|
|
Post by booley on Apr 8, 2009 12:12:08 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by MaybeNever on Apr 8, 2009 12:30:42 GMT -5
I can see where this legislation is coming from. In fact the illegalization of porn focusing on the mentally disabled probably isn't a bad move... present wisdom is that they are typically in no more position to "consent" than a child is, and if people are that eager for it you can always get actors and makeup. The elderly, though... that's such a mixed bag. This is no better than legislation outlawing adoption by gays because somehow every single gay person makes an unfit parent. Also, it's proof that not every piece of idiotic legislation comes from the gaping goatse rectum of the Republican party.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sigmaleph on Apr 8, 2009 17:29:00 GMT -5
How the fuck do you equate nude pictures of someone over 60 and child porn? What in the fucking name of Osiris is wrong with her?
|
|
|
|
Post by peanutfan on Apr 8, 2009 17:31:12 GMT -5
I think she was referring to the fact that the elderly sometimes degenerate mentally, and someone (don't ask me WHO, but I know elderly sexual abuse happens) could take advantage of them in this state to make pornography they aren't mentally competent to consent to.
|
|
|
|
Post by devilschaplain2 on Apr 8, 2009 17:36:19 GMT -5
Well, it would certainly do my eyes a world of good.....
|
|
|
|
Post by wackadoodle on Apr 8, 2009 17:44:12 GMT -5
So instead of banning the senile, were just banning all the old people. Am I the only one reminded of that southpark episode?
|
|
|
|
Post by antichrist on Apr 8, 2009 18:04:17 GMT -5
So the Calendar girls would be banned?
Sounds like that Cuban law that tried to ban ugly people from the beach.
|
|
|
|
Post by devilschaplain2 on Apr 8, 2009 18:08:21 GMT -5
So instead of banning the senile, were just banning all the old people. Am I the only one reminded of that southpark episode? Hey, this isn't Country Kitchen Buffet.... |
|
|
|
Post by szaleniec on Apr 8, 2009 18:21:15 GMT -5
Wouldn't it make a lot more sense just to limit the rule to people with mental disabilities and make it clear that the definition includes age-related degenerative conditions? At the moment the proposer seems to be implying that everyone over 60 is senile.
|
|
|
|
Post by peanutfan on Apr 8, 2009 18:23:56 GMT -5
You mean they aren't?  I keed, I keed... |
|
|
|
Post by Green-Eyed Lilo on Apr 8, 2009 18:31:31 GMT -5
So let me get this straight. To keep elderly people who are senile/suffer dementia/don't have their right mind from being victimized, there will not be additional punishments for the victimizers. Instead, frisky senior citizens who *are* in their right minds will become criminals if they photograph each other naked or enjoy making home movies. Makes sense to me, right along with all the bullshit around teenagers and "sexting."
I think it's time for Massachusetts teenagers and their grandparents to band together!
(Oh, and as an aside--does that mean Old Viking's avatar would be illegal in Massachusetts?)
|
|
|
|
Post by JonathanE on Apr 8, 2009 18:35:41 GMT -5
As a 63 year old man, I have no problem with "senior" porn!
|
|
|
|
Post by antichrist on Apr 8, 2009 18:35:44 GMT -5
Didn't Stalone pose in the nude on his 60th birthday? Maybe it was his 50th, I can't remember.
There are a lot of sexy 60+ people out there.
What about the Dove commercials? They have nude seniors in their "ageless beauty" ads.
|
|
|
|
Post by booley on Apr 9, 2009 2:49:58 GMT -5
.... In fact the illegalization of porn focusing on the mentally disabled probably isn't a bad move... present wisdom is that they are typically in no more position to "consent" than a child is, ... No it's not a bad idea at all. Which is probably why there are already such laws. |
|
|
|
Post by perv on Apr 9, 2009 4:08:50 GMT -5
Wha!? The only possible explanation is that Kathi-Anne is making a round-about attack on child porn laws. They're certainly in need of reform, so I wish her luck.
|
|
