Online business Toolkit

Story: ICANN drops plan to approve .XXX

• 
• 

Overall I approve of the idea, however there might be problems defining what constitues porn and what constitues erotic art, stories, or whatever. You might end up with companies being accused of violating their dotcom status if there even a discussion relating to sex or whatever. I can usually tell the difference between dirty-mag type porn and artistic nudity that merely celebrates the human form, but how long before A N Religious group forces legitimate nudity or even just frank discussions of sex without any pictures under the 'depraved' .XXX banner, thus demeaning an non-pornographic site that even young teenagers should have the right to access to discuss their sexual questions or admire the artistic nude (ie not legs spread for a gynaelogical exam, but merely the curves of a man or woman as a legitimate celebration of nudity and human beauty). I can already hear the God-botherers screaming 'but that IS porn!' when it's not. After all if an Islamic woman in Saudi Arabia shows much more than her eyes she's accused of being immoral, should all images of women therefore fall under .XXX unless they wear the chadori or hijab? What about the face of a person during orgasm like at beautiful agony dotcom- is that porn? Or can something be erotic and arousing without being considered porn, like a steamy novel or a seductive pose? So my twopenneth is this: the .XXX domain is a good idea for things that an open-minded person would consider to be porn, but we must be careful not to allow it to become a hysterical witchhunt against sex and nudity in general on the internet.

• 
• 

• 
• 
• 

Full Talkback thread