From: allens@yang.earlham.edu (Allen Smith)
Newsgroups: alt.cyberpunk
Subject: Re: Virtual Reality
Date: 8 Apr 92 16:56:12 GMT
Article-I.D.: yang.1992Apr8.115612.16817
 <1992Apr01.053227.17963@ecst.csuchico.edu> <1992Apr3.170647.27148@u.washington.edu>
Organization: Earlham College, Richmond, Indiana

In article <1992Apr3.170647.27148@u.washington.edu>, kitsch@milton.u.washington.edu (Ted Fitch) writes:
> In article <1992Apr01.053227.17963@ecst.csuchico.edu> shawnb@ecst.csuchico.edu (???) writes:
>>In article <1992Mar31.163403.25924@u.washington.edu> kitsch@milton.u.washington.edu (Ted Fitch) writes:
>>>In article <34592@nntpd.lkg.dec.com> hughes@gary.enet.dec.com (Gary Hughes - VMS Development) writes:
>>>>
>>>>In article <1992Mar19.211812.19035@u.washington.edu>, tmaddox@milton.u.washington.edu (Tom Maddox) writes...
>>>>>	Regarding vr porn:  no kidding; as with videotape distribution and 
>>>>>rental, this will be one of the uh applications that drives the commercial
>>>>>success of vr.  This will not be a bad thing, in my opinion--it is better
>>>>>that virtual women should be exploited than real ones, and in fact vr porn 
>>>       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>But if virtual women are exploited, what happens when the user decides that
>>>VR sex is not for him and carries out the fantasies he has had with 
>>>artificial women out with real women?  In my opinion, VR sex exploiting
>>>women would merely feed the desire the carry out the act in real life.  Until
>>>tactile controls mirror each and every nerve in your body, VR sex will be
>>>nothing but pornography!  While at first the statisfaction gained via this
>>>means might quench the thirst for "exploitation" the very fact that it does
>>>not mirror the real thing will eventually drive the user to carry out his
>>>fantasy in a real life environment.
>>>
>>>
>>Jesus, this is the same bullshit rhetoric espoused by your generic Christian
>>Fundamentalist groups.  This is not the place to spread this kind of moralistic
>>nonsense.  Try alt.fan.ed.meese. 
>>
>>
> Thank you very much for your most impressive response.  Obviously, your
> intuition about my reasoning for posting MY OPINION is so accurate
> that I think I'll have to change my name to JERRY FALWELL, *heck* I
> have been trying to figure out who I was for the past few years
> and here you did it in three sentences.  Thanks Shawn, I owe you a lot.
> 
> *Please*, I have just as much right to post my opinion about VR as you
> do to disagree with it.  If you can't respond with anything more than
> rhetoric yourself, then perhaps you should be posting your eloquent
> omnipotent three liners to "alt.mind.reader"

	Quite. And people would have as much right to view/produce such 
virtual pornography as you do to post your opinions.
> 
> In defense of my position, I would hardly call myself a Christian!
> Rather, I beleive that there has been no real consenus about the
> effects of pornography upon behaviour, other than "inconclusive
> evidence."  Certainly it seems a little hypocritical for therapists
> to rave about how pornography (especially erotic videos) can
> help couples open up about their own sexual desires, thus influencing
> their behaviour, yet claim that the same material does not infulence
> people in a negative way.

	I recall reading a summary of a study on the topic, in which the 
elements of violence and sex were seperated via clipping the film at 
appropriate points. Violence, as measured by various tests (I believe ones 
worked out on violent criminals), was not increased in likelihood by the 
sexual segments, only the violent ones. The sexual ones only promoted 
sexual interest (unsurprisingly).
> 
	-Allen
Xref: sparky alt.sex:14203 alt.cyberpunk:2054 misc.legal:9187