Penises, LIttle Boys, and Internet Responsibility

KY brand of sexual lubricant already has TV ads that tout a creme for him and a creme for her which, when used together, does something "special" for each of them.

What kind of messages are we sending to our children when online and TV ads bearing these types of headlines are available at all hours for the kids to see?

Online, the headline "Dreaming of a Bigger Penis?" comes with a good looking young man lying on his bed, looking up at you. It does not have the addition of "Little Boy."

But you and I know the elementary boys will be giggling about it and showing it to each other. Middle and junior high school girls will be giggling about "penises" at the their lockers, while looking at their favorite boys' crotches trying to figure out which one's have the biggest. Some of those girls will find out, if they have not already. The boys will be laughing about penis size in the locker rooms and pointing at each other's dicks in the shower to prove they themselves don't need any "pills," and inadvertently shaming the innocent, closeted gay boys who get a hard-on, while bravely encouraging the straight boys to jerk it and prove they are men before emerging from the showers.

Creation of a web "dotsex" just for sex ads and porn is not against the first amendment or free speech; it is against the mulitculturist left [see article below] who want freedom of the press, even when the press is read by minors. You cannot yell fire in a crowded theater? Certainly; and just as certainly this is not a case of that; but there is an audience for everything, and for everything there is a audience that should not be involved. It is why we make age-related laws about so many subjects, from movies to alcohol, from video games to driver's licenses, to which crimes can cause teens to be tried as adults.

We adults in civilization ought not be able to titillate the horny teens who already have their pants full of throbbing meat, wondering where to put it. They are not being taught not to put it anywhere, because statistics prove that abstinence programs alone are not as effective as mixed education where the proper use of condoms and safer sex are also taught.

Chastity rings are a cool thing, and I hope they work for those teens who want them to work. But 8 year olds who innocently surf the web and find these ads on their favorite general information pages don't need to be thinking about their penises--or anyone else's. If this continues, we will eventually see "clitoral stimulus pills" advertised. KY brand of sexual lubricant already has TV ads that tout a creme for him and a creme for her which, when used together, does something "special" for each of them.

Can you imagine what the boys in the locker rooms will do that with that information? A social society does not need to publicly discuss penises in general, not in front of our toddlers and teens.

Read this important report:

majicJack rips off consumers; leaves behind spywar...

The Free Assemblage of Metaphysical Naturalists is the SM of
The Free Assemblage of Metaphysical Naturalists LLC.
The Academy of Metaphysical Naturalism TM,
The Academy of Metaphysical Naturalism Blogger TM, and
Academy of Metaphysical Naturalism Blogger Extra TM are the educational arms of the LLC and are:
© 2008-2009 by Curtis Edward Clark and Naturalist Academy Publishing ®

mailto:freeassemblage@gmail.com

http://freeassemblage.blogspot.com/

TV Frequencies and Wealth Redistribution

...big government as epitomized by Obama's ideas thinks that causing business to spend and then to lose money is a good policy...

In one of President Obama's first outright, overt attempts to redistribute the wealth from those who have to those who were too lazy over the last 14 months to purchase--with Federal Assistance Rebates--their hdtv converters, he wants to delay the February 17th transition to the new broadcasting frequencies.

Neowin.net reported Obama made it clear that to him, "many Americans are not ready for the switch. The cut off date was scheduled for February 17, 2009 in America, which was to free up airwaves for emergency services.

"'We are extremely pleased the incoming administration is supportive of consumer efforts to ensure that the poor, elderly and rural consumers do not face economic hardship as we move broadcasting to digital transmission," said Gene Kimmelman, vice president for federal policy for Consumers Union.'" Neowin.net

Those Kimmelman is speaking of are the have-nots. Redistributing the wealth to them would be in the form of billions of dollars lost from first responders whose frequencies will change to the old TV frequencies and were ready to make the switch; and broadcasting companies who did not budget nor prepare to run two transmitters at the same time. Are advertisers ready to pick up the tab to run their commercials for another four months on not one, but two, frequencies at the same time?

"As it stands now the FCC will not be backing down on its initial plan of February 17th unless Congress passes a judgment delaying the transition. As we get closer to the deadline the fighting will most likely intensify but at the end of the day the broadcasters already have plans in place to remove the old analog technology, the FCC has sold off the spectrum, it has advertised heavily for the transition and should not be delayed because a small minority procrastinated to upgrade their technology."

The billions of dollars already spent, compared to the loss that will be suffered by the procrastinators, is already money ready well spent, spent being the operative word.

In these hard economic times when big government as epitomized by Obama's ideas thinks that causing business to spend and then to lose money is a good policy, we can understand why President Reagan said big government is the problem.

The government had the absolute right to upgrade to the superior frequencies that will be used by TV broadcasters, in order to sell the old frequencies to other services who severly needed new ones.

But after delaying the transition for years because of technology problems, and then setting a date by which time billions of dollars have already been spent, that same government has no right to squander the money of the very capitalists who are going to help pay off the huge debts run up by Presidents Bush and Obama.

NOTE: "I do not want Obama to succeed."

On Wednesday, January 21, Rush Limbaugh explicitly stated about Obama, "I hope he fails."

The day before, in a blog about "lost art of communication" and saying what you mean, I published these words of my own:

"A President is [ ] a looter if he creates debt for future generations, robbing them of their ability to be free of the slavery of that debt. Our children and grandchildren, and probably our great-grandchildren, in other words our posterity, will be born as indendured servants of the IRS, or of whatever government agency is collecting the debt-reduction taxes in the future.

"That indenture may prevent our posterity from their own pursuit of happiness.

"The only people who want to see socialism succeed are those who don't see [ ] that the fortune of America and its people is not made by redistributing wealth, but rather by its creation."

I am not one of those people who "does not see," and neither is Rush Limbaugh. I don't want our new President to succeed, either.

If he fails, I wrote, perhaps we will then get a President who is rooting for outright capitalism.

The Free Assemblage of Metaphysical Naturalists is the SM of
The Free Assemblage of Metaphysical Naturalists LLC.
The Academy of Metaphysical Naturalism TM,
The Academy of Metaphysical Naturalism Blogger TM, and
Academy of Metaphysical Naturalism Blogger Extra TM are the educational arms of the LLC and are:
© 2008-2009 by Curtis Edward Clark and Naturalist Academy Publishing ®

mailto:freeassemblage@gmail.com

http://freeassemblage.blogspot.com/