|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 30 OF 47 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Apr-06-06
 | | Open Defence: <she was less exploited as a prostitute than as a waitress, maid, cashier, etc. (better pay and more fexible hours.... her time and her body.> funny, throughout the history of mankind, no Man was arrested and imprisoned for visiting a brothel .. its considered almost as a facet of manhood ... im going to abandon this discussion as I see clearly that the opinions would differ .... |
|
| Apr-06-06 | | Richard III: If you are planning to debate moral duty (as a woman/a chessplayer/or a woman chessplayer)I think one would need to clarify how we are to evaluate said duty. If the problem with Alexandra is her participation in something "largely frowned upon by society in general," then we are not evaluating her decision, rather, merely pointing out possible consequences of such a decision: <Acirce's> "dragging the reputation of chess in the mud." Of course, one could say that these consequences are bad for Alexandra, and therefore, unwise, but this,too, is arguable. I'm sure she's being well-compensated, maybe she'll garner more fans. It seems that she enjoys being photographed, too, right? And it doesn't seem like the photos are any different than ones that might appear on her very own website - so to specifically criticize her so-called "prostitution," one would also have to throw her entire public relations strategy under the microscope, as well.
Nonetheless, if one were to contend that pornographic magazines are in and of themselves bad, and therefore, publicizing via a pornographic magazine was bad, you would probably be able to morally evaluate Alexandra's actual decision & action. However, to do so, one would first have to draw a clear-cut line between Playboy, Penthouse, and other magazines on the spectrum of more nudity/less nudity, pointing out what makes Penthouse an immoral exception (as opposed to, say, a fine art photography magazine which might show equally nude photos of women - or men, for that matter). Would a strict moral calculus also restrict Alexandra from posing for GQ, or Esquire?
One final thought experiment: if a legal scholar (who also happened to play brilliant chess)temporarily put aside his legal dreams to garner the fame and fortunes of professional chess (which for some time was considered a dishonorable occupation), could this not be considered a prostitution of the mind? The man is Paul Morphy (although to be accurate, I believe he often rejected his winnings).
In sum, is it merely selling something that comes naturally that is wrong? Or, is it specifically the selling of sexual imagery or ability that is wrong? Or is it just the discomfort of a chess star failing to conform to one's idealized expectations? |
|
| Apr-06-06 | | percyblakeney: Topalov and Kasparov (and Joyce Carol Oates, Mel Gibson, Nicole Kidman...) have been interviewed in Playboy. It doesn't have to be a good move, but I don't think it drags chess in the mud that much or is the same thing as supporting prostitution... |
|
| Apr-06-06 | | BishopofBlunder: A man does an interview in a "porn" magazine and no one blinks an eye. A woman does it and suddenly she's a tramp who's dishonoring her vocation and her gender. The fact that we think this way is the true immorality here. |
|
| Apr-06-06 | | twinlark: In other words, much ado about nothing except our own prejudices. |
|
| Apr-06-06 | | acirce: <Marmot PFL> Yes, that's not all that unusual to hear. <percyblakeney> I'm not sure if you list all those names as an excuse for others to do the same thing or for some other reason. It's not the same thing as supporting prostitution, but it's the same thing as supporting pornography, which has close links to prostitution (conceptually as well as materially). |
|
| Apr-06-06 | | percyblakeney: <acirce> If I was Kosteniuk I would maybe not do such an interview, but it does seem rather accepted in some parts of the world to be interviewed by Playboy/Penthouse, and not everyone is criticised for it. On other things than interviews, Brazilian footballer Bruno Carvalho once trained with a Swedish football team. He had previously been model in a (gay) pornographic magazine, and the photos made Manakova look like a Medieval nun in comparison. The newspapers had much fun about this in 2003, but that's a different story... |
|
| Apr-06-06 | | acirce: And then, on the subject of football, there is of course the recent suggestion from the "Equal Opportunities Ombudsman" in Sweden that we withdraw from the World Cup to protest trafficking. I don't agree, and I don't even know if it is 100% seriously meant, but I welcome the statement as a somewhat provokative way to put the issue on the agenda so that at least there's a discussion about what to do instead. |
|
| Apr-06-06 | | Jim Bartle: I still think we have to consider the possibility that Kosteniuk just did an interview with a journalist, and didn't know where it was going to end up published. (And neither did the interviewer at the time.) |
|
| Apr-06-06 | | babakova: If there is something the swedish politicans love, its prohibitions and restrictions. Its kind of a swedish tradition one might say. |
|
| Apr-06-06 | | s4life: Maybe if Kramnik would have been interviewed by Playboy some people here.. cough cough.. wouldn't be so stingy about this; for I don't see any particular reason (except bigotry) to crucify 'her' and let it pass if it's 'him'.... maybe it's another swedish tradition? |
|
| Apr-06-06 | | acirce: <Maybe if Kramnik would have been interviewed by Playboy some people here.. cough cough.. wouldn't be so stingy about this; for I don't see any particular reason (except bigotry) to crucify 'her' and let it pass if it's 'him'.... maybe it's another swedish tradition?> Now what on earth was *that* good for? Right, I forgot that it's the most natural thing in the world to invent a scenario out of the blue according to which I'd show my bias, and then use the invented scenario to deliver silly accusations. Nothing about this is about Kosteniuk personally. I have hardly even mentioned her. It's just that the topic came up right now. Considering I've critized Kramnik many times for his actions and statements - I called him "bigotted" when he spoke about "civilised European countries" and still stand by that - why would I let it pass if he did something else I'd consider scandalous? No sorry, this was just too ridiculous. And completely unnecessary unless you consider it a duty to be a pest. |
|
| Apr-06-06 | | Akavall: <acirce><Pornography is an evil that should be fought, not assisted.> Why do you say ponrography (or prostitution) is evil? It is not, IMO. The girl(s) is(are) happy and the guy(s) is(are) happy, and they don't hurt anybody else. I just don't see anything evil here... |
|
| Apr-06-06 | | s4life: Well <acirce> for once I don't see you going around Topalov and Kasparov's pages saying they are evil because they were interviewed by Playboy.. I hope I made my point clear; this has nothing to do with Kramnik |
|
| Apr-06-06 | | blingice: <acirce: How can anyone possibly think it's a good thing for chess to have it associated with the porn industry?> I agree with this statement, i.e Kosteniuk is being stupid by doing this (if this is actually happening, I still am somewhat convinced it's hearsay). <acirce: Obviously she is dragging the reputation of chess in the mud. But even that is to ignore that the world is bigger than the insignificant little game we call chess.> I also agree with this. How are they gonna headline this? "The Hot Skank of Chess!" or something?! Or are they going to not mention that her job is to play chess (possibly a turn-off)? I still don't understand Kosteniuk's theory here, about how posing naked will get people to say "I better start playing chess and analyzing HER games!" <acirce: Pornography is an evil that should be fought, not assisted.> I definetely don't agree with this. This is reminiscent of Communist China or Saddam Hussein's leadership. Restricting (consentual adult) porn leads to other restrictions (see Saddam Hussein's domination of his people). |
|
| Apr-06-06 | | acirce: <Why do you say ponrography (or prostitution) is evil? It is not, IMO. The girl(s) is(are) happy...> <Akavall> Definitely not true. It might be in theory, and it is in a few rare cases, but if we're talking about the industry as a whole as it exists in the real world, no. For example, it was exactly in Penthouse that Traci Lords started her "career", and I'm sure you know her story. Point is that this is how it usually looks. Prostitution is not better for the victims. (I actually prefer the modern term "sex trade" which indicates that it's not just about a "seller" who is out to find "customers". This term's more to the point and helps understand that it's more important for an understanding of the phenomenon to study the attitudes of the customers and the profiteers, as well as the overall structures and power relations in society.) The myth about the "happy prostitute" doesn't become true by the fact that some learn to "live with it" somehow, fool themselves that it's the best they deserve (which is often a contributing reason they end up there in the first place), or don't dare speak the truth about their situation, etc. <...and they don't hurt anybody else> This is more speculative but nevertheless wrong in my opinion. These institutions contribute, and more the more accepted they are, if only subtly and subconsciously for most, to a degrading and objectifying view of women that is simply disastrous for the struggle for gender equality. In the worst cases it goes all the way to rape or murder, but it infects the whole society on all levels. Why do you think it's so many more men than women who defend pornography, btw? |
|
| Apr-06-06 | | acirce: <s4life> I didn't even know they had! The discussion took place here, not at their pages. And you should realize that if I were at Topalov's page criticising him people could equally easily say "Hey, why don't you take this to the Kosteniuk page? She's done it too. Bet it is because you're a Kramnik fanatic who can't stand that Topalov is the new champion...blah blah" Simply can't make everyone happy. But everything I've said about working with the porn industry applies to anyone who does it. <This is reminiscent of Communist China or Saddam Hussein's leadership. Restricting (consentual adult) porn leads to other restrictions (see Saddam Hussein's domination of his people).> You surely have a sense for proportions, <blingice>. But I'd agree that these days with the Internet legal restriction can't be the main way to fight pornography, it has to be about fighting attitudes and long-term about reforming society. Starting tomorrow I intend to take a break from this site for a week or so, so I guess this discussion is over from my side for the time being. |
|
| Apr-06-06 | | Daodejing: It would be perfect, if you leave not only for a week. Use your intelligence for constructive things.
Quit internet for a month and look at the world. The world is not to puke. Read some poems, go painting, look at the nature, meet friends but keep your eyes open for the real world. |
|
| Apr-06-06 | | BishopofBlunder: This discussion reminded me of a quote from (I think) a movie that I cannot remember the title of: "There are 3 kinds of people in the world: pimps, @#$%*s, and customers. Which one are you?" (Note: I may be paraphrasing) |
|
| Apr-06-06 | | Akavall: <acirce> <For example, it was exactly in Penthouse that Traci Lords started her "career", and I'm sure you know her story.> Actually, I have no idea.
<The myth about the "happy prostitute" doesn't become true by the fact that some learn to "live with it" somehow, fool themselves that it's the best they deserve (which is often a contributing reason they end up there in the first place), or don't dare speak the truth about their situation, etc.> Sure, there are some women who are pretty much forced into prostitution, because they owe money (usually for drugs) or something similar. I agree, that this situation can be described as "evil". However, I believe, the problem is not caused by prositution itself, but by criminal atmosphere that surrounds it (prostitution is illegal in most countries). IMO, if prostitution was legalized, but strictly controlled those problems would arrise less. In case where prostitution is really a woman's choice, I don't see anything evil. <Why do you think it's so many more men than women who defend pornography, btw?> Do you know that for sure?
|
|
| Apr-06-06 | | Akavall: <Starting tomorrow I intend to take a break from this site for a week or so> Enjoy your break. |
|
| Apr-06-06 | | babakova: I do not see any reason to fight pornography, restrictions never made anyone happy. |
|
| Apr-06-06 | | BrotherJed: I'd rather see her pose in Hustler than do an interview for Playboy |
|
| Apr-06-06 | | blingice: <Akavall: <acirce> <For example, it was exactly in Penthouse that Traci Lords started her "career", and I'm sure you know her story.> Actually, I have no idea.>
Yeah, who is she?
<BrotherJed: I'd rather see her pose in Hustler than do an interview for Playboy> I wouldn't for two reasons:
1. She isn't that pretty.
2. She's actually accomplishing something and not disgracing anything if she does an interview. If she posed, what is she accomplishing? She's only demeaning her image, and would no longer have any credibility. |
|
| Apr-06-06 | | babakova: Traci Lords was a "pornstar" (I dont think she was in so many flicks) who got even more famous when it transpired that she was underage when she did her films. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 30 OF 47 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
|
|
|
Kibitzing
