, but, I can't see it lasting too long. I'm more geed up and horrified by that US case ;-).

Yet again we discover another case where the introduction of a recording device apparently radically alters the morality of an act. That one has always struck me as quite strange.

I can see a general point to that though. The shame from an unphotographed act can more easily fade with time than one where the evidence can be dug up and made fresh at a moment's notice.

I don't think there's much shame in a kid in a swimsuit, but, it would definitely apply for more serious offences.

[amazinggoatgirl.livejournal.com]

ill considered decisions where they don't have enough life experience to make informed judgements

Well, doesn't that just boil down to an inability to make decisions?

[zey.livejournal.com]

Not technically. At that age they can certainly make decisions, but, they're more likely to be bad ones ;-).

Age gives us both human nature experience and the opportunity to learn important things (STD protection, contraception, etc) through education.

[amazinggoatgirl.livejournal.com]

Well, ya, it's classic denial.