My fellow blogger, Erik over at Restoring Love, dropped me a message today and told me how his blog had been shut down by his web hosting provider(siteground.com), alleging that his site contained pornography. It has been my experience that Restoring Love (restoringlove.com) has very decent, tasteful photos, and no pornography. Erik indicates that siteground.com closed the blog with no warning or possible negotiation and he believes that it was a case of pure homophobia. Erik further advised that it took four (4) days to recover and have everything working on a new host provider. It could have meant closing the blog if we had not made a backup last week.Has anyone else experienced this problem? I have no back up, so this blog would cease to exist if something similar were to happen.
8 comments:
I just took a look at Restoring Love and I don't see where the former Host site can label it as pornographic.
You see more pornography on HBO.
I'm going to add Restoring Love to Slices Of The Gay Pie and give these fellas a help in finding more readers.
It really makes you wonder who makes the call as to what is/isn't pornographic.
Are other agendas at work ??
O.K. So, I'm a bit on the line here. Society has changed since the statement somewhat to the effect that "I can't define it, but I know it when I see" was made. So, just what is pornographic these days? Is there a legal definition? The images you post (very nice eye candy, by the way) definitely appeal to the prurient nature of us all and I would venture to say that while tasteful in nature should not be viewed by young and impressionable audiences necessarily. So, in an effort to understand whether rights have been violated or not, the question is what is considered pornography these days? You can't go by what you see on television -- most of that shouldn't be viewed by a young audience either. As a matter of a fact, most of the stuff that comes in through the television isn't appropriate for those who are not of the age of consent. At the risk of being prude, what is decent and respectable? Definitely don't have a problem with people having the right -- but really, help us out here. You're a lawyer. What shouldn't be "out there for everyone to see". I notice that even you have a disclaimer (in somewhat small type, however) that the information may not be appropriate for all to view. Tell us -- what is pornography? You're a father, too. What should the unsuspecting child be able to view in the public domain?
The dictionary definition of pornography is as follows: Pornography or porn is, in its broadest state, the explicit representation of the human body or sexual activity with the goal of sexual arousal and/or sexual relief.
Against this, there "erotica" which refers to portrayals of sexually arousing material that hold or aspire to artistic or historical merit, whereas "pornography" (which is frequently considered a pejorative term) connotes the more direct, blunt or excessive depiction of sexual acts, with little or no artistic value, intended for mere entertainment.
Pornography, both culturally and legally, is treated as a separate entity from depictions of naked persons in art or photography.
From a legal perspective, the U. S. Supreme Court limits the definition of obscenity to “hard-core” pornographic depictions, meaning extremely explicit portrayals of sex. Thus, pornography is illegal only if judged to be obscene.
Applying these terms and concepts, at most, my "male beauty" photos might be considered erotica, but not pornography inasmuch as they do not contain any explicity sexual depictions. They are not obscene under the legal definition.
I'll give you that. As noted before, the eye candy is nice. However, where should be draw the line when it comes to the youngest generation? When you son was four years old or eight or twelve, which of the posted photos would be appropriate for him to view? Not trying to quell anyone's rights. However, our society needs to be a bit more self-policing, if you would, on what should be out in the public. And, since the hereo world is so befuddled by it all, the gay community should take the lead and make a responsible stand. The Internet is today's equivalent to a roadside billboard and available for all to see and access -- regardless of age. Think like a parent and comment. That would be extremely bold.
The majority of my male beauty posts are suitable for viewing of individuals of almost any age - they are (or at least the intent is) to celebrate the beauty of the male form and not as some sex object. None contain explicit sex and in my mind are similar to statutes of antiquity that showed the beauty of the nude form and were not deemed to be obscene.
People take their kids to the YMCA and other facilities where they see far worse sights in the locker room. There will always be those who have been indoctrinated to see the human body (and sex) as nasty, dirty, etc. I do not want my kids to be in that camp which is plagued by sexual hang ups and mean spiritedness generally.
Fair enough. Unfortunately, there are those who push their rights to the point of infringing on others. I'm not against the nude figure -- admittedly it is a marvelous creation (male and female alike). I believe people (in certain cases, those who are of the age of legal consent) should be able to have access to all sorts of information, but when it comes to certain themes and children, I have to say there needs to be some guidelines. Your perspective sounds very appropriate and healthy (although some of your images portray couples very intimately). The real problem, however, really is in the legal definition that at its foundation relies on the norms and attitudes of society. As you well point out on many occasions, our society does not necessarily hold the same view as we do. Thanks for the honest appraisal and personal perspective. So, now, I guiess I should venture over to the other site to see if it adheres to your standards or not. We really should do something about making a statement so that what is accepted by "society" includes our comments as well.
True my photo posts sometimes show intimacy between male couples, but nothing is explicit or obscene under the legal definition. Iguess Pat Robertson might call them obscene, but then again, I think his bigotry and hypocrisy are obscene.
While I have not checked my ranking lately,for a while I was consitently in the 45 to 50 ranking on Best Gay Blogs. Sadly, all of the most visited gay blogs were those with graphic sex. I had no desire to go that route and, therefore, have continued to look for beautiful guys, typically in artistic poses.
And all are in good taste, I must say. Thank you for bringing a touch of class to your blog. Although I believe the content alone merits the visitors. As promised, I ventured over and the blog itself is pretty good. There are some links and ads (I guess) that I'd object to if my children happened on the page, though. Still, I wouldn't say that it merited an unannounced shut down on the basis of pornography. Keep up the great work. There are many topics in the news that I read about through your blog -- I, for one, appreciate that most of all. I was especially taken with the article on treatment of the elderly -- seniors as well as children can be very cruel at times. It is sad that there are those who have lived much longer and should have a more accepting attitude are sometimes the most bigotted.
Post a Comment