>on tv!?

yup

>we're not talking about women you
>meet- we're talking about women
>in videos.

i was talking about both, in my own patented mendering way

>yeah you said you can "no
>longer witness certain things beyond
>the affect it may have
>on ME, the culture i'm
>in, etc." you commented on
>looking beyond "the parts which
>enticed me carnally."

right...but that doesn't quite translate the way you paraphrased to me. whatever.

>On what grounds do you consider
>that reducing?

on the grounds that she (hopefully) is more than her behind/breasts.

>I disagree with the
>idea that to enjoy ass-
>I must disregard that this
>an actual person

good for you. although i never said nor implied that you SHOULD.
but as usual we digress.

>please tell me how so- do
>these videos differentiate themselves from
>television media as a whole?

in my opinion - to take part any event (whether passively or actively) is sanctioning it.

and to answer your question:perhaps.

there is a difference between "this home beautiful" (or some ish like that) and "106 and park" for example. similarly, there is a difference between say the cartoon network and your local video channel.

>if watchin an ass shakin
>video count as a sanction
>then doesnt watching BET or
>MTV count too?

yep

>do you watch BET and MTV?

rarely, and when i do even rare still do i watch videos.
if your point is that by watching the network (even occasionally) which broadcasts the videos am i in some way sanctioning the videos, i guess the answer is to some extent yes.

>so you're advocating suppressing one's carnal
>urges but not reconditioning them?

i'm not "advocating" anything. i'm simply saying that i choose not to INDULGE my carnal urges at the expense of other factors and/or what may be affected by that indulgance.

>yet you still willfully participate?

sure. on occasion. however, when i THINK as opposed to just responding/reacting i often am able to check myself. which i think is cool for me to do.

>Again -"when you insist that there
>is nothing (remarkably) positive about
>it

again - did i say that?

>how do you differentiate?

forgive me - differentiate between what and what?

>Take fast food
>for instance- it ceratinly has
>an impact on you and
>your culture- but do you
>still Super Size?

in this case. for several reasons i try to avoid damaging my body by eating something more nutricious. if faced with no other alternative - i will grab a burger, but i will try and minimize the sya environmental detriment by throwing the wrapper in the trash as opposed to just on the ground. does that solve the detrimental effect, maybe not, but i do believe it lessens it in a small way.

going back to videos...

if i don't like the images portrayed in a video, or the song, or the messages, i don't watch it. i'm not foolish enough to think that that makes the issues any less existant, but in a small way i feel that by turning off the tv i'm not ADVOCATING it.

>Im not challenging your idea- just
>trying to find out what
>it is.

>That was more pre-emptive than anything.

ok

>You skirted the argument

what was the arguement?

>admitting that getting one's "jollies"
>was a positive

or at least that it COULD be

>but slighted
>any others

if you say so. again in all this discussion and wrangling i'm losing focus (doing this discussion while working isn't helping), so how about we cut to the chase

what exactly IS your question?