Don't waste money on porn bill

The Jakarta Post , Jakarta | Fri, 03/24/2006 8:46 AM | Opinion

When I came from the Netherlands, a friend of mine asked me, ""Do you know about sexy men?"" I said, ""No, I have no idea."" So she described to me the following: A man is called sexy if when you see him, the only thing you want is to sleep with him. ""Wow, I never knew that and I never found such a man!""

She give me an example: ""Ricky Martin, especially when he sings and dances, that's sexy."" Now, what about the porn bill?

First of all, opposing the porn bill does not mean that I agree with pornography. My first impression is that it is gender biased, that women have been deemed temptresses and prone to doing the devil's business.

Second, there is the problem of definitions in the bill. Attraction is not always the same. A man with a beard and body hair may be very attractive to certain women but not for others. A women with a headscarf and tight clothes may be more attractive than a woman with loose clothes but without a headscarf.

So which should be banned? Should we ban soccer as the players wear shorts that might be attractive to women? In short, do we need a new bill to protect our children from pornography? All we need is to enforce the laws we already have, such as the law on child abuse, etc. These have everything we need to protect children. Do not waste time and money on something that is useless.

YULI ASTUTI
Jakarta

Comments (0) | Post comment

A | A | A |