According to a “self-described ‘data geek,’” social networking is now more popular than pornography on the internet.
But only among “millenials,” that is (I think) people who “came of age” around 2000. So, don’t trust anyone over 30 … to rank social networking over porn.
And he’s only basing his data on searches, not on actual traffic. Because, well, until the government mandates tracking, accurate appraisals of real internet traffic are slightly impossible to achieve.
Even so, more searches for social network stuff than for naked people is a good thing, right?
I guess, in the way that eating deep-fried Twinkies is better for you than eating deep-fried shards of used petri dishes.
Comments
Leave a Comment
“I guess, in the way that eating deep-fried Twinkies is better for you than eating deep-fried shards of used petri dishes.”
LOL – Pretty much, yeah.
You say, “more searches for social network stuff than for naked people [i.e. on porn websites] is a good thing, right?”
Well, my inclination is to suspect that many “searches” on social networking sites are sexually motivated, just like viewing porn sites.
But what is it that you believe is wrong or evil about “viewing naked people?” Isn’t the human body a creation of and by God? And wasn’t He pleased when He had finished creating it, since He had created it in His own image? How can it be wrong to admire the naked human body? The United States Supreme Court doesn’t think so. Several decades ago they struck down actions by the U.S.Postal Inspector who had confiscated publications mailed by nudist groups, on the grounds that they were “obscene.” The Supreme Court ruled that individual pictures of the naked human body are not obscene, and cannot be treated as such by the U.S. Post Office. Several persons engaged in sexual acts may be considered obscene, but even then, such a judgment is mostly cultural, and not obscene in and of itself. The concept of social standards apply. So it is not ethically acceptable to claim that pictures of the naked human body are always obscene. Anyone concerned with ethics should carefully consider the question of whether nudity as such is a matter of morality, or whether it is merely a matter of local and current social and community preferences.
Peter –
If you want to be precise, you’re correct that there is nothing intrinsically immoral about the human body or nudity.
The morality comes in how we use our eyes, and our minds, and our bodies in relation to our sacred and beautiful and glorious human bodies.
The best analogy I’ve heard is that human sexual desire is very much like fire: when contained and directed, it allows us to cook food and turn engines and heat homes and do all sorts of wonders; but if even a spark goes out of place, it can destroy all that we have built and kill all those we love. Likewise with sexuality: when contained and focused within marriage, it binds people together and brings new life into the world; when squandered outside that environment, it destroys lives.
So, while the human body is an object of great beauty, and some great artworks are devoted to the glory of the naked human form, there is indeed such a thing as pornography. Pornography is directed toward the inflaming of sexual desire against the proper order of human sexuality; it is tearing down the fireplace while throwing gasoline on the fire.