[lbo-talk] Re: Corporate Porn to Kids

Michael Dawson -PSU mdawson at pdx.edu
Tue Mar 23 14:58:28 PST 2004



> Michael Dawson -PSU wrote:
>
> >So you dismiss the charges against MTV? Why? Is it OK with you to have
> >11-year-olds beinvited to watch drunken college kids engaging in public
> >foreplay? Why?
>
> What's the harm of that? I can see if you're some kind of fundie,
> anxious about nonmarital sex, but otherwise, I don't get what the
> damage is from watching MTV.
>
> Doug

Have you looked at the stuff I'm talking about here?

As to reasons, I agree with Neil Postman's theory: Sex (especially commercialized and commodified images of it) competes with juvenile personality development and academic skill acquisition. When it enters into kids' awareness at too young an age, it puts harmful pressure on kids and diverts attention from healthier pre-pubescent endeavors.

This is not to say prudishness and shame are good things. It's simply a bad thing for 11-year-olds to watch drunken pre-orgies. Same goes for pornography of the harder variety. All that is fine and good for grown-ups, and perhaps that includes late teens. But childhood, as Postman argues, is an adult-managed arrangement, the quality of which matters greatly to us all. MTV is nothing but a disaster for kids. Watch it for a few days, and see if you can argue your way around this.



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list