January 15, 2004

PORNSEC

Most tabloids, adverts and music videos are now soft porn, without exception and gradually getting raunchier…this we take for granted, while kid’s programming is downright Satanic, with Buffy and Harry. If you want a picture of the New World Order watch the Cartoon Network, it’s all in there… occultism, spies, doomsday viruses, evil megalomaniacs, biometrics and cyborg soldiers, but yesterday I saw something which disturbed me to such an extent, that this rant is the result.

Sometimes I don’t know why I bother, since I tend to state the obvious, at least I hope it is… but the incremental methodology of the demonic press means that one barely notices that the bar has been lowered again, until they are rubbing your nose in it. In this case it is the subtle transition of hard-core pornography to the front cover of men’s glossy magazines, photos which were once reserved for the inside of seedier publications.

The new rag which caught my eye, I couldn’t miss it, it was in my face the moment I stepped into the newsagents, is called ‘Fox’ and was placed “innocently” between Cosmopolitan and Elle, not out of sight on the top shelf. The front page spread featured a “fun” close up of nude models engaged in an explicit lesbian sex act, I could go into detail but you can use your imagination! It was in full view of everyone in the shop, including my nine year-old daughter and five year-old son.

It seemed to go over the children’s heads but as a woman, I felt disgusted and degraded by this public display of obscenity and took it upon myself to slide the offending magazine behind Cosmopolitan, hoping the shopkeeper saw me and got the message… this is just not “Kosher” to some people. Now, I’m not a prude, not by a long shot, as one or two of my male correspondents could testify (please don’t!) but my embarrassment over women being depicted this way to all and sundry made me wonder…

How would men react if their sexuality was laid bare? What’s good for the goose and all that… Imagine; daddy pops into the corner shop with his children to buy them a treat and ‘Pornsec’ is laying on the counter revealing a naked man in an advanced stage of arousal, and to make it comparable to the female equivalent, he would have to be receiving gratification from another “stud.” Would you not feel you were being humiliated and your masculinity debased? But then, maybe that’s where it’s going because no-one objects or complains.

Perhaps in time, children and animals will be introduced to the mix, as paedophilia, bestiality and homosexuality are normalised and encouraged via the internet. And no, I am not a homophobe, I have gay friends, but that does not mean you should have it rammed down your throat! However, I do baulk at the sexualising of youngsters who have no interest in the subject whatsoever until puberty, prior to that it’s something to titter about, unless you’ve been abused.

Pornography, if at all, ought to be a matter of personal choice, not compulsory, yet the Liberal Democrats see it as a useful tool in sex education and a harmless “safety valve” - not exploitation. But it’s not everyone’s ‘cup of tea,’ some folk are not that way inclined and have got better things to do, like gardening… not necessarily uphill. Sex between consenting adults is natural and wholesome, I don’t have a problem with that, (my problem is finding a decent partner) but it is also intimate and private, or it should be!

If ‘Fox’ magazine is now typical of what is acceptable in the mainstream media, we are almost at the bottom of the moral barrel, how much further are you prepared to let it go… all the way? We need another ‘Mary Whitehouse’ she knew where to draw the line - and must be turning in her grave! I feel a job opportunity coming on… although, whoever chooses to fill this vacant ‘missionary’ position has got their work cut out for them, because there are very few boundaries or taboos left.

Hazel

---

July 27, 2002:

Hi there,

As a former (professional) musician and nowadays DJ, journalist and radio/television presenter I am in the position (and I can now say: "fortunately") to confirm almost everything as portrayed on your website. Just wanted you to know.

There are more people (outside en inside) in the know, (than you and I might realize) who'd like to see otherwise and trying to the best of their abilities to change things. A slow and almost impossible process, but nevertheless.

(Name withheld)

---

Nov 11, 2002:

hi

I am a musician, engineer and producer.Whereas I can agree with a lot of what you have to say there is unfortunately at least one premise where I have to disagree. That is the nature of man (woman) being basically good. This is patently untrue.

The true nature of man (woman) is to be 100% selfish in the pursuit of survival and reproduction. It's a natural thing. Observe nature anywhere, anytime and you will see the struggle for survival is a daily round of eat or be eaten, mate (reproduce) or be excluded from the future gene pool. This is true for animals, insects.... even plants, microbes.... whatever level you choose to examine. As far as humans are concerned.... study history; it's the same story. War and oppression. Everything is down to survival and the practicalities thereof... eg. most stuggles (wars, oppression) are concerned with territory and the resources (food, reproduction) it contains.

Sad though it may be to those who have concepts of a 'spiritual' life, this is the truth of the matter. Get over it. Nothing will change the facts.

Yours as a brother musician (Name withheld)

---

Aug 2, 2003

The recent actions of the RIAA and some of the recent legislation
certainly support your ideas. The RIAA has already tried to push for
felony charges on file sharers, and when that was unsuccessful, they tried
to get their lackeys in Congress to create legislation that would make
file sharing a felony. File sharing and P2P networks would destroy the
infrastructure of control that these people have upon the public if they
are ignored, and the RIAA knows it.

Have you heard of the DMCA? It's the first of these draconian pieces of
legislation designed to add controls of felonious punishment.
Essentially, it bars anti-circumvention devices and software lest one
risks prison time. There are some exceptions to the rule, but they are by
far very few. Be assured that more such draconian pieces of legislation
will be drafted in the future. I am sure that the executives of the RIAA
have the morality of thugs and mob bosses that crave more power.

Not only have the RIAA and its lackeys in the government drafted
legislation like the DMCA, but they are also responsible for legislation
such the Patriot Act. They have been trying to destroy people's privacy
so that they can have better monitors on people. Remember the Total
Information Awareness program (later renamed to the Terrorist Information
Awareness program?) The only reason it didn't become real is that its
violation of privacy rights were overly glaring and could be seen by
anyone with basic high school education. That's the real [edit]reason[/edit] John Poindexter
was let go. He made things too obvious to the public. You can trust that
they'll be more careful next time.

Actually, if this is all true, I need to wonder about their strategy. To
listen to the radio or MTV or VH1 is absolutely painful, and I'm 22.
Admittedly, though, I do not listen to much music, accept that which is
put out by my friends, a few locals, and a **rare** indie artist. After a
while, the crap on the radio, MTV and VH1 all start to sound the same, and
this line of thought seems to run through many of my friends. They deride
MTV as the "Shiny Things" Network.

We should be paying close attention to websites like opensecrets.org since
they will help us figure out the links between the politicians and the
Elite (the American Aristocracy.) The EFF (eff.org, Electronic Frontier
Foundation), EPIC (epic.org, Electronic Privacy Information Center) and
the ACLU also have valuable information on our politicians, even if they
have differenct goals.

Rene

---