HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: joemays@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Joseph F. Mays)
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
Subject: Japan on the Ohio River
Date: 5 Nov 92 15:08:52 GMT
Distribution: alt.censorship
Organization: Dept. of CS Ball State University Muncie IN

Everybody's talking about censoring the Madonna book in Japan.  It's
not necessary to go so far afield.  On the radio on the way in this
morning, they said that there is a movement afoot to ban the
book in Cincinnati.  This isn't hard to believe at all.  Cincy is
a beautiful city (as anyone who's seen it by night can attest), but
it's incredibly uptight.  Absolutely nothing in any way questionable
or lewd seems to be permitted there.  Remember that this is the same
city that would not allow the Grateful Dead to perform a few years
ago (seems they bring in a bad element).  Their reaction to anything
in "Bad Taste" is to sew their anuses shut a little tighter and
stand firm.  Oh, and speaking of Mapplethorpe, they tried to keep
his photos from being shown there, although I don't know if they 
succeeded.

Joe


Xref: sparky alt.censorship:8652 alt.conspiracy:11965 talk.politics.misc:58736 alt.activism:18473
From: tzs@carson.u.washington.edu (Tim Smith)
Subject: Re: Genitals in Japan(was Madonna...)
Organization: University of Washington School of Law, Class of '95
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 07:46:20 GMT

In article <Bx496F.CHE@cs.uiuc.edu> kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
>obscene.  The Court ruled that material is legally obscene if: (1) the
>average person, applying contemporary community standards, would
>conclude that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to prurient
>interests; (2) it depicts sexually explicit conduct, specifically
>defined by law, in a patently offensive manner; and (3) it lacks
>serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.  The
>_Miller_ test is still the law today.

I've wondered why porn publishers don't use element (3) of the Miller
test to get around obscenity laws.  Say that some community decides that
your magazine, "Young and Shaved," is obscene.  Why not come out with a
new magazine: "Shakespear Illustrated: Volume 1: Hamlet".  Illustrations
consist of the pictures from "Young and Shaved" with captions such as
"The Queen of Denmark Plays With Her Dildo."  The text of Shakespear is
public domain, so they are free to use it, and who could argue that
there is no serious literary value in such a work?

--Tim Smith
From: jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (Jack Campin)
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
Subject: Re: Enid Blyton's
Date: 12 Nov 92 14:57:34 GMT
Reply-To: jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (Jack Campin)
Organization: COMANDOS Project, Glesga Yoonie

shinyash@fraser.sfu.ca (Kazuya Shinyashiki) wrote:
> Anyone know of Enid Blyton's childrens' novels?  I am especially refering
> to the Adventure Series.  They have been banned from at least one local
> library on the grounds of being "racist" and "very sexist".  Any comments?

I don't know about the Canadian situation, but similar flaps came up in the
UK a few years ago, and it wasn't quite the way you imply.  Blyton was
indeed a small-minded little-England bigot who expresses that rather
visibly in her books.  A number of British librarians decided they could do
without her stuff because they had limited budgets and there were more
modern books around which were both more appealing to present-day kids and
didn't have Blyton's ideological baggage (Janet and Allen Ahlberg's books,
if you want an example, or books that concede the existence of immigrant
peoples in the UK; these simply don't exist in Blyton's world).  The Blimps
reacted by trying (and in some cases succeeding) to force libraries to go
on buying the Blyton stuff anyway, on directly ideological grounds ("if
boring bigotry was good enough for us it's good enough for kids today...").

Censorship can be about what you're *forced* to buy or read as well as about
what you're prevented from.

-- 
--  Jack Campin    room G092, Computing Science Department, Glasgow University,
17 Lilybank Gardens, Glasgow G12 8RZ, Scotland   TEL: 041 339 8855 x6854 (work)
INTERNET: jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk or via nsfnet-relay.ac.uk    FAX: 041 330 4913
BANG!net: via mcsun and uknet     BITNET: via UKACRL    UUCP: jack@glasgow.uucp
From: meierdalepau@bvc.edu
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
Subject: RE:  what good will come of this
Date: 5 Nov 92 14:28:11 CDT
Organization: Buena Vista College, Storm Lake, IA

	I've been thinking about this one myself, and the answer is....

I DON'T KNOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

	I asked a friend of mine about it and he said that Tipper shouldn't 
have any more power than she did before (I hope).  However, I agree with 
the fact that she does pose a threat to free speech since she is offended 
by just about anything and anyone.  UGH!  I can just see her new 
environmental proposal--"Save the trees--ban books!!!!"  I admit, I support 
Clinton, but only because Bush hasn't done doo-wa for our country...

Dale Meier
From: bwood@nssdca.gsfc.nasa.gov (William Wood)
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
Subject: Re: photomanipulation
Date: 10 Nov 92 20:18:00 GMT
Followup-To: alt.censorship
Distribution: usa
Organization: NASA - Goddard Space Flight Center
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <BxILwB.EE9@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk>, jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (Jack Campin) writes...
>hdevine@alfred.carleton.ca (Heather Devine) writes:
>> I am looking for specific examples of photographs that have been
>> manipulated and used as a picture of reality.  For example, the
>> National Geographic photo which moved the pyramids closer together for
>> a horizontal rather than vertical photo.  I need examples that date
>> back no farther than two years, and I prefer those that have been used
>> in newspapers.
> 
>I can think of three British examples of rather more significance than
>that, though they're all a bit older, and they show that tools no fancier
>than a pair of scissors can do the trick.
> 
>During the UK miners' strike of the mid-80s, Murdoch's "Sun" ran an image
>of the miners' leader Arthur Scargill addressing a rally: he was holding
>both hands straight out, palms down, in the usual gesture to call for
>quiet.  The "Sun" cropped away his left hand and added a text that
>suggested he was giving a Nazi salute.  The Press Council (a newspaper
>watchdog body of astonishing gutlessness) eventually ordered the "Sun" to
>print a retraction.
> 
>During the same strike, another newspaper photo ran a picture of a miner
>shouting at a policeman on a picket line.  He *was* in fact shouting at the
>cop, but the picture editor removed several yards of empty space between
>them to put them apparently inches apart and make the cop look like he was
>being seriously threatened.
> 
>More a case of censorship than manipulation: when Bassam Shaka'a, the Arab
>mayor of Nablus on the West Bank, was bombed by Israeli terrorists, only
>one UK paper ran the whole of the photo the agencies gave them.  That
>showed Shaka'a full-length in his hospital bed with his legs blown off at
>the knees.  Other papers gutted the impact of the picture by only showing
>him from the waist up.
> 
>Followups to alt.censorship.
> 
>-- 
>--  Jack Campin    room G092, Computing Science Department, Glasgow University,
>17 Lilybank Gardens, Glasgow G12 8RZ, Scotland   TEL: 041 339 8855 x6854 (work)
>INTERNET: jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk or via nsfnet-relay.ac.uk    FAX: 041 330 4913
>BANG!net: via mcsun and uknet     BITNET: via UKACRL    UUCP: jack@glasgow.uucp


If you're looking for examples of retouched photos, try one of the 
most famous one's ever known:  Autopsy photos shown of JFK.   It is 
also speculated that even the famous Zapruder 'film' has been 
retouched in certain frames.  
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,alt.sex,soc.culture.japan
From: tzs@carson.u.washington.edu (Tim Smith)
Subject: Re: Madonna's _Sex_ banned in Japan
Organization: University of Washington School of Law, Class of '95
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 07:37:33 GMT

twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes:
>>How the ruling will finally effect the Japanese publishing industry is
>>anyone's guess, but I would imagine the Madonna book will clear customs with
>>no problems now.
>
>With woman-woman sex, male-male kissing, three-way scenes, leathersex,
>and mock rape?  No problem.

Isn't the "rapeman" comic popular in Japan?  And I've seen Japanese
magazines for teenagers (it appeared from the ads, at least, to be a
teen magazine -- I don't read Japanese, so couldn't tell for sure) that
seemed to have lesbian and three-way sex (possibly involving children).

The impression I got was that, aside from the pubic hair hangup, they
were pretty open over there.

--Tim Smith
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [news.admin, et al.] Enough With The Child Pornography
Followup-To: alt.censorship,news.admin,news.sysadmin,alt.config,alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.d
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 22:07:46 GMT

[A repost - Carl]

From: siphon@momad.UUCP (Stimpson J. Katz)
Newsgroups: news.admin,news.sysadmin,alt.config,alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.d
Subject: Enough With The Child Pornography
Date: 9 Nov 92 00:20:35 GMT


     Apparently my previous comments on the kiddie-porn issue were
insufficiently clear. This is not an issue of censorship, it is an issue
of protecting Usenet, its users, and its operators from legal reprisals.
Nobody wants to be a test case.

     If you were sending a package to a friend in another country, and
explosives were legal to possess in your country but illegal in your
friend's, would you send him some? So long as your post can be sent
to another country, it is incumbent upon you to respect that country's
laws because you are putting other people at risk.

     If someone wants to establish a new newsgroup to carry these materials
so that only those willing to take the risk need do so, go ahead, may I
suggest "alt.binaries.erotica.six.year.olds.with.flat.chests". (Anyone
who wants to can cross-post this to alt.config) Continuing to post these 
messages on other groups will result in more operators blocking those  
groups and nobody wants that.

     Of course, I don't think anyone would establish such a group because
few (if any) people will agree to carry it. Hence their desire to post
this stuff on the existing groups. This constitutes an attempt to subvert 
the 'anyone can choose not to carry it' issue by preventing operators from 
allowing existing traffic but preventing child pornography, thus confusing 
a simple legal precaution with censorship or an attempt to eliminate the 
passage of all erotic images.

     It is unfortunate that this was originally titled, "Does Usenet condone
child pronography." Usenet does not condone anything, it simply passes it,
subject to the discression of its administrators and operators. Don't
jepordize that discretion.

SJK

The Siphon (SIPHON@momad.uucp)

"I swear, by my life and my love of it, never to live for the
sake of another man, nor to ask another man to live for mine."
-- 
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
From: bigbro@netlink.cts.com (Kenneth Sullivan)
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
Subject: Re: what good will come of this
Date: 5 Nov 92 23:22:52 GMT
Organization: NetLink Online Communications, San Diego CA

rwd4f@poe.acc.Virginia.EDU (Rob Dobson) writes:

> In article <niklasf.3.720965541@dhhalden.no> niklasf@dhhalden.no (NIKLAS FRED
> >I don't know if this has been brought up yet (or if there is reason
> >to), but as I have understood Clinton's vice president, Gore, is 
> >married to Tipper Gore!?
> >
> >It's been a while since I've heard anything from her, but doesn't she
> >want to ban just about everything she finds offensive? How will the
> >situation in the US become now when she's got one foot in the 
> >White House?
> >
> Yes, tipper gore was involved in PMRC, a group which attempted to
> force record companies to label their 'offensive' records.
> 
> Unwise? yes
> censorious?  yes
> 
> BUT: 1) Even at her most censorious, tipper has nothing on the republicans,
> who feel that burning a piece of cloth with a certain pattern on it is
> so offensive that it deserves a constitutional amendment to ban it.
> And the Meese commission, whos main result was to intimidate 7-11 stores
> into not selling playboy (thanks, ed, i feel so much safer. was that gunfire
> i heard in the distance?)
> 
> 2) the wife of the vice-president is not exactly a powerful figure here.
> youll just have to trust me on this one.
> 
> 

Oh yeah sure, look at all the things that Marylin Quayle did....just look 
at all of them geez.

--                    
INTERNET:  bigbro@netlink.cts.com (Kenneth Sullivan)
UUCP:   ...!ryptyde!netlink!bigbro
NetLink Online Communications * Public Access in San Diego, CA (619) 453-1115
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
From: evorst@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Ed Vorst)
Subject: Impressions
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 22:34:29 GMT

	Hi there. I'm new to this group so this already may be a discussed
topic, but I was wondering if anybody out there has looked at the
"Impressions" reading book series for children?  From what I understand,
this is quite the hot topic in California and Alberta and I was just
wondering what all the fuss is about.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
	  		el conquistador	
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
	( evorst@umanitoba.ccu.ca ) - Kiss my ass, I bought a boat
					        I'm going out to sea
							-L. Lovett
	
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,alt.conspiracy.jfk
From: ccasm@cc.newcastle.edu.au
Subject: Re: I Have Been Forbidden to Speak the Truth From THIS Account
Followup-To: alt.censorship
Organization: University of Newcastle, AUSTRALIA
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 23:33:13 GMT

In article <26065@optima.cs.arizona.edu>, gln@cs.arizona.edu (Gary L. Newell) writes:
> 
>  First off let me say that I agree that in *this* case AT&T has the right to
> restrit access on its machines. However, I wonder how many of you
> would feel if this were not AT&T but rather a publically funded college
> or university. Does FOO U. have the right to do the same thing? How about
> a particular department at Foo U? If so, how do you justify it? It
> is not "their money" it is the tax-payer's money which supplies the
> resources and pays the bills - what right do they have to limit the access
> of one individual while allowing others access? Thanks,
> 

In OZtralia most universities restrict acces to AARNet (the Australian academic
net which connects to Internet). Students are not permitted to use it unless
part of their course, as designated by their Head of Faculty. This restriction
was "to prevent the playing of MUDDs", but in reality was to free up general
use PC laboratories - there are not enough pcs or terminals to satisfy demand
(and there never will be). I spoke against this at Academic Senate but now have
to enforce it. Most students don't know what they are missing, but personally I
would choose to got to a uni which did not have such a policy if I were a
student. It is "their money as soon as it is allocated - no politician would
dare interfere with academia's right to decide how best to spend it, especially 
at departmental level, or research funds.



Newsgroups: alt.censorship
From: tt@tarzan.jyu.fi (Tapani Tarvainen)
Subject: Re: A gender neutral pronoun, was Fundamentalist Nightmare
Originator: tt@tarzan.math.jyu.fi
Organization: University of Jyvaskyla
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 10:01:56 GMT

In article <6766@dove.nist.gov> cst@bork.nist.gov (Charles S. Tarrio) writes:

>BTW, why is everyone looking for a gender-neutral third-person singular?   
>English has a perfectly good one:  it.  Sure, it doesn't usually apply to  
>a person, but they isn't usually singular, and one isn't usually used in  
>spoken English.  It seems as good a solution as any.

As I already advertised that Finnish pronouns are gender-neutral, I
might as well also tell that while it has one pronoun for people
(translated as "he" or "she" or "he or she") and one for things
("it"), the latter is frequently used of people as well in everyday
language.  I suspect one reason against using "it" of people in
English is that it doesn't allow specifying gender ...

>"Bob's roommate of indeterminate sex went to the store, but it didn't have  
>any shoes."  I guess the antecedents could get kind of confusing. :-)

Similar problems occur even now; in some sentences antecedents cannot
be determined without knowing the sex of persons being spoken of
("A and B were talking peacefully when suddenly she hit him").
Finnish of course has means for distinguishing between the antecedents
in that kind of situation, but I guess I'll leave explaining them
to another time (and newsgroup).
--
Tapani Tarvainen  (tt@math.jyu.fi, tarvainen@finjyu.bitnet)
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
From: mlgreer@eng.clemson.edu (matthew greer)
Subject:  Censorship in Music
Summary: Censorship in Music
Reply-To: mlgreer@eng.clemson.edu
Organization: College of Engineering, Clemson Univ.
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 23:26:05 GMT

 My girlfriend is doing a paper on censorshipin music and whether or not the people making the music should be held responsible ro their words to the public, or whether or not the companies selling the music should put lables on the alblums etc.  Any comment on this would be greatly appreciated.

Reply to 
mlgreer@eng.clemson.edu



Newsgroups: alt.censorship
From: komarimf@craft.camp.clarkson.edu (Mark 'Henry' Komarinski)
Subject: Re: I Have Been Forbidden to Speak the Truth From THIS Account
Organization: Clarkson University
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 17:15:52 GMT

gln@cs.arizona.edu (Gary L. Newell) writes:

>In article <1992Nov4.235419.2215@porthos.cc.bellcore.com>, bobh@troy.uucp (22131-hettmansperger) writes:
>> You're confusing AT&T *customers* with AT&T *employees*.  AT&T can't 
>> restrict what their employees say on the net, but they can refuse to
>> subsidize access to the net, given that there are other, cheap access
>> methods.

> First off let me say that I agree that in *this* case AT&T has the right to
>restrit access on its machines. However, I wonder how many of you
>would feel if this were not AT&T but rather a publically funded college
>or university. Does FOO U. have the right to do the same thing? How about
>a particular department at Foo U? If so, how do you justify it? It
>is not "their money" it is the tax-payer's money which supplies the
>resources and pays the bills - what right do they have to limit the access
>of one individual while allowing others access? Thanks,

I'm paying large sums of money to get an education here.  Part of that
money goes towards getting Internet access, including news.  If I
can't get all the news access I want, I'll find another (legal) acocunt
elsewhere and use that.  And argue to the administration here.

-Mark

--
- Mark Komarinski - komarimf@craft.camp.clarkson.edu
[MIME mail welcome]
Ask me about linux, the least expensive UN*X you'll ever see.
From: bwood@nssdca.gsfc.nasa.gov (William Wood)
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
Subject: Re: what good will come of this
Date: 6 Nov 92 17:04:00 GMT
Organization: NASA - Goddard Space Flight Center
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <TgHsTB2w165w@netlink.cts.com>, bigbro@netlink.cts.com (Kenneth Sullivan) writes...
>rwd4f@poe.acc.Virginia.EDU (Rob Dobson) writes:
> 
>> In article <niklasf.3.720965541@dhhalden.no> niklasf@dhhalden.no (NIKLAS FRED
>> >I don't know if this has been brought up yet (or if there is reason
>> >to), but as I have understood Clinton's vice president, Gore, is 
>> >married to Tipper Gore!?
>> >
>> >It's been a while since I've heard anything from her, but doesn't she
>> >want to ban just about everything she finds offensive? How will the
>> >situation in the US become now when she's got one foot in the 
>> >White House?
>> >
>> Yes, tipper gore was involved in PMRC, a group which attempted to
>> force record companies to label their 'offensive' records.
>> 
>> Unwise? yes
>> censorious?  yes
>> 
>> BUT: 1) Even at her most censorious, tipper has nothing on the republicans,
>> who feel that burning a piece of cloth with a certain pattern on it is
>> so offensive that it deserves a constitutional amendment to ban it.
>> And the Meese commission, whos main result was to intimidate 7-11 stores
>> into not selling playboy (thanks, ed, i feel so much safer. was that gunfire
>> i heard in the distance?)
>> 
>> 2) the wife of the vice-president is not exactly a powerful figure here.
>> youll just have to trust me on this one.
>> 
>> 
> 
>Oh yeah sure, look at all the things that Marylin Quayle did....just look 
>at all of them geez.
> 
>--                    
>INTERNET:  bigbro@netlink.cts.com (Kenneth Sullivan)
>UUCP:   ...!ryptyde!netlink!bigbro
>NetLink Online Communications * Public Access in San Diego, CA (619) 453-1115


now, stop that!  Or, I'll send you both to your rooms!!!!  So there!!!
Xref: sparky alt.censorship:8789 soc.libraries.talk:332 alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk:3385 alt.sex:35970 rec.arts.books:20028
From: sean@cobra.dra.com
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,soc.libraries.talk,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,alt.sex,rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: [UPI] Library attacked for buying Madonna's Sex book
Date: 12 Nov 92 23:36:50 CST
Organization: Data Ressearch Associates, Inc.

In article <BxMKts.656@cs.uiuc.edu>, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
> 	He said despite the controversy, the book has a proper place in the
> library.
> 	``Madonna is a cultural phenomenon,'' he said. ``Most of what she
> does is news. And our patrons would have an interest in what she's
> doing.''
> 	Bates said the book is not pornographic. ``It's being sold legally in
> mainstream book retailers,'' he said.

It should be interesting how long he stays with that opinion.  The St. Louis
(City) Public Library had ordered six copies of "Sex."  They had over 70
requests for the book before it was even published.  The city library said
that only persons over eighteen would be allowed to look at, or check out
the book.  The day after the newspaper reported the library had ordered the
books, the library cancelled the order.  The library director reported they
had received a large number of complaints about the planned purchase.  He
said that their librarians had obtained a copy of the book, and upon further
review decided not to purchase it.  I don't have a copy of the articles, but
the quotes were the standard "spending tax money for pornography," and "it
wasn't censorship since people could always go buy the book from a bookstore."

The St. Louis County Public Library (independent from the city) had decided
not to order the book either.  The county library gave several reasons for
not ordering the book.  1. It had received poor reviews. 2. It was spiral
bound (doesn't hold up well). 3. Didn't appear to have "lasting value." and
4. Too expensive.

Although though the county library didn't order the book, they also have a
program of not allowing children to check out certain books or videotapes.
Even the computer system is programmed to block checking out "minus" material
on a children's card.  That was merely the continuation of a policy that
had been in place before they installed the automated circulation system.
Parents can ask to have this restriction removed for their child's card,
but by default all children's cards are restricted.
-- 
Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO
Domain: sean@sdg.dra.com, Voice: (Work) +1 314-432-1100
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,soc.libraries.talk,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,alt.sex,rec.arts.books