News24

The naked truth about TopTV and porn

2013-03-11 09:19

Chris Moerdyk

I am in favour of letting TopTV show porn programmes if they want to.

Well, that should have got the attention of just about every consumer body, religious organisation and do-gooder in our wonderful, sunny nanny-state.

I don't much like porn, I prefer being involved rather than a bystander, but as a kid at high school I was pretty much always first in line in the queue behind the bicycle shed when one of the matrics managed to get hold of a Playboy magazine his father had smuggled in from overseas.

Playboy was banned then and fell neatly into the category of forbidden fruit which of course is like a magnet to teenagers.

Then, we became a democracy and suddenly Playboy wasn't banned. It was even printed here in South Africa but it didn't last long and went bust, if you'll pardon the pun, because it wasn't forbidden fruit anymore.

I supposed we learned that from a number of Scandinavian countries that years earlier had changed from having porn magazines covered in plastic and set high up on the shelves at newsstands and shops.

Natural human phenomenon

Then they took the plastic off and let the shopkeepers put the magazines wherever they liked and what do you know - sales went down faster than homeless moles because the mags weren't forbidden fruit anymore.

But, besides the forbidden fruit phenomenon, it still really amazes me that the people who regulate the content of programmes on TV and movies in the cinema, have such a fixation about porn.

After all, it involves a perfectly natural human phenomenon.

Movies that have men and women without their clothes on having a bonk along with all the requisite huffing and puffing, all have an age restriction of at least 18.

Meanwhile, all those action movies we see showing people blasting seven kinds of hell out of each other with everything from pistols  to rocket launchers and cutting heads off with meat cleavers and being impaled on spikes along with all the graphic detail of slowmo blood spatter, usually only get age restricted to 13 or maybe 16.

Why is it that perfectly acceptable and legal sex is bad and man's illegal inhumanity to man is OK?

It doesn't make sense. Even deviant sex has got to be more acceptable than bloody murder.

Violent society

I am still friends with all those school kids who drooled over Playboy magazine behind the bicycle sheds and used to meet in all sorts of peculiar places to watch "blue" movies. I still know a lot of people who love action movies with as much bloody murder as possible. None of these have turned out to be cold blooded killers or sex maniacs.

Which suggests to me that the only people violent movies and porn programmes influence are those who would probably turn out that way even if they didn't watch movies or porn on TV.

Now, I realise that one can argue until doomsday as to whether porn and violence on TV or in the movies, contributes towards our violent, hormone-charged society.

So, forget about the fact that society was pretty damn violent even before movies and TV were invented.

Let's assume that I am wrong and that all this in our face sex does influence the incidence of say, rape, in this country. If so, would it not be also logical to say that the violence on TV and the movies also influence the level of violence in this country?

So, if the authorities decide that Top TV should not be allowed to show porn, then I believe they should really look at whether cinemas and TV should be slowed to show so much violence? I am sure a lot of people would agree. But wait, that's not all.

There are a lot of books that are very graphic when it comes to sexual content and kids read books, so perhaps the authorities should not allow books to have any sexual or violent content.

Oh and then there are our art galleries that are full of nude paintings and some that are even sexually explicit. Perhaps those should be removed as well.

People who want to watch will watch

And while they’re at it maybe parents should not be allowed to be naked in front of their children. The point is, where does one stop?

I don't like porn and I don't watch violent movies. But it makes no sense to me that violence should be OK and sex something bad.

So if TopTV wants to show porn, let them for heaven's sake. They will quickly learn as I suspect e.tv has done that porn isn't the big drawcard it is cracked up to be.

The point is people who want to watch porn will watch it. Better they watch the soft stuff on Top TV than the hard-core bestiality and kiddy porn that remains available on the internet.

In my opinion it is up to parents to set examples and decide what their kids should and should not be watching.

Governments cannot take the place of parents without turning the country into a nanny state and a nanny state represents the worst kind of parenting imaginable.     
 
- Follow Chris on Twitter.

Send your comments to Chris

Disclaimer: News24 encourages freedom of speech and the expression of diverse views. The views of columnists published on News24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of News24.


Comments
  • rm.elegant.5 - 2013-03-11 09:57

    well said author but I assure you once the licence is granted we will see an increase in...1) hand lotion/vaseline sales, 2) stockings (or socks, whatever you prefer) of the male type, 3) divorces as people become more "self sustaining"

      truthis.tway - 2013-03-11 10:25

      SO people only marry to have sex, and masturbation doesn't exist without porn. wow. You are special indeed.

      TheJaydedKing - 2013-03-11 11:17

      Tracy - a good comment, i would prescribe a few hours of you p0rn alone or with the partner of your choice, twice a week for the next few months. Dr Jay

      rm.elegant.5 - 2013-03-11 12:10

      I'm talking about men Tracy...Men in general use porn to masturbate, whether it's their spouses pics (hardly to be honest) or some1 else. Ofcourse marriage isn't about sex but marriage without sex is tragic, sex however without marriage is magic....take your pic :)

  • jacowium - 2013-03-11 10:06

    I fully support your position and reasoning, Chris. Not only that, but I also have a sneaky suspicion that those who appoint themselves as moral guardians, may even be more likely to visit porn channels than those who have no objections to such channels. (Of course I generalise.)

  • jeremy002 - 2013-03-11 10:07

    Neither mindless violence or mindless sex are a good thing. I say mindless sex, because most probably the scenes portrayed in these porno movies are usually not between loving married couples, in a normal heathly realationship. I don't think you would not like a camera to follow you into your bedroom and broadcast what happens in private between you and your wife for (potentially) the whole world to see? I know that some couples, married or unmarried, film themselves and post it on the internet, and others partake in group sex and allow that to be filmed and publicised, but in these cases we are not talking about people with normal healthy attitudes. Such promiscuity always carries a price. I believe that most of these things are acted out by paid "professional" porn stars, not people with consciences.

      NuttyZA - 2013-03-11 10:26

      Judgemental much?

      Revelgen - 2013-03-11 10:58

      So Nutty, we mustn't then have ANY standards? Everything is OK, right? No problem for someone, turned on by porn, then to have sex with your young daughter? Heck, why be 'judgmental' hey?

      truthis.tway - 2013-03-11 11:11

      @Revelgen - Anything that happens between consenting adults is cool.

      Juanne-pierre De Abreu - 2013-03-11 11:14

      Watching a married couple have sex is about as exciting as watching hounds go at it. Throw a third person into that loving relationship and boom, we have a movie.

      LaurenH - 2013-03-11 13:19

      Um, you think a great deal during sex? Always? Er, OK.

  • Juanne-pierre De Abreu - 2013-03-11 11:12

    Two very enthusiastic thumbs up. I have always firmly believed that there is more chance of someone having a six way orgy in their lifetime than stabbing someone to death. we are designed to have sex.

  • Erick Vogel - 2013-03-11 12:00

    I can choose for myself. I refuse to be dictated by hypocrites.

      TheJaydedKing - 2013-03-11 13:40

      Would you accept non hypocrites?

      GB Garratt - 2013-03-11 14:15

      Erick Exactly. And the biggest hypocrites are the religious fundies. In the US (where research is done) the regions where there is the highest number of christians consume the most online porn. http://furiouspurpose.me/the-religious-do-love-their-porn/ Pakistan, a Muslim country, is the world's leader in online searches for pornographic material Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/07/12/data-shows-pakistan-googling-pornographic-material/#ixzz1k9Yg0znd

  • mike.bundy.73 - 2013-03-11 13:33

    I am very happy with your conclusion - banning inanimate things such as magazines and movies has proven to be ineffective. I question your conclusion that availability has created less demand for magazines, do you have a reference for this? I am certain that the easy availability of free porn on the web has a lot more to do with decreased magazine sales.

      Gareth Deeble - 2013-03-14 13:46

      Well if thats the case then toptv should go ahead, if we go by your assumption it will fail so why worry

  • andrew.malan.3 - 2013-03-11 14:54

    Obviously you're entitled to your opinion Chris, but your arguments are paper-thin and don't bother with even vague stats to back up your opinions. The industry that manufactures porn is very different to that which makes Holywood movies, however violent. The former has been proven to interface with the worldwide illicit trade in drugs, people and the like - should we really be giving these folks a market? The softest form of porn is in any event permissible in SA, the consequence of this TopTV application is to push the boundary well back (to a twilight zone contiguous with your animal and kiddie porn examples) and make money from that. Also, approval for TopTV would trigger simultaneous approval for all public broadcasters. The Internet offers porn lovers more than enough opportunity to stroke their fantasies with. Public broadcasters whose business models can't survive without undermining social norms and values probably don't deserve to exist.

      GB Garratt - 2013-03-11 15:15

      So how does that affect you? Don't want it then don't watch it. And what gives you the right to dictate what others may watch, read, hear and talk about. "The former has been proven to interface with the worldwide illicit trade." Citation please. "TopTV application is to push the boundary well back (to a twilight zone contiguous with your animal and kiddie porn examples)." Citation please or you are simply making stuff up. Please explain the use of the word contiguous as you appear to be using a big word you don't know the meaning of. So if porn is free available on the internet then what is your problem with Top Tv showing exactly the same stuff via and encoded subscription channel. And please explain the difference between broadcasting via satellite and broadcasting via the internet. Me thinks you are just another busy[body hypocritical religious fundie.

      andrew.malan.3 - 2013-03-11 20:14

      Happy to respond - perhaps it'll help you to back your libertarian views with some ral facts about the consequences. 1. Link between the porn industry and human trafficking, drug smuggling, money laundering etc, start with Moises Naim (World Bank director and fellow of the WEF) book Illicit, then carry on to many others on the topic, by people who've worked in countering these shadow industries. 2. Unintended consequences into "harder" porn -simply logic. Presumably TopTV isn't applying to show R18 stuff that they can already, so a scrutiny of the application shows a desire to push the existing boundary back. Once this door is opened it's difficult to contain, as a multitude of broadcasters engage in a race to the bottom to outdo each other and differentiate their product. The path is well trodden around the world - Gay porn follows, then fetish, then whatever broadcasters can get away with. 3. What is wrong with it when it's available on the Internet anyway? Well the fact that this is freely available to adults and children alike on the Internet does not make it right, or appropriate. In the UK and elsewhere Internet-enabled devices willmsoon no longer be porn-enabled by default at time of sale, as an "opt-in" will be necessary to access porn sites (with service providers monitoring). Hopefully this cuts the negative social effects among teenagers of excessive exposure to porn. Why should civilized societies welcome porn peddlers, any more than drug smugglers etc.

      Lanfear Mierin - 2013-03-12 09:36

      @ andrew.malan - you fail to realise that the porn industry, like the illegal drug industry, are associated with crime because it used to be, and often still is, illegal. YOu cannot force your idea of "social morality" onto others, history has shown it over and over again. Banning something makes it more desirable in general, not less. I agree with GB Garratt and sincerly don't understand why you are so set against it being shown on a closed subscriber-paying channel? Your last sentenced about "civilised society" also holds no water, as a truly civilised society comprise of responsible people who make their own decisions and accept the consequences of their actions. Teenagers are not children anymore, no matter how much we want to think so, yet who is at fault if teenagers or children see this? Besides, why is it fine and dandy to show violence to children but not sex? Are humans really that warped?

      andrew.malan.3 - 2013-03-12 13:03

      @Lanfear, My point is that you must look beneath the surface to find the consequences of allowing porn on public media networks. (i) The porn industry is the ultimate leech industry - taking money out of a country and investing absolutely nothing in return (much of the balance sheet behind porn is East European - which incidentally is also where much of the trafficking of young girls around Europe emanates). Re Hollywood, at least SA participates in some way as a movie destination (and I'm not defending gratuitous violence - which should arguably be better controlled). (ii) The link between porn and other illicit industries (drugs, humans etc) lies not in their illegality, but in the fact that they use the same distribution and money laundering channels. (iii) When an open minded SA adult argues it is their right to see more nudity on TV just because they feel the urge, then they should realise that they are funding, and a party to, a hidden chain of human misery. (iv) If porn on public TV is allowed, such people should also acknowledge that they can't really control or contain where it develops from there. Porn peddlers, having found a new market, will obviously drive a bus through it. (v) It's sad that you suggest that porn viewing by teens is OK just because it exists on phones. Perhaps you should read up on the social consequences (I agree that the same applies to excessive violence in movies and video games). Isn't it time we made things better/cleaner, not worse.

      Gareth Deeble - 2013-03-14 13:37

      The point you miss is that its not public tv,its a paid subscription.I think you should put all your energy in stopping what dstv has on at the moment,you ever seen Spartacus it has all of what you talking about crammed into 45 min of entertainment violence,sex,mutilation and even gay sex take a look its on channel 112 enjoy it its only a 16 age restriction. The more worring point is that i ordered the dvd set of Spartacus from the UK and they rate it 18 with a big warning

  • aj.coetzee.9 - 2013-03-11 18:01

    I think the people that complain wont watch anyway so why dont they mind their own business? #just saying

  • Mora Mthonyama - 2013-03-11 18:38

    lol Dr jay u're crazy!

  • Concerned86 - 2013-03-12 10:44

    Chris your notions are sound and your argument flawless...

  • Christof Spies - 2013-04-29 18:56

    Good conclusion, but you've totally sidestepped the primary problem. Porn is not a good thing. It destroys healthy sexual relationships. It creates fantastical expectations which are far removed from from reality. The truth is this - the sacredness and beauty and joy of sex is not in the act but in the relationship that it consummates. It builds on trust and love and respect and one-ness, far far deeper than the physical act. The porn industry totally flatters the act of sex, selling souls and bodies on the altar of fantasy and self-worship. It is not love. It never has been, and never will promote either healthy relationships or a healthy society. So, are we to promote porn, or not. Well, I simply cannot see what value it will add to my life, or anyone else's, and for that reason, its just not worth supporting in any way...

  • Kim SaiyanPrincess Murison - 2013-04-30 15:59

    - Excellent! Why was EL James not banned? Are these people doing anything for real causes like animal cruelty????

  • pages:
  • 1