All Your Breasts Are Belong to Us (Unless We Tell You Otherwise)

|

Writing in The Wall Street Journal, the very sharp Garance Franke-Ruta suggests we rewrite First Amendment jurisprudence to keep 20-year-old breasts off the Internet:

Joe Francis is a cultural pollutant. But as he contemplates life in prison, the rest of us ought to contemplate what he has wrought—or what kind of society we have allowed him to create on our watch…

consider how much has changed in recent years. Once upon a time, a picture was just a picture…Just as Google transforms us all into archivists of previously fleeting moments, so too does the new digital recording technology give youthful acts a permanent life. In the case of Mr. Francis and his empire of imitators—not to mention angry ex-boyfriends with digital flash cards and a long memory—it can transform the playful exhibitionism of young women into scarlet letters that follow them around for life.

Is there anything to be done? Curtailing the demand side of such a "market" is difficult, requiring moralistic sermons and abridgements of speech. But the supply side is more vulnerable to change. It is time to raise the age of consent from 18 to 21–"consent," in this case, referring not to sexual relations but to providing erotic content on film.

Franke-Ruta is right! We don't want "playful exhibitionism" to morph into future-killing "scarlet letters." So let's channel a little Nathaniel Hawthorne circa 1850: Woman engages in sexual act, is shunned by society, dies alone. In Franke-Ruta's moral universe, the ideal response to this situation is: Prevent the sexual act, or at least prevent anyone from knowing what transpired. The problem isn't norms that sentence a sexual woman to societal exile; it's the ease with which naïve, silly adult women find themselves showing some nip.

It'd have been nice for Hester Prynne if norms had evolved to tolerate, rather than stigmatize, the sexuality of women. We're obviously headed that way. In an important sense, the reputational cost of stripping down on camera has never been lower. (Thanks, Paris!) By the time the current crop of flash-ready 18-year-olds graduate college, the cost will be lower still.

To retard this (ultimately beneficial) evolution, you've got to perpetuate the idea that the display of adult mammaries is an earth-shattering, life-altering, and above all shameful event. One way to do that is to jack up the age of consent and the cost of participation, turning adult women into victims and amateur filmmakers into sex criminals. I see how that's an ideal outcome for Rick Santorum-ites, the Independent Women's Forum, and Concerned Women for America; young women in general, not so much.

NEXT: Jack Kemp: Hates Constitution, Loves Black People

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Why not just force everyone to grow up in opaque plastic bubbles until they are 35? That would eliminate any possibility of cultural contamination or immoral behavior. Do it for the children, won’t somebody think of the children?

  2. Raising the legal age from 18 to 21 has been such an overwhelming success for alcohol, I think we should institute it everywher we can.

  3. You can have my Barely Legal when you pry it from my cold, dead, clawlike, hairy hands.

  4. Why not just force everyone to grow up in opaque plastic bubbles until they are 35?

    Because a lot of women are still sexy at that age. Make it 65 and you’ve got a deal.

  5. I don’t know if the argument is that flashing or other sexual hijinks are “shameful” in asmuch as the internet has made the stakes a lot higher.

    How much would Ms Howley’s reputation as a serious journalist be harmed if some compromising photos from a college party 10 years ago showed up on the internet?

  6. Oh, and here’s some annoying pedantry: if the woman is 20 years old, the breasts themselves are probably younger than seven.

  7. Kerry,
    You keep writing this wonderful sex positive, ifeminist stuff. But when are you going to lead by example and post on Suicide Girls?

    {In the event that Ms Howley actually has a Suicide Girl page, please ignore the above}

  8. Dan T.,

    No, the internet has apparently made the stakes a lot lower.

  9. Dan T.,

    No, the internet has apparently made the stakes a lot lower.

    How? Back when I was doing stupid drunken things in college, there was no chance of any of it being captured on a cell phone camera and posted literally for the world to see.

  10. How much would Ms Howley’s reputation as a serious journalist be harmed if some compromising photos from a college party 10 years ago showed up on the internet?

    I guess that would be Ms. Howley’s problem; and the argument being presented is that the way to deal with the problem is to bring back a more stringent stigma.

    I have what I believe to be a better idea – why don’t people loosen up a bit? Bodies are neat.

  11. Make it 65 and you’ve got a deal

    ageist propaganda……

  12. How much would Ms Howley’s reputation as a serious journalist be harmed if some compromising photos from a college party 10 years ago showed up on the internet?

    Warren can only hope…….

    🙂

  13. The only thing lamentable is that many of these girls don’t get paid for taking it all off. I tend to think girls who do this are silly sluts who can’t make it with their brains. But to prohibit or restrict adults from getting nakie in front of the camera is idiotic. And I don’t think anybody’s photos from 10 years ago would hurt them. It’s like marijuana. Used to be you couldn’t admit you smoked it in college, but we had Clinton with dope and Bush with 8 balls of coke. I think our society is over giving a crap about sex tapes.

  14. Dan T: How much would Ms Howley’s reputation as a serious journalist be harmed if some compromising photos from a college party 10 years ago showed up on the internet?

    Not at all?

    Ms Howley was 15 ten years ago, FYI.

    The question at hand is whether a naked photo ought to be considered “compromising” in any sense. Joe Francis, the saint, has helped to create a world in which it more normal, and less compromising, each year. “You flashed your tits on GGW? Me too! Good times.” Kerry’s point, I take it, was that Franke-Ruta’s proposal would be a move backward to more repressive mores in which playful, harmless filmed nakedness IS stupidly considered “compromising.”

    A better idiotic coercive solution would be to mandate that ALL 18 year olds have naked pictures taken and published on the internet, removing the stigma altogether.

  15. We should mandate that people have erotic photos taken of them yearly from birth and stored on a fully searchable database online. That way, since nobody will be exempt, the shame would suddenly just go away and anyone could be naked whenever they wanted without stigma.

    But then what would college deans do if they didn’t have freshmen track team initiation streakings to crack down on?

  16. Sorry, I don’t want to end up watching porn that has people 35 or older in it. It will eventually come to that if this passes.

    This is insane, another strike against liberty. They are BREASTS. Breasts are fat and tissue with many ducts and a nipple. Get over it!

    I say that since a shirtless man is erotic for a teenage girl, we should make men wear shirts at beaches and public pools. This way NO ONE has the natural human sexual urges.

    Humans evolved (Please..don’t..deny..science) to eat animals and mate. We cannot deny any of those.

    Legally you are an adult when 18. To raise the age of consent / porn age to 21 would mean you would have to be 21 to be an adult. I mean, how can you be an adult but yet not make a decision on sex?

  17. The question at hand is whether a naked photo ought to be considered “compromising” in any sense. Joe Francis, the saint, has helped to create a world in which it more normal, and less compromising, each year. “You flashed your tits on GGW? Me too! Good times.” Kerry’s point, I take it, was that Franke-Ruta’s proposal would be a move backward to more repressive mores in which playful, harmless filmed nakedness IS stupidly considered “compromising.”

    It’s a fair point and I understand where she’s coming from.

    Although it assumes that there is no legitimate reason to repress displays of sexuality to begin with.

  18. I’m not sure if I got this right?

    A breast feeding mother can whip one out in any public space, say in front of numerous teenage and sub-teenage kids. But if the kid has a picture of that mother showing her breast it would be a crime?

  19. All haters of lucious B ( . Y . ) BS must be executed! NOW!

    lol. j/k

    But seriously why can’t the moralizing idiots mind thier own boobs and leave the rest of us alone?

  20. You know, how stupid are we, it’s the 21st Century and we still think female breasts are “porn”. Unlike most of the world.

  21. Warren:

    Kerry,
    You keep writing this wonderful sex positive, ifeminist stuff. But when are you going to lead by example and post on Suicide Girls?

    Kerry has also written in favor of open immigration, so why not ask her when she is going to lead by example and emigrate?

  22. Jennifer | May 7, 2007, 11:38am | #
    Why not just force everyone to grow up in opaque plastic bubbles until they are 35?

    Because a lot of women are still sexy at that age. Make it 65 and you’ve got a deal.

    So you think women over 65 are not sexy? I use to think women over thirty were unsexy. Now I tend to judge women under 30 too childlike to be sexy (still like that youthful complexion). 65 is still a bit old for me. Still I suspect I’ll be eying the senior discount babes with my particular brand of creepy lustfulness one day all too soon.

    BTW FWIW, I find cosmetic surgery results in a “fake” and therefore less attractive appearance in almost all cases.

  23. I go to Univ. Wisc. Madison (Playboys #1 party school and a den of damn dirty stinking hippies who make the local scene fantastic but naively unarmed) and it would be a crippling blow to our ability to attract sex crazed high school grads if women were forced to keep those sweater puppies covered until they were juniors. Won’t someone think of the overpaid college admissions officers?

    Of course I am 26 and married, so what do I know?

  24. Dan T.,

    How?

    In other words, there anonymity in the common.

  25. Wow, run-on sentence much, Ramsey?

  26. The problem isn’t norms that sentence a sexual woman to societal exile; it’s the ease with which na?ve, silly adult women find themselves showing some nip.

    Maybe the consent should only be required for creampie photos then.

  27. I saw myself naked when I was 15. Should I turn myself into the authorities?

  28. make that “over to”

    The enlightened peoples of the Middle East have already figured out this problem: chicks, can’t leave the house unless you’re wearing a tent.

  29. Although it assumes that there is no legitimate reason to repress displays of sexuality to begin with.

    Oh mighty Dan, I have been wracking my brian and cannot find one reason for the repression of sexual displays. Please enlighten me with a good example.

  30. it can transform the playful exhibitionism of young women into scarlet letters that follow them around for life.

    Maybe this is what Franke-Ruta means.

    Whether that non-existent collective we call society approves or not doesn’t matter to me, what matters is that these wanton girls know what’s happening. They know about cell phone cameras, the internet, and digital storage devices. When Eddie O snaps a digital photo of a hot little honey lying back topless on her Wave Runner at the River, and she smiles for the camera, one cannot say she is youthfully ignorant or a victim of manipulation and that she just wouldn’t do that if she was 21 instead of 19. Except, whoops, she is 23.

    Like all else in this life, each of us has to face the consequences of our actions, good or bad. Maybe it’s just me, but I’ve noticed that I feel a lot less stupid about stupid decisions that I made for myself than I do about stupid decisions my parents or others made on my behalf.

  31. Under these kinds of laws the government protects you from the “long term harm” of having your boobies on the internet by giving you a perminant prison record as a sex offender.

    Curtailing the demand side of such a “market” is difficult, requiring moralistic sermons and abridgements of speech. But the supply side is more vulnerable to change.

    So “free speech” covers receiving the content, but not producing it? Then why did the Founding Fathers guarantee Freedom of Speech and not Freedom of Listening?

    It is time to raise the age of consent from 18 to 21–“consent,” in this case, referring not to sexual relations but to providing erotic content on film.

    So at age 17 (in most states, and in many states much younger if you get legally married or are both about the same age) a woman and her boyfriend can do anything they want to to her boobies except photograph them. For that she must be 21.

    Right.

    How about we first raise the minimum age for military service from 18 to 21. After all, which is more likely to have a long-term adverse impact on a person, boobies on the Internet or an improvised explosive device?

  32. I think Kerry and Franke need to settle this with a bikini pillow fight on a sexyedition of vlogging heads.

  33. How about we first raise the minimum age for military service from 18 to 21. After all, which is more likely to have a long-term adverse impact on a person, boobies on the Internet or an improvised explosive device?

    It would have been interesting if Flynt had asked Lynch this when he was threatening to run the photos.

  34. Larry A, good point.

    Besides, getting photo’s doesn’t necessarily mean publicity ensues.

    I’ve got some really naughty Polaroids of a certain chick I used to know before Mrs TWC in some very compromising positions. I haven’t put them on the internet yet, haven’t mailed them to her now-grown daughters, haven’t shown them to my buddies, in fact, I don’t even know where they are anymore. Somewhere in a musty moldering box up in the rafters of the garage I suppose.

    Maybe I better get rid of them before I drop dead at my computer and my kids find them.

  35. illustrations dammit, where are the illustrations?

  36. LarryA –
    18-20 year olds just don’t understand that they could die by joining the military. We need to protect them from making life-altering decisions until they are as old and “wise” as the lawmakers trying to protect them from themselves.

  37. Back when I was doing stupid drunken things in college, there was no chance of any of it being captured on a cell phone camera and posted literally for the world to see.

    And even less chance that the world would want to see it anyway.

  38. Oh mighty Dan, I have been wracking my brian and cannot find one reason for the repression of sexual displays. Please enlighten me with a good example.

    Well, one example that you don’t hear often but I find appealing is that by cheapening sexuality, you take the enjoyment out of it.

    But I guess the main argument is that, like most things, sex causes problems if done in excess. Has there ever been a functioning civilization that did not have rules and customs that acted to repress sexuality?

  39. Dadiodaddy:
    Yes, does the same thing go for Anime porn? Should it be illegal to draw boobies of a girl who’s supposed to be younger than 21? Or moreover, should it be illegal to think of them?
    If you say no, you’re clearly a perv. Who else would THINK of such a heinous thing?

  40. I think you miss part of the point. If college guys were flashing their dicks like this for “Guys Gone Wild” by a Josephine Francis, they’d be hard-pressed to get into many careers as well and/or lose respect if they were already there. I bet you the rate of exhibitionism among men around large groups of women is probably a lot lower because the men would rather the women get in trouble than them.

  41. If college guys were flashing their dicks like this for…

    They’d also be arrested for indecent exposure, right fargin’ NOW.

  42. They’d also be arrested for indecent exposure, right fargin’ NOW.

    As would women flashing their pudenta.

    Has there ever been a functioning civilization that did not have rules and customs that acted to repress sexuality?

    I can think of a whole bunch that would have functioned much better had they had less repression. Including some around today.

  43. I have nothing to add.
    But regarding the issue of breasts: I’m in favor of them.

  44. Although it assumes that there is no legitimate reason to repress displays of sexuality to begin with.

    The only “assumption” being employed is that 18 is a valid age of consent, and that there is no reason to deviate it in special cases such as this unless you can show one. Repressing sexual displays for general purposes was not even given as a reason for raising the age of consent for internet sexuality (at least in the quoted passage), rather the reason given was to protect the reputation of women. This reason was appropriately attacked for being likely to have the opposite effect as the one claimed for it. Your blatant misreading of this, Dan, would seem to reinforce the claim of many that you are a troll, a view to which I do not subscribe myself, but I can see how stuff like this feeds it.

  45. “That’s right, you heard right, our big prize tonight is 50 American dollars to the girl with the most exciting murmelian protuberances! As viewed through a thoroughly soaked stupid-looking white sort of male person’s conservative kind of middle-of-the road cotton under-garment. Whoopee!”

  46. From reading these comments, it appears that no one here has actually viewed a Girls Gone Wild video. These are not videos of boobs; these are full-on sex tapes.

    Joe Francis finds a couple 18 year olds at Spring Break or Mardi Gras, makes sure they are good and drunk, then convinces them to have sex on camera.

    I’m pretty sure our society is beyond caring if someone flashes their boobs. Hell, my wife has been to Mardi Gras and it hasn’t hurt her any. But, I don’t think we’ve reached the point where “starring” in amateur porn is completely innocuous.

  47. jaybird | May 7, 2007, 12:16pm | #

    I think Kerry and Franke need to settle this with a bikini pillow fight on a sexyedition of vlogging heads.

    Not a bad idea. Picture of Franke HERE. (girl in black dress)

  48. “They’d also be arrested for indecent exposure, right fargin’ NOW.

    As would women flashing their pudenta.”

    That’s completely untrue – I have been to Mardi Gras and Spring Break. Women can walk around butt-naked with no interference from the police. Hell, I’ve seen women having sex in public while the police watched.

    But, whenever a guy “whips it out”, he is taken to the ground IMMEDIATELY, and gets to spend the next two or three days in jail. That’s just the way the world works.

  49. “What did you think? That TV turned a whole generation of girls into sleazy whores? That we’ve normalized promiscuous behavior to the point that college chicks would get naked for millions of masturbating men for the price of a truckers hat?…Of course it’s hypnotism”
    ~Stroker and Hoop “The XXX Wife”

  50. But, I don’t think we’ve reached the point where “starring” in amateur porn is completely innocuous.

    Maybe, maybe not. There’s degrees of everything.

    Regardless, if you’re right (I’ve seen Girls Gone Wild at some point, not in a while, myself) it would not just be the commenters here who either don’t know or apprectiate that Girls Gone Wild includes sex acts rather than merely exhibitionism, it would Franke-Ruta as well. Ms. Howley and us are reacting to what he has said. You seem to want to introduce a new issue: a distinction between the age of consent for exhibitionism on camera and the age of consent for sex acts on camera?

  51. I refuse to form an opinion until I see the evidence.

  52. The only “assumption” being employed is that 18 is a valid age of consent, and that there is no reason to deviate it in special cases such as this unless you can show one. Repressing sexual displays for general purposes was not even given as a reason for raising the age of consent for internet sexuality (at least in the quoted passage), rather the reason given was to protect the reputation of women. This reason was appropriately attacked for being likely to have the opposite effect as the one claimed for it. Your blatant misreading of this, Dan, would seem to reinforce the claim of many that you are a troll, a view to which I do not subscribe myself, but I can see how stuff like this feeds it.

    I don’t think I misread the issue at all – check again and you’ll see that I described it as a “fair point”.

    Like most internet discussions, this one has moved from the initial point into broader themes of sexual repression and freedom. I don’t see how that constitutes trolling at all.

  53. Fyodor:

    Personally, I think that 18 is fine. You should be an adult by 18, and should be responsible for your decisions.

    I just wanted to point out that GGW is not mere exhibitionism. And, that there really is a difference between showing your boobs and having full-on sex with some random stranger on camera…

    For instance, my wife has shown her boobies at Mardi Gras, and this doesn’t bother me in the least (she has a great rack). If she had been featured in one the GGW porn scenes, I’d probably feel a little differently.

  54. I would imagine that since most states have laws against public breast flashing, that that would be indecent exposure too…

    It is stupid for women to engage in behavior like this if they know that they are going to seek a career in a profession where people care a lot about image. Both men and women will use this against them. Men will mock them as sex objects, and women who don’t like them or compete with them will use them to label them as the office whore. Most people don’t care about loose sexuality, but there are many people who wouldn’t hesitate to use an exhibitionist photo of a coworker to knock them down for a promotion.

  55. What about parenting?

    it’s somehow impossible for us to raise our daughters with the ability to make sound decisions, so we need big brother to protect them from their own poor judgment?

    never mind the sexism

    an 18 year old male can sign up to be a hessian for Bush’s imperial adventures, and he’s lauded as a hero (of sorts)

    but an 18 year old female who flashes her nipples at a camera needs to be protected from her own poor judgment, ‘cuz it could go bad and embarrass the poor dear later in her life

  56. Okapi, right on two counts.

    TWC has never seen a Girls Gone Wild video.

    Weenie Wavers go to jail.

    Not that it matters and it’s off topic a bit, but in a city near here some 40 year old bimbo got sick of her neighbor’s kids playing basketball in the back yard. She began standing around her deck naked every time they played.

    Did I mention she was disgusting looking (saw her pix in the paper). Not only would she fail to arouse even a blind octogenarian but any 14 year old boy would Ralph on the spot at the thought.

    Never mind. Her naked body was displayed with the purpose of driving the kids away from hoops. The parents discussed, she refused to put her clothes back on. This went on for weeks. Finally the cops get called. After 8 calls to the cops, they finally show up.

    She does not get arrested but instead gets a ticket. She goes to court and the judge dismisses the ticket because only men can be charged with this kind of indecency.

    Story here

    Just imagine the community uproar if some old fat guy was lying around in his birthday suit in clear view of a few 9th grade girls shooting hoops in the backyard.

  57. Lamar said: I tend to think girls who do this are silly sluts who can’t make it with their brains.

    Which goes to show you that the moral patrol isn’t extinct just yet. Why does a playful display of skin make someone a slut, or stupid?

    I tend to assume that most 18-year-olds know that the internet exists and they can end up on GGW or similar if the expose their breasts in public (which, as other commenters have pointed out, is quite different from exposing one’s genitalia)- they just don’t care. They’re just nipples. Everyone has them. No big deal in my world.

  58. “I tend to assume that most 18-year-olds know that the internet exists and they can end up on GGW or similar if the expose their breasts in public (which, as other commenters have pointed out, is quite different from exposing one’s genitalia)- they just don’t care.”

    or at least not at the moment. booze is like that, for better and for worse.

    but how showing titty makes one a slut – or what slut actually means – is kind of beyond my thinking at this point.

  59. “I am soooo drunk”
    ~the mating call of certain college girls

  60. Garance Franke-Ruta, is what? Ninety-three?

    If this were put to any kind of a vote, it would fail miserably. Creepy old politicians are against it; teen-agers and young adults are against it. Just the Fundies and hard core Andrea dworkin-types would be for it. And they probably amount to 10% of the population combined.

  61. to Reinmoose
    …not only no, but hell no…clearly a most heinous perv and proud of it sir. 9 out of 10 heinous perv’s agree tits are a good thing

  62. Hmm. My thoughts:

    The real issue here isn’t naked 18 year old chicks, or 18 year old chicks having sex (at least not to me, and I suspect not to the original writer of the article).

    It’s the “drunken” bit. Now, as I understand it — drunk people, of any age, are generally not considered entirely capable of consent. Sex is a bit of a grey area, insofar as sometimes it’s just drunken sex and sometimes it’s drunken rape and thus highly situational, but contract law is a bit more black and white.

    I’m pretty sure you cannot, while incapcitated by alcohol, enter into a legally binding contract. Since each and every “Girl Gone Wild” has had to sign a release and consent form, the questions are thus: “Was she drunk or sober when she signed the release? Was she drunk or sober when they filmed it? Did they get the release before or after the filming?”.

    I see it like this:

    1) Sober signing of release, drinking, filming of drunk flashing/antics/sex = Legally Okay.
    2) Drunk signing of release, filming of drunk flashing/antics/sex = Not Legal.
    3) Filming of drunk OR sober antics/sex/flashing, drinking, then drunken signing of release == Not Legal.

    Rather than mucking around with the pornographic age of consent, if one actually wanted to address the problem you’d be better off doing things like “Following the GGW crew around with a videocamera, filming them getting drunken consents, then offering the girls free legal aide to sue the shit out of GGW”.

    If you wanted to approach it from a legal perspective (actually passing laws — we’ll ignore whether it’s a good law to pass), a much more targeted and workable approach would be to require consent forms a day prior to filming or a day after, or require breathalizer tests and notarized results on the consent form, that sort of thing.

    The problem isn’t the boobs, the flashing, or the drunken sex so much as it is the legal and ethical issues surrounding the use if the resulting images. If those images were obtained through an invalid contract (because the signer was, for instance, wasted off of his or her ass and thus unable to legally sign a contract)….that’s the actual problem.

    Drunk and doing stupid things? Always going to happen. Drunk flashing? Always going to happen. Drunk sex? Really always going to happen. People catching it on videotape or film? Always going to happen, and more and more likely every day with cameras everywhere.

    Having those images of you sold for profit without a valid consent form? Now there’s an actual problem that’s worth talking about.

  63. “”””I would imagine that since most states have laws against public breast flashing, that that would be indecent exposure too…””””

    Not if an infant was sucking on it!

  64. I’m pretty sure you cannot, while incapcitated by alcohol, enter into a legally binding contract.

    Since getting drunk is a voluntary act on your part, my recollection from contracts class is that most states don’t allow you to weasel out of your contractual obligations by saying “But I got myself drunk first!”

  65. The problem isn’t the boobs, the flashing, or the drunken sex so much as it is the legal and ethical issues surrounding the use if the resulting images. If those images were obtained through an invalid contract (because the signer was, for instance, wasted off of his or her ass and thus unable to legally sign a contract)….that’s the actual problem.

    Um, correct me if I’m wrong, but… wasn’t just this sort of suit attempted by a couple of fraternity guys over their appearance in a certain film starring Sacha Baron Cohen? And wasn’t it tossed out of court?

    JMJ

  66. “Which goes to show you that the moral patrol isn’t extinct just yet.”

    I defended their right and prerogative to do as they please, and I even said that there wouldn’t be much of a stigma. Just because pulling your pants down for money isn’t my cup of tea, that doesn’t mean I don’t support your right to sell beaver shots.

    “Why does a playful display of skin make someone a slut, or stupid?”

    It doesn’t make them a slut or stupid, stupid people tend to go into these lines of work because it doesn’t require any brains. Conversely, brains do not disqualify one from sex work.

    What I’m wondering is why you have a problem with my statements. These women are the foundation of an industry that treats women as brainless slabs of purchasable meat. Sorry if that turns me off.

  67. RC Dean: you are right about not being able to weasel out of a contract, but I also recall that courts are sensitive to the guy who gets somebody drunk for the purpose of taking advantage of them.

  68. this thread is burning into extinction but…

    I cut nobody slack for being drunk. It is the oldest excuse in the book. oh, I was so drunk I didn’t notice your daughter was only six. Oh, I was so drunk I didn’t notice you were in the crosswalk. Oh, I was so drunk I didn’t notice I was cheating on my husband. Oh, I was so drunk…...

    With reference to LaMar’s comments. What is un-libertarian about expressing a personal opinion? Everybody else postulates that Jesus Freaks are morons around here every day. But if you express a personal opinion about boob flashing that makes you somehow less of a libertarian? Less of a human? A brainless slut?

  69. And why is it that some libertarians are not simply content with being afforded the freedom to say flash your boobies at the camera but instead also demand the blessings of the crowd as well?

  70. Oh great. This moron wants to make images of 18-20 year olds “child prnography”. Now this might not be what Garence has in mind. However this is what this law would probably morph into.

  71. Since getting drunk is a voluntary act on your part, my recollection from contracts class is that most states don’t allow you to weasel out of your contractual obligations by saying “But I got myself drunk first!”

    Depends on the order, IIRC. If you go to a bar to negotiate a contract, get plastered in the process, and sign it before leaving — tough luck on you.

    If you’re in the bar, drinking yourself silly for a party, and some guy pops up and offers you 100 bucks if you’ll sign this piece of paper and flash your tits — I think the law comes down on the other side.

    If you get drunk while planning to enter a contract later that day/night, your fault. If you are drunk and someone tries to take advantage of that to solicit a contract, not so much.

  72. … if the woman is 20 years old, the breasts themselves are probably younger than seven.

    And sometimes the breasts are considerably younger than seven – almost as if they appeared overnight! 😉

  73. Lamar: apparently you were referring to porn actresses (and, presumably, porn actors as well) as silly sluts- I thought you were referring to girls who participate in GGW. Guess it’s immaterial, at any rate…

    I’m with you that people shouldn’t be prevented from making money off being naked, or having sex, on camera, and that porn does not always equal dumb (but frequently does).

    FTR, my beef was with how I interpreted your comment- namely, that there is some kind of shame attached to promiscuity, as “slut” is generally taken as an insult.

    That’s pretty incongruous, IMO, with decrying the porn industry as degrading to women.

  74. “The problem isn’t norms that sentence a sexual woman to societal exile…”

    Kerry Howley makes a libertine’s argument against Franke-Ruta’s suggestion of raising the age of consent for posing for pornographic material. Not only mustn’t we make the laws against this more restrictive but we mustn’t have any societal mores that crimps an anything goes sexual lifestyle. After all, such mores only exist to punish uppity womenfolk. There can be no bad effects from unconstrained sexuality, can there?

    “To retard this (ultimately beneficial) evolution…”

    Beneficial? For what? To whom?

  75. “…that there is some kind of shame attached to promiscuity…”

    There is always shame attached to irresponsible behavior, that is one of the ways society attempts to discourage such behaviors. Promiscuity is an irresponsible expression of sexuality for the emotional, hygenic and familial damages it causes.

  76. To answer an earlier question:

    http://store.guysgonewild.com/

    Moving on:

    The drunkenness question brings up an issue I have wondered about for a while: if a woman can’t consent to sex when drunk, why can a drunk man be charged with forcible rape? After all, he couldn’t have wanted to do so, since he can’t consent to sex himself, right? Also, did the drunk driver consent to drive?

    Alcohol: the Readily Available, Socially Acceptable Excuse for Whatever Stupid Thing You Did.

  77. For instance, my wife has shown her boobies at Mardi Gras, and this doesn’t bother me in the least (she has a great rack).

    So, what city do you guys live in, and where do you go to celebrate Mardi Gras, exactly? As in street address?

  78. What do you think Garance Franke-Ruta would say if one suggested that girls ought not to be allowed to have abortions — or sex — until 21?

  79. that that would be indecent exposure too..

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.