I think the Lounge is grinding through its own Miller vs. California, 1972

[DS1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller_vs._California

The Lounge is an Online Community.

Roth repudiated the Hicklin test and defined obscenity more strictly, as material whose "dominant theme taken as a whole appeals to the prurient interest" to the "average person, applying contemporary community standards." Only material meeting this test could be banned as "obscene".

We exist online in a community with a NO SEX THREADS rule, how difficult is it to make the connection between what would've been the glaring double-standard of allowing the sale of T-Shirts stating gems such as "I facebooked your mom" (whatever the hell that means, that's a rhetorical question) and disallowing discussions on Monica Bellucci's wonderfully ample buttocks -such discussions essentially objectifying women.

If someone can tell me why women should have had to continue being associated with and approving of these things, by nature of these ads remaining on the front page, merely by continuing to post here without express disapproval, I'll give them a cookie.

[BlondieK143]

1. Uh.

Did I miss something? :popcorn:

[DS1]

2. By that question

Probably everything

[kick-ass-bob]

3. I thought they were off the front page now.

:shrug:

I haven't seen them.

So, isn't it over?

[Hugin]

4. DS1... Honestly, I'm having trouble parsing your question.

Especially the third paragraph...

I think I agree with you on the Miller vs. CA part, however.

[GOPisEvil]

5. Excellent!

:thumbsup:

[brainshrub]

6. Locking.

This issue has already been resolved. See this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=105&topic_id=3729697&mesg_id=3729697