SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: PROLIFE who wrote (13856)10/30/2006 3:25:36 PM
From: TimF  Read Replies (1) of 71588
 
I don't see how its an issue with word parsing, at least not on my part. Even if I'm wrong its not a matter of carefully applying words to obfuscate the issue. Instead I'm presenting an idea simply, and you can either find it useful or not.

Lets give an example. All sorts of fiction has really horrible villains. They kill, enslave, torture etc. Some of them might be cannibals. That doesn't mean the authors endorse, or are fixated on murder, slavery, torture or cannibalism.

If the rapists and abusers (or tortures or cannibals) are the heroes of the story, then you might more reasonably draw some negative conclusion about the author (but even then writing a book from the point of view of evil people, doesn't make you evil)

Possible counter arguments?

1 - "Sex is different". I'm not sure that it is. I suppose someone writing about sexual assault or perverted activity might be more likely to enjoy or be fascinated by that activity than someone writing a story with cannibals is likely to enjoy or be fascinated by cannibalism, but still there is no automatic connection.

2 - That these passages where particularly graphic and that you wouldn't vote for someone who wrote a story graphically depicting torture or cannibalism either.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext