Three cultural trends that finally died in '07

[DesertFox]

Jonah Goldberg
The Dallas Morning News
4 Jan 08

Let us remember three of the cultural trends that died – or were at least mortally wounded – in the previous year, hopefully for the betterment of all mankind.

The discrediting of Hollywood "protest." Hollywood will never give up trying to make Americans think like Barbra Streisand, but 2007 showed that it might have a harder time raising money for the effort. In the last year, Hollywood dropped enough anti-war bombs to launch its own Shock and Awe campaign.

Robert Redford's star-studded Lions for Lambs was panned by critics and moviegoers across the ideological spectrum. But the bunker-buster of box-office bombs was Brian De Palma's Redacted, which grossed a staggeringly paltry $65,000. (Reno 911!: Miami took in 312 times that at the box office in 2007.) Americans may not be keen on the Iraq war, but they appear even less keen on hearing Hollywood's opinion on it.

The demise of slattern chic. ...

The democratization of porn.

More (http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/viewpoints/stories/DN-goldberg_04edi.ART.State.Edition1.3797aff.html)

[Neil Peart]

And with pornographic websites taking over, hopefully the people who visit those sites will have their computers damaged beyond repair.

[jayson]

Democratization of porn... well that's true. The Porn industry is just feeling the effects of piracy. The only problem for them is that they don't have the government-backed heavyweights like the RIAA and MPAA to back them up.

But in the end, regardless of morals, it's capitalism at work. Either people can tune into YouPorn and get 30 second low quality clips of voyeuristic folks who think it's kinky to post their sexual acts online, or they can pay money for HD films of their favorite stars from regular porn companies.

All sites like YouPorn and other streaming services are guaranteeing is that the market will correct itself and people won't be paying high subscription prices any longer. You can have shit quality for free, or high quality for a nominal price. That's what it really boils down to. In the end, this will only weed out the companies who aren't innovative or can't compete, and leave the strongest of the bunch.

[Neil Peart]

Democratization of porn... well that's true. The Porn industry is just feeling the effects of piracy. The only problem for them is that they don't have the government-backed heavyweights like the RIAA and MPAA to back them up.

But in the end, regardless of morals, it's capitalism at work. Either people can tune into YouPorn and get 30 second low quality clips of voyeuristic folks who think it's kinky to post their sexual acts online, or they can pay money for HD films of their favorite stars from regular porn companies.

All sites like YouPorn and other streaming services are guaranteeing is that the market will correct itself and people won't be paying high subscription prices any longer. You can have shit quality for free, or high quality for a nominal price. That's what it really boils down to. In the end, this will only weed out the companies who aren't innovative or can't compete, and leave the strongest of the bunch.But people who watch porn don't really care about quality, as long as they're getting their fix of smut.

[DoctorDoom]

But the bunker-buster of box-office bombs was Brian De Palma's Redacted, which grossed a staggeringly paltry $65,000.It couldn't happen to a nicer guy. Go away, Brian. You've become yesterday. Hollywood will of course continue to promote ultra-leftist crap. They will become increasingly irrelevant and won't have a nanoclue about why it's happening.

As for porn, as long as there are assholes who need to watch smut to get their rocks off, there will be assholes making and supplying it. The objection is to demanding that it must be freely accessible anywhere, e.g., in public libraries. If the sorry losers who jerk off to filth want that crap, let them be forced to take measures to get it beyond turning on a public computer. There is no freedom-of-speech issue with smut.

"Though crude, pornography is a philosophical statement. It says: there are no rules about sex; sex is trivial; sex is for entertainment. Though debased, pornography is a theological statement. It says: there is no God who says I should limit my lust or channel my passion or give as well as get... Pornography is anti-woman and anti-child. It is anti-marriage and anti-permanence. Thus it is profoundly anti-civilization. Since civilization is social support to the dynamics of life, pornography is anti-life."
-- William Stanmeyer

"'You don't have to read it.' 'You can switch it off if you are offended.' These and other cliches... have been used to justify a situation where the tastes of a small minority have progressively infused the whole culture. On the assumption that no one's freedom is thereby impaired, violence and obscenity fill the media, despite the fact that this material does not reflect the choice of the average adult."
-- John H. Court

"It is, by now, a scandal beyond irony that thanks to the energetic litigation of 'civil liberties' fanatics, pornographers enjoy expansive First Amendment protection while first graders in a nativity play are said to violate First Amendment values."
-- George Will

[CONSERVATIVE HERO]

"'You don't have to read it.' 'You can switch it off if you are offended.' These and other cliches... have been used to justify a situation where the tastes of a small minority have progressively infused the whole culture. On the assumption that no one's freedom is thereby impaired, violence and obscenity fill the media, despite the fact that this material does not reflect the choice of the average adult."
-- John H. Court
Funny thing, Doc, about the people who use this argument (in my experience generally dems and libertarians). Though they rarely fail to use this as a rebuttal against us when protesting the filth they're injecting into every facet of our society, the jerkoffs virtually never take their own advice when the shoe's on the other foot, and themselves are never content to simply "look the other way" if a CHRISTmas tree on a courthouse lawn offends them.

[DesertFox]

They argue against those things on 1A grounds.

[Justaguy]

Darn... I was excited when I saw a big "Jonah Goldberg" at the top of the post... I guess there's always next year.

[Riverboat]

I don't get your post. Surely you're not saying Jonah Goldberg is one of the cultural trends that should have died?

[CONSERVATIVE HERO]

They argue against those things on 1A grounds.
Howso? I take it you're simply stating that (as opposed to endorsing that position?). I understand that's what they usually cite as the basis of their claim, if that's what you mean, though I can't see how they can make a vaild 1A argument.

My right to religious exercise 'shall not be prohibited.' Their right to porn frankly doesn't exist (they just made it up). Besides, to my knowledge even if it did mean what they say it does, it's moot as it only prohibits the national government from doing so (on federal property) with the right to do so being reserved to the states and the people. I can't see how it's possible for their interpretation to be accurate however given that it uses the first clause to essentially erase the second.

What does sexual exhibitionism have to do with "speech?" Is it common to hear "vote for _____" being peppered amidst the various grunting and cursing? Perhaps the posterior of teenage girls is frequently found sporting bumper stickers for their candiate of choice while being gang-banged by several men? Even if they did these things it would still be in every way be a corruption of its meaning.