What's most terrifying about this story is not the fact that medical students are regularly given the opportunity to preform pelvic exams on female patients who are anesthetized and unconscious waiting for another procedure, although that's frightening enough. No, what's most terrifying about this story is that it this invasive, nonconsensual practice has already been reported on; but in January 2010 AND – and here is where it gets really scary – in 2003, on the defunct medical blog ShamExam.com. This is not late breaking, this is re-breaking, from at least seven years ago, and clearly the practice is still going on. Dr. Michael Gerger says in the original '03 article " If you’re anesthetized and you’re in the OB/GYN department you probably have had students practice pelvic exams on you regardless of what you’re in the hospital for – even if the procedure you need doesn’t require a pelvic exam!" How is that not malpractice?
Back in 2008, to the cries of "Thank you, God!" Indonesian parliament members passed a draconian anti-pornography law. Last month, they announced their (now legal) intentions of blocking all online pornography during the holy month of Ramadan, when the religious are expected to refrain from any immoral acts, including viewing porn. (Only during that one month, I wonder?)
Unsurprisingly, the country-wide filter ran into a snag as 30 websites, including news portals, were also blocked—unintentionally, according to Indonesian Information Minister's spokesman Gatot Dewa Broto. "The speed of the operation was so huge, we hit the wrong ones," he explained, but touted that the operation had successfully shut down 80% of its intended target. The blockade is being implemented with the cooperation of the country's 300 major Internet service providers.
Nipples. That's what's "obscene" and, according to Apple, needs to be censored in the App Store. To secure a spot in the App Store, Playboy Magazine agreed to self-censor the digital version of their magazine on the iPad, Matthew Moore reports. "The Playmate of the Month, one of the magazine’s most popular photo features, will only appear on the iPad as a tasteful headshot," he writes. In addition to Playboy, Apple has also not allowed a dictionary containing swear words or an application allowing users to replace the face of Jesus with a photo of themselves to exist in the App Store unchanged, all according to Steve Jobs' self-appointed role to define "moral responsibility" for his customers.
Gee, it almost sounds like the next step is restricting iPhone users from taking pictures of their non-orthodox weddings. Of course, anyone with an iPad can visit Playboy's website where uncensored pictures are still shown, nipples included.
An important trial is pitting a politically outspoken pornographer, John Stagliano, against a gauntlet of questionable legal ethics. "The case against Stagliano concerns the selling of movies performed by consenting adults to entertain adult DVD viewers who have chosen to watch these films," Richard Abowitz reports. Using taxpayer money to get obscenity convictions for consensual erotic labor is bad enough, but Judge Richard Leon "is putting great effort into limiting public access to how justice is being administered in this case. […T]he strategic placement of monitors outside public sightlines reeks of the abandonment of the presumption of innocence." The case is being prosecuted with familiar anti-porn activist rhetoric. If Stagliano's relatively tame productions can earn years in prison, don't think you're safe from such anti-porn zealots.
"In a sharp rebuke of the Bush-era crackdown on foul language on broadcast television and radio, a federal appeals court on Tuesday struck down the government's near-zero-tolerance indecency policy as a violation of the 1st Amendment protection of free speech," Jim Puzzanghera and Meg James report. The NY State 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals "reversed the aggressive stance the [FCC] took starting in 2004 that found even a slip of the tongue that got by network censors was a violation" and "said that policy on so-called fleeting expletives was 'unconstitutionally vague' and created a 'chilling effect' on the programming that broadcasters chose to air."
Even Fox Broadcasting Co., the lead plaintiff against the government, praised the decision, while Democratic FCC Commissioner Michael J. Copps said the ruling was "an anti-family decision." The case may wind up at the Supreme Court, but experts are unsure of the ultimate outcome. Personally, I say fuck all that censorship shit. Period.
Documentary filmmaker Justin Sisley wants to make a reality TV show that will culminate in a virginity auction and, unsurprisingly, "Sisley's project has become a lightning rod for debates over morality," writes Tim McElreavy. "He has spent more than a year recruiting virgins of both sexes who have agreed to auction off their first time to the highest bidder. Each participant will be paid $20,000 plus 90 percent of the final bidding price. However, Sisley's original plan to hold the auction in Sydney was scrapped after receiving a letter of warning from the government of the Australian state of Victoria, threatening to prosecute him for prostitution should he proceed. As a result, he will relocate the entire project to Nevada where prostitution is legal."
21 year old Veronica, one of the virgins who wants to participate in the auction, says her motivation was to "challenge society, […] and change society's views on sex," and had to allay her father's fears that she had been abused.