It is worth reviewing the simply and subjective description of what constitutes porn according to Indonesia's lawmakers.
Porn: Pictures, sketches, illustrations, photographs, articles, sounds, voices, moving pictures, animations, cartoons, conversations, body movements, or other forms of messages through various communication mediums and/or public displays, that contain obscenity or sexual exploitation that violates community norms.
Pretty much gives any self appointed ,nutcase a license to harass doesn’t it?
The “community norms” bit is laughable. Community norms where Bali, Papua, Kalimantan, Sulawesi? Unfortunately, the law is classic example how far the Jakarta/Java centric pressure groups have hijacked the law making process at the expense of greater Indonesia.
In upbeat news, Bali Governor Made Pastika has responded by refusing to enforce the law as he states, quite correctly law does not "suit the regions socio-psychological elements" One has to wonder what this means in the wider political picture in such a diverse nation.
Anyway in an effort to titillate both groups please enjoy the following and remember
Sexuality is in the eye of the beholder.
3 comments:
ON Nestles..
I wonder whether Greenpeace finds itself unwittingly used by economic competitors of palm oil.
It seems a little unfair that developed countries which have long ago replaced their forests with farmland should condemn a developing country for doing the same thing.
Palm oil is highly productive, with an average oil yield of 3.66 tonnes/ha/year, compared with 0.4 tonnes/ha/per year for soyoil and 0.6 tonnes/ha/per year for rapeseed.
Palm oil trees last many years and do not require repeated C02 releasing, energy consuming cultivation operations, and sequester far more CO2 and relaease far more oxygen than do conventional crops.
Surely the answer lies in encouraging the formation of parks to preserve orang utans, rather than attacking the economic improvements of a developing country. The end point of the Greenpeace campaign would seem to be the replacement of palm oil in the products with a less environmentally friendly alternative.
I wonder how contributors to Greenpeace feel about seeing their donated money spent on such dramatic, childish and usually illogical protests.
Eeer Not sure how this comment equates to the post but never the less...
"It seems a little unfair that developed countries which have long ago replaced their forests with farmland should condemn a developing country for doing the same thing."
The number of times you hear this nonsense point never ceases to amaze me. Life is unfair, get used to it. Developed nations also used DDT as an additive to everything, feed tablets to their woman that lead to mass child deformities as well, should a developing country demand thier right to do that as well coz that would be fair?
Palm tree plantations are green deserts and in fact when you consider the damage done in clear felling, burning off and enviromental damage equal the very worst crop you can put into the ground.
Ecomomic improvements, tell you what anon, name two..how much tax did Sinar Mas pay last year and you show use one village where life is better off thanks to Palm Oil...just one..
Nice to declare yourself as paid PR before you write as well.
The definition of porn still bias and can be assumed from any angle and gain many pros and cons.
Post a Comment