Berikut ini artikel yg sangat bagus tentang siapa dan apa sebenarnya yg diproteksi oleh UU pornografi.

----------------
Who will the pornography bill protect?

The Jakarta Post,Friday 31 October 2008
Bonni Rambatan ,  Malang, East Java   |  Mon, 10/13/2008 11:35 AM  |  Opinion


What is the practical danger of pornography? Is the infamous saying, "pornography is the theory, rape is the practice", really true? Have no illusions: Recall the statistics of family rapes in Amish tribes, homosexual pedophilia in monasteries and domestic violence towards females in Middle Eastern societies.

And compare them to the statistics in liberal societies. Does the opposite not then ring loudly true: The more sexual liberation you have in a society, the less rape and sexual harassment there will be? A good, quick Freudian theory will speedily erase the paradox of this notion, but since we do not have very many Freudian supporters around, let us do ourselves a favor and skip such erudite discourse.

Imagine the typical image in a liberal society in which women can jog around a park only very scantily clad in perfect harmony alongside adult men. Is that condition what one would call "too free" (in terms of clothing)? Would it not be more logical if this image is seen instead as a society with very strict moral codes already in place? For the women to be able to feel safe alongside men even in such clothes, they must first presuppose that the men already follow a very strict code of conduct that regulates even the movement of their eyes so as not to offend the women.

Without such a strict moral code that a liberal society obeys, they would not have the freedom to wear any clothes they want to in first place. In this sense, within this ethical societal context, their scanty clothes are not at all a statement of sexual invitation, but rather a statement of total sexual indifference: "I do not care if I dress this way, because for me, your sexual desires do not even exist!"

Whenever I bring this topic up in any discussion or a class, I get a uniform response: "The Indonesian culture is not yet ready for such kind of morality, which is why we still need a written law!" It is hard to look for an idea that is more miserable than this one: If our culture is not ready, then why celebrate its unreadiness with a law? Why not educate our people to respect women more instead of by erecting a big, long bill?

Are we not, then, basically saying out loud that our culture -- if there is any -- is a primitive one that can never be ready, a backwards culture whose men are wild sexual predators who get aroused by the slightest hint of a genital? And even if we do need to be educated by law, why not make a law dispensing stronger punishment for rape, or basically just regulating sexual harassment?

Why not make a law that would make it easier for women to report on men who are harassing them instead of making it easier for men to report on a woman who they feel just has a beautiful butt that is slightly too exposed for the public to see? Would the former not be much better for society?

With the bill in place, are men not then practically free to stare at any voluptuous body part on any woman on the street -- first, because we have no pornography to stare at, and second, because it is the woman's fault for dressing too sexy anyway?

Does not the Pornography Bill, in this sense, promise a greater, much more obscene sexual freedom -- not a freedom to express, but a freedom to harass -- which is supposed to be the long lost freedom of our liberal world?

Clearly, this is a violent masculine backlash against feminism and liberal political correctness. But there is much more to it than meets the eye.

There are two types of laws/regulations: One that condemns the predicate, and another that condemns the object. The majority of examples belong to the first group: One must not kill, one must not steal. Others belong in the second group: Cigarettes and alcohol are forbidden to minors, we are forbidden to use recreational drugs.

When predicates are regulated, it is because it does harm to another; when objects are regulated, it is because it does harm to oneself. So now we are practically back to the first question: What harm does pornography practically do? Practically speaking, it is generally not harmful to the self. And if it is harmful to others, i.e., it causes sexual harassment, is not trying to regulate pornography to get rid of sexual harassment like trying to regulate thriller movies to get rid of murder?

There is a more fundamental logic at work: When you are on trial for mutilating a person, nobody else is to blame but you. Imagine now a society in which mutilation is discussed based on whether or not the victim is tempting enough to be mutilated, and a suggestion that a law should prohibit video games because the criminal actually did it while under the influence of video games.

It turns out that our society is perfectly fine in our current way, and if there are some people who want to justify mutilation, they will just be shrugged off as crazy people. Should the same not also apply to sexual regulations?

Would it not be perfectly better to live in a society in which rape and sexual harassment are fundamentally wrong, regardless of how sexy the victim was or whether or not the criminal was under the influence of pornography?

Does not the current elevation of sexual regulation into a law precisely increase the chance for a double-sided discourse -- such as a justification for rape or sexual harassment -- by moving over half the sense of legal guilt from the criminal to the victim and the media? Who are we trying to protect in this kind of society?

------
The writer is a psychoanalytic media researcher based in Malang, East Java. He maintains a theory/media/philosophy/sociology blog at http://posthumanmarxist.wordpress.com/

kenapa sih pada menolak UU APP?!!!
gw rasa ini malah lebih baik ..

apalagi artis2 tuh, banyak yang menolak! dengan alasan yang cukup ga rasional menurut gw ..
apa mereka takut ya bakalan ga bisa berpenampilan layaknya manusia tercantik di muka bumi yang senangnya make tank top!!

ayolah, grow up! gw bukannya tidak menghargai aspirasi kalian (bagi yang menolak)
yang gw maksud, kalau mau berdebat, harus menggunakan akal sehat dan secara gentle dong ..

pernah ada yang bilang "UU ini tidak menghargai kebebasan yang diberikan Tuhan"
lalu gw bales "jadi bagaimana caranya menghargai Tuhan yang memberikan kebebasan?"

^ lebih baik baca dulu isi UU APP nya .. (saya juga belum baca2 banget sih)

Sudah baca sih. lumayan menyedihkan isinya. Yang jelas sudah ada gambaran nanti pemilu 2009 milih yang mana.

maksud? ga ngerti euy ..

Aku menolak RUU pornografi!!
bukannya berarti aku suka porno-porno ya..., but negara kita ini kan bukan hanya didatangi dan ditinggali orang-orang indonesia yang sudah terbiasa dengan pakaian yang tidak terbuka, tapi ada para wisatawan dari berbagai negara yang datang dan memberikan keuntungan bagi devisa negara kita ini...
Contohnya aja pulau bali yang merupakan pulau yang pariwisatanya paling menonjol. Kalau misalkannya saja RUU pornografi disahkan, trus para wisatawan berbaju seksi itu mau diusir? Gitu? Trus devisa negar kita mau turun? Mau harga bbm dinaikin lagi? Mau? Enggak kan...
jadi ya, udahlah... lagi pula, negara kitakan punya semboyan "Bhineka Tunggal Ika" yang kita semua sudah pernah diajarin artinya apaan, trus, kalo RUU pornografi disah kan, bhineka tunggal ikanya terhapus donk...

wah jd bingung nih.... pengen ikutan nolak atow setuju yah.....

klo ajaran dari ibu gua... selalu bilang klo pornografi itu dilarang. tapi pornografi yang gimana....?

gua tu msh bingungx porno itu kan relatif. bs jadi bwt orang yg bnr2 menutup auratx bilang orang yg udah berpakaian sopan tapi membuka hanya sedikit aurat yang menurut kita itu biasa, jadi pornografi.

Kalo di negara-negara yang pornografinya legal kejahatan seksnya jauh lebih rendah dari negara-negara yang pornografinya illegal? Berarti manfaatnya sebenarnya ada kan?

pendapat gua klo negara yg pornografix legal yah jadix bs kita bayangin sendiri.... video porno dipampang di mall mslx... trus klo kita ajak adek ikta jln mereka liat trus pengen nonton gmn?

legalitas g semudah itu..... apalagi mslhg pornografi, lagian klo mslkan porno jadi hal yg umum gua pikir bkl baxk ank dibuang. aborsi makin merajalela... lain lagi klo kita bilangnya pengusaha kondom jadi laris......^_^ jd klo kita bilang kejahatn seksual berkurang justru kejahatan yang lain yang nambah.....

kayakx yah emang cara paling ampuh hrs menanamkan moral dr kecil..... anggep aja pornografi adalah hal yang tabu begitu, dan ketabuan itu terus ditingkatkan maka orang akan sungkan untuk melakukan pornografi dan pornoaksi. gitu ja deh.... yang gua denger panu RUU APP ada yg ragu gitu dengan UU yg udah mereka rancang brng.... SO....^_^ i'am Still COnfuSe to...^_* 

maaf saja.... klo ada yg beranggapan mslh video porno dipoampang secara bebas itu adalah hal bys.... itu sy bwt anda2 yg sering tinggal di luar negeri... tapibwt ibu2 yg masih sayang sama anakx...??

...Apa hubunganya pornografi sama seks bebas?

ya jelas donk.... bermula dari sekedar menonton pornografi akan berkembang jadi seks bebas... bahkan pelecehan dan kekerasan seksual.....

coba anda liat di TV yg acarax mengupas kriminal gitu... menurut pengamatan dan pengetahuan saya kebanyakan pelakux adalah orang yg sering nonton pornografi..... bukan begitu..??

bwt masalah kondom... it's okay... gua emang setuju... mending kondom laris darai pada aborsi laris.....

dan klo kita dah menanamkan moral yg baik itu... g hax pornografi masalah yg baxk diuangkap tmn2 jg akan terselesaikan....??