Letter to the Editor: Online reader finds ad debate disturbing

Dear Editor,

  I find this entire debate surrounding the pornographic ads rather disturbing.  Rather than approaching the subject with a sound and thoughtful argument, many writers simply attack the beliefs and ideas of others.  The opposition to such material is based upon personal religious beliefs.  In a world where tolerance is championed, it disturbs me the “champions” of tolerance are those putting down another’s beliefs. 

With respect to the ad, I read the Statesman online, so I have not viewed the ad.  I do not believe it necessary to see the ad in order to form an opinion.  Many might disagree on this point.  In fact, on Feb 8, a letter claimed a “clean mind is synonymous with an empty mind.”  Rory C. Reid, a licensed psychotherapist who specializes in treatment of sexual impulsivity wrote “Legal, academic and other definitions of pornography vary widely, but in a practical sense, pornography is any visual or written medium created with the intent to sexually stimulate. If the work was not intended to stimulate but nevertheless causes sexual arousal in an individual, it constitutes pornography for that person.

  “If you find yourself asking whether a work is pornographic, the question itself suggests the material makes you uncomfortable. That should be enough to tell you to avoid it.” 

  Based upon the descriptions of the ad from both sides of this issue, I would personally classify it as pornographic.  The ad is for a store which sells adult material.  It obviously is intended to “sexually stimulate.” 

  While the Statesman does receive funding from public funds, it also is a business which receives revenue from the sale of ad space.  I believe in the freedom of speech, and don’t believe the Statesman can be forced to change its ad policy.  Those who find it objectionable simply need to stop reading the Statesman. Should enough people stop reading, they will change the policy.  It is as simple as that.  As for those writing letters to the editor, I would expect more tolerance and sound thought from university educated people.

Matthew Carney