Last update:
May 25th

the lounge newspaper

corner Newspaper - Page 2 corner


Matt & Andrej Koymasky
Published on           
December 7th
, 1997


A few days after I opened my site on Geocities, I received two emails,  one from Geocities and one from Linkexchange, saying that my homepage contained pornography. I was (mildly) surprised because I intended to avoid pornography with the images and words I used. And this is not because I'm against pornography but because I wanted to abide the rules set by those services, and also because I wanted my Web site to be accessible to everyone. And there are already too many pornographic sites on the World Wide Web.

Since I need to use those services, of course I had to remove the "incriminating" items, but I started to think seriously about the concept of pornography and its validity. I'm neither a philosopher nor a good polemist, but let me say what I thought about this subject.

First, went to search for a definition of the word in a dictionary. Here is what I found:

Pornography: words, images etc. produced primarily to arouse sexual desire.

OK. "Words, images , etc." means in plain words "anything" produced or shown primarily to arouse sexual desire.

According to this definition, several very famous paintings in the history of art must be pornographic, such as the one that was on the homepage of this site, the "Creation of Adam" by Michelangelo, and others such as and Tiziano's "Venus", Giorgione's "Storm", Goya's "Maja Desnuda" for instance, were notoriously produced "to arouse sexual desire".

And what about famous movies (including some Oscar winners) that are clearly erotic?

Oh yes, I also searched for the definition of this word:

Erotic: arousing sexual feelings or desires.

Well, according to the dictionary, there is no real difference between something that's pornographic and something that's erotic!!! Very interesting. Aren't a lot of famous pictures of Marilyn Monroe erotic? Yes? Well, beware, according the dictionary they are all pornographic...

And what about fashion, that is primarily done to "show and enhance" the sex appeal (dictionary definition: erotic charm that attract members of the opposite sex - No sex appeal between gay or lesbians!) of the buyer?

Or better, what about dance? Isn't tango, lambada, or classic waltz erotic? Are they all pornographic? Oh, sorry, erotic! But show me the difference, please.

Oh, and "sexy", according to the dictionary, means: exciting or intended to excite sexual desire... that is pornographic!!! So never say that someone is so sexy! They can bring a law suit against you...

Anyway, let's say that what I have on my site is "exciting sexual desires" of my guests...

Here is my main point: What is wrong with "exciting sexual desire" in a person who continues to browse my pages after reading my warnings? Or better, what is wrong with sexual desire itself?

In fact, it could not be the "exciting" part that is wrong. If I were to excite my guests' appetite for food with writings or pictures, for sure nobody would have said anything. So, what's wrong with sexual desire? Isn't it one of the most natural and basic instincts of mankind, like eating?

Okay. Somebody says that it could be disturbing to some people. But this is not a good reason.

I'm deeply disturbed by boxing (a so-called "sport") in which the main point (acknowledged by the participants, referees and the public) is to smash the opponent's guts or to make him collapse (technically called Knock Out or KO). I just don't watch boxing, but I'll never claim to prohibit boxing! Also, I'm deeply disturbed by horror movies. I just avoid watching them, but if other people enjoy watching horror movies, what harm is there?

What harm does so-called "pornography" create, especially the "soft" kind (no genitals or cum shown) I have on my site?

But... for children... they say.

I am a father and a teacher and I spent most of my life among boys or children. The point is not to hide sex from them but to educate them to understand sex and more importantly, love in its sexual expression. The problem is not with the images of nudity or sexual behavior, but making our children understand what's good and what's bad and why. And this surely cannot be achieved by hiding so-called "pornography" from our children the. Hiding, will only make what you hide more appealing. Stop regarding children as mentally handicapped people! They are able to understand, if we are able to explain!

But... yes, I almost forgot - someone also accused Walt Disney's productions as being bad for children. So, why am I so surprised?

Unfortunately, there is no fixed boundary between what's "good" and what's "bad", but those with authority and power like to set such boundaries based on their own likings.

Let me know what you think about this issue...


Also see the article on page 15, "Andrej the Gelder".

point Go to: Page 1 Return to the point Index Page Return to the point Lounge Go to: Page 3point

corner © Matt & Andrej Koymasky, 2010 corner
navigation map
If you can't use the map, use these links
HALL Lounge Living Room Memorial
Our Bedroom Guestroom Library Workshop
Links Awards Map