Re: Facebook is evil, why it must be eradicated [was: Wikileaks?]

Bruce Bostwick wrote:
> 
>> It's not the people that join that are sociopaths
>> and perverts, it's the people that control the site
>> that are sociopaths and perverts.
>>
>> Only a sociopath and pervert can think that
>> breastfeeding is pornography. It's disrespectful
>> to breastfeeding (and to pornography too, but wfc?)
>>
>> All the billions that g*vernments invest all the
>> time to make mothers breastfeed, and those sociopaths
>> and perverts create a Social Network that criminalizes
>> it. They should be exiled to Antarctica.
> 
> It seemed to me that the initial post could have been an excellent  
> illustration of a trap question in the mold of "Have you stopped  
> beating your wife?", and left it alone, admiring the complex twists 
> of  it semantic seductiveness.
> 
> But this seems to be a much better question to answer in the real world.
> 
> The answer is that the culture at large has some very unhealthy and  
> dysfunctional ideas about nudity and sex, and tends to perceive  
> women's exposed breasts (regardless of the reasons why they're  
> exposed) as a sexualized image.  
>
This is sociopathological, pervert and infanticidal.

>  I don't know if this is more so, or 
>  less so, in Brazil than it is in the USA (I've heard widely 
>  conflicting reports), 
>
The conflicting reports are accurate: Brazil _was_ more liberal,
but we are slowly becoming more fanatical and mysogynist than
Iran and Afghanistan.

>  but with only limited exceptions in some more 
>  open-minded areas of the country, people are taught to consider 
>  exposed female breasts a moral threat of sorts (under the guise of  
> "protecting children") and some websites run by people who adhere to 
>  that belief system tend to discriminate in that way rather,
>  er,  indiscriminately.
> 
This is sick. It's ok for children to watch ultraviolence,
hear rap songs that glorify prostitution, but not to watch
breasts?

> I don't like the paradigm, I strongly feel that the value system 
> that  underlies it is ultimately more destructive and unhealthy than 
>  anything else, but it's a very deep-rooted paradigm that would 
> require  far more than my own meager efforts to shift.  And whether 
> I happen to  like it or not, Facebook is likely to continue this 
> behavior for the  foreseeable future.  I wouldn't necessarily call 
> the attitudes driving  it sociopathic, but I suppose I could call 
> some of them perverted, for  a fairly loose definition of perversion.
> 
I guess there are other Social Networks with less perverted owners.
Here in Brazil, the Social Network of Choice is Orkut (Orkut seems
like a Brazil - India Social Network :-) ).

> (A similar definition exists in a more extreme form in parts of the  
> Arab world where women are forced to wrap themselves in clothing to  
> the extent that they can barely even see, supposedly to avoid 
> tempting  nearby men into acts of lust.  Both are a form of blaming 
> the victim,  and I think men who believe this about women need to 
> work on impulse  control more than they need to harass the womenfolk 
> into covering  themselves up, but that may just be me.)
> 
Men that think so should do the way Oedipus did _after_ he found out 
he was a parricide and mfer.

Alberto Monteiro