The war against perverts.

May 18, 2001 7:45 AM

The war against perverts. Apparently, in Saudi Arabia, "Saudi police have whipped seven teenage boys after charging them with leering at women in the conservative Muslim kingdom." If only the U.S. could implement the same policy with those involved in child-porn.
posted by msposner (22 comments total)

Mickey, "involved with" is a dangerously vague standard.

In Ancient Rome, criticizing the emperor was considered "obscene."

Under loosely defined standards like those in Saudia Arabia, how difficult would it be for a critic of Dick Cheney's energy policy (for example) to be said to be "leering" at it? Or to find some evidence that he was "involved with" child porn?

I recently was invited (via spam) to click a link called "girl f**ks a horse" Am I now "involved with" animal sodomy and eligible for a lashing?

I am not entirely without sympathy for your point of view. Many of the young men I see in OUR shopping malls look to me as if their manners would be improved considerably by a horsewhipping--but it is our Constitution that would bleed.
posted by steve_high at 8:06 AM on May 18, 2001

Is this post serious? I suppose it is. Wooboy. Man. Lots of posts about people wanting the government to torture people lately. Somethin in the water, I guess.
Anyway, anybody goin to the Preakness this weekend?
posted by Doug at 8:27 AM on May 18, 2001

"If only the U.S. could implement the same policy"

What the hell is wrong with you? You want the U.S. to implement "whipping"?

Yah, great idea. Let's look to Saudi Arabia for inspiration in human rights issues.

what a moron.
posted by preguicoso at 9:02 AM on May 18, 2001

Great . . . more calls on MetaFilter for state-sponsored torture. We could also start cutting off hands and heads in Oakland Coliseum -- the A's certainly aren't bringing in the ticket sales.
posted by OneBallJay at 9:06 AM on May 18, 2001

Saudi babes rule!
posted by Postroad at 9:10 AM on May 18, 2001

I'm sure he's joking, dude.

Out of interest - what the hell is the Preakness?
posted by Mocata at 9:10 AM on May 18, 2001

The Preakness Stakes is the second leg of the Triple Crown, after the Kentucky Derby and before the Belmont Stakes. It's held at Pimlico Racetrack, in Maryland.

I'll be there laying wagers on the ponies.
posted by dfowler at 9:31 AM on May 18, 2001

Yeah, I've never even been to a race before, but I'm kinda getting dragged along by a friend. Any advice, dfowler?
posted by Doug at 9:55 AM on May 18, 2001

Yeah, they "whip" the horses, right?
posted by steve_high at 10:10 AM on May 18, 2001

I hope no one that posts on Yahoo message boards comes over here. I've skimmed about 20 messages posted about this news story, and they're all ignorant, flame-bating comments. Is there really this much ignorance and racism in people, are they just more vocal, or are they just voicing their true opinions thanks to the anonymity of the Internet?
posted by gramcracker at 10:12 AM on May 18, 2001

OT: Doug, a word of advice: bring a lot of beer. I went to the Preakness last year (infield tix); it was lots of fun, but not b/c of the horses.
posted by Witold at 10:18 AM on May 18, 2001

I don't think the original poster was joking. Glanced at his web site and I think maybe he's a gentle romantic dude doesn't think young girls should be getting abused in shopping malls--and hey, neither do I.

Tempting as it may sound, however, bringing back the Lash is about the sorriest idea I've heard in quite some time.

Who do you like in the Preakness, anyway?
posted by steve_high at 10:22 AM on May 18, 2001

i think the concept of bringing back the lash IS appalling.

why the whip when there are better alternatives.*

*(do not click if you don't have a sense of humour.)
posted by jcterminal at 11:01 AM on May 18, 2001

Well, seem as if I've provoked some people to feel quite iritate with the last sentence of my post. Read: sarcasm.
posted by msposner at 11:04 AM on May 18, 2001

oh what the hell? another weird parse!

http://www.dailyradar.com/features/directhit_feature_page_1941_1.html
posted by jcterminal at 11:10 AM on May 18, 2001

MS Posner, I don't feel "quite irritate," but I am confused. Where are you at with this issue? You want to keep the ragheads over there hitting the sand six times a day with their whips and cutting off the hands and dicks that offend you and such, or do you think we should implement such law and order practices over here?

Give me a straight answer, Dude, no effin' sarcasm.
posted by steve_high at 11:21 AM on May 18, 2001

Um. Child porn IS illegal. And the punishment is worse than a spanking.
posted by glenwood at 11:55 AM on May 18, 2001

Ragheads. Ragheads?

Dude, like, that's so effin' unkewl.
posted by lia at 11:56 AM on May 18, 2001

Oh Christ, that just slipped out. God I hope I didn't hurt their feelings. Maybe I should go let them whip me.
posted by steve_high at 12:09 PM on May 18, 2001

*(do not click if you don't have a sense of humour.)

Or if you do not have a very strong stomach. Excuse me... gotta hrumphmmphgh...
posted by Dick Paris at 12:11 PM on May 18, 2001

I think the problem is in the terminology. There is a big difference between "leering at women " and what comes to mind when one says "involved with child porn."
Like glenwood said - the punishment is worse than a whipping when such things are proven by the government. That's the rub - "involved with" could mean anything the government wanted it to. Just ask the Nazi's.
posted by sixdifferentways at 12:54 PM on May 18, 2001

Oh man, tell me about the infield, Witold. It's worth the extra money?
posted by Doug at 12:55 PM on May 18, 2001