Interesting encounter in a bookstore (RE pornography)

[LearnedHand]

A couple of days ago, I was browsing the magazine section in a local bookstore (fairly liberal city). A youngish woman standing by a magazine section had apparently called over the store manager and began haranguing him about displaying "those" magazines (porn -- all covered in opaque plastic, etc.) I ignored them for a bit, but she got louder, louder, and finally, very aggressive with him: "Do I have to go all the way to the corporate office to get someone to do something about this?" Her whole schtick was something about damage to the children who might see them and damage to the women who work in the store. She asserted several times that she was exercising her right to voice her opinion. Oh, and one of the women employees was standing right next to the loudmouth, restocking the magazine shelves.

At this point, I whirled around and said, "Oh, for Pete's sake!" and walked up to them. "I DON'T mind that you sell these," I said to the manager, and walked over to another magazine rack. The loudmouth was livid. She told the manager off for another few minutes; I stood close by, shaking my head at the total inanity and chuckling wryly at her rude, aggressive behavior. (For the record, I don't care that she complained. But she should have taken the manager off and talked to him about this privately, and NOT made a scene during bookstore rush hour.)

When she finished, she turned to me and said it was none of my business what she thought, and if I supported pornography (sigh) and wanted to buy THOSE THINGS..., and she stalked off. I didn't even answer her because it's usually a total waste of time to get into it with someone likeher. Later, though, I wishid I had said that since she was loudly and rudely assalting the manager with her opinion, I was also exercising my right to voice a dissenting opinion.

I don't have any particularly strong opinion about pornography one way or the other. But the loudmouth's behavior was SO reflective of the bellicose, aggrandizing, I'm-so-persecuted, attitudes of so many in public life, from the White House on down to the local fundy churches. I lay the blame for this kind of public behavior SQUARELY on Newt Gingrich's shoulders: almost by himself, he ushered in this nasty, nasty treatment of one another in today's public square. I hate it. I hate it more than almost anything else that's happened in the last 10 years (well, not more than the abrogation of our civil liberties).

I think disagreement over policy is not only a good thing, it's virtually guaranteed by the structure of our federal government. But the nastiness, the "criminalization" of disagreement is very scary.

[Liberal In Texas]

1. She made it your business by making a noisy scene in public.

What an uptight B.

[LearnedHand]

2. That's actually why I said something

The store manager was very flustered, trying to answer her calmly and courteously. She just got louder, more aggressive.

[FreedomAngel82]

8. Exactly

There is this quote I've heard before in my life and it's: "your rights end where my nose begins."

[LearnedHand]

10. ROTFL

That's a WONDERFUL line! May I steal it?

[NYCGirl]

3. I would hope that the store manager told her that if she had a problem

with his merchandise, she should consider shopping elsewhere.

[tanyev]

5. Yeah, one of those Fundies R' Us Bookstores.

She should be very happy there.

[LearnedHand]

9. He was trying to say that politely

But she kept backing him into a corner further and further. After she walked away, he tracked me down and apologized to me for the encounter. I told him I was fine, but that I was sorry he was subjected to such rude behavior. I expressed my fervent wish that if she didn't like the magazines, she shouldn't buy them. He totally agreed.

[NYCGirl]

15. Sounds like a good place to continue to shop. It's really too bad that

some people like that loud woman can't mind their own business.

[LearnedHand]

17. Exactly

As I said, she has a right to protest the magazines, but she should have done it PRIVATELY! Much more effective that way, anyway.

[LostinVA]

20. Of course they didn't say that -- they would be fired

I can tell you've never been a bookstore manager! I put up with this worse ten times a day -- you have to grin and take it, unless sexist, racist, etc. language is said. Home Office would have fired my ass, and I would have had to have fired an employee who did this, too.

And, for the record, this happened to us, because some idiot had left an opened Playboy open on the shelf. Some woman's child saw it, called the cops, and I was almost charged with a Class II Felony Sexual Offense Against a Minor. The damn "sophisticates" were stored under the counter at the register after that.

[LearnedHand]

23. I bet you DO get a lot of this and more

And no, I've never been a bookstore manager. When I said the guy was politely trying to say that to the loudmouth, what I meant was that he was trying to imply that without saying anything that would get him fired. And none of the magazines was opened and exposed. She just didn't want them to be there at all.

Sorry you had such a scary event. I'm sure keeping the mags behind the counter is a pretty good way to avoid such incidents, and in fact, that might be a good way for any bookstore to manage access to "sophisticates." It's a complex issue, to be sure. But this woman was totally out of line.

[Warpy]

4. "The more you try to push other people around

the more they're gonna know what a fucking waste of oxygen YOU are"

There's ya snappy comeback, just make sure you've got fast reflexes to go with it.

[LearnedHand]

11. More ROTFL!

Oh, that's wonderful. I always think of these things too late for a snappy rejoinder. {{{shakes fist}}} curses!

[ChairmanAgnostic]

6. she was trying to create a scene. Why? because -

they realize that their emperor is losing it.
they realize that their tenuous grip over the media is failing
they realize that their war on x-mas is being laughed out of existence
they realize that their gig is up - we are onto them

Think of it as a last gasp of a threatened group - knowing that they have been caught with a hand in the cookie jar.

[LearnedHand]

12. I hope you're right

There is a lot of desperation in what passes for public discourse, but I hope it's not the desperation of a group who has so little to lose they will start a civil war over it.

[PaganPreacher]

25. You presume she was a Pub.

Intolerance is not just a right-wing problem.

Plenty of "progressive" voices right here on DU screaming about "exploitation of women".


The Pagan Preacher
I don't turn the other cheek.

[LearnedHand]

27. Oops. My prejudice was showing!

You're right.

[omega minimo]

38. Do you live with your mom?

[PaganPreacher]

39. No, but I may have lived with yours once.

Send a picture, and I'll let you know if I need to start sending support checks.

What an odd question!



The Pagan Preacher
I don't turn the other cheek.

[omega minimo]

41. Either very young

or very ignorant

"Plenty of "progressive" voices right here on DU screaming about "exploitation of women"."

Not very progressive.

[Terran]

45. Well, not everyone here agrees that pornography is

automatically anti-woman, ior that it's a bad thing. But I have seen some posters here who simply condemn it outright, on some sort of inexplicable gut-level.

[PaganPreacher]

47. Neither, thank you. I appreciate your "tolerance", though!

Resorting to ad hominiem is an impotent arguing tactic. If it is to be "logical fallacies at 10 paces" for us, would you care to be slandered by a false dichotomy? I am sure I can come up with two unflattering things to say about you, someone whom I know not at all, and insist you must be one or the other. However, since Festivus is fast approaching, I will show a greater measure of grace than you have, and perhaps provide a bit of enlightenment in the process:

Many liberal people mirror religious conservative people in opposing books, movies, art, video games, and other forms of expression or entertainment that contain nudity or sexual content. Their motivations are different: for those liberals, "making the world a better place", "doing it for the children", and "stopping the exploitation of women" are the dominant memes; the religious conservatives invoke God, G-d, or Allah (paradoxically, Creator of the nude human body and Architect of sex and sexual reproduction). However, each group insists it is the standard bearer for "right" in the battle of "right" v. "wrong", and each group shows intolerance (to the point of hatred) for expressions of individual freedom that it deems "wrong".

Less globally: Among self-described progressives on DU (and ultimately, we don't truly know the political or philosophical positions of any one here; we only know what he writes, and make assumptions based on that), there are people who stridently oppose adult literature, art, or expression on the grounds they are exploitative of women. Both the quote you pulled, and my entire post, acknowledge that point, which you did not argue against or refute.

Look at the dictionary.com definition of "progressive": Promoting or favoring progress toward better conditions or new policies, ideas, or methods. We can have honest discussion (even disagreement) about what constitutes "better conditions". We can debate the way in which we, as an American society, would determine what is "better", and how to measure movement toward or away from that ideal. However, that debate becomes moot when the self-appointed Guardians of Truth (on the right or left) begin screaming, or when their enablers (those who stand on the flanks and act as Guardians of Progressivism or Guardians of True Conservatism) seek to stifle rational discourse.

I define "progressive process" to include healthy debate between different factions within the liberal and civil libertarian camps to find common ground for a "better" society. Screamers (within or without) who insist theirs is the One True Path, do nothing to advance the progressive process.


The Pagan Preacher
I don't turn the other cheek.

[omega minimo]

51. Tolerance?

"Plenty of "progressive" voices right here on DU screaming about "exploitation of women"."

"Both the quote you pulled, and my entire post, acknowledge that point, which you did not argue against or refute."

That was not an "acknowledgment" that is a scattershot insult and "an impotent arguing tactic." There may be more reading this than your inner circle that you think know who/what you're talking about. My question suggested that that attitude possibly came from youth and/or inexperience and/or ignorance of the bigger picture-- including how to "include healthy debate between different factions."

I was interested in perhaps healing some of the recently-deepened factionalizing on DU and made some attempts. Blanket snarkments about "Plenty of 'progressive' voices right here on DU screaming...." reinforces the attitudes and animosity, which I have proposed are short-sighted and unnecessary.

On this board, we would have better discussions and some hope of "progress" if people responded to the individual poster and WHAT IS ACTUALLY BEING SAID, rather than reacting with canned responses to what they already think about the poster's general comments-- things like "many liberal people mirror religious conservative people in opposing books, movies, art, video games, and other forms of expression or entertainment that contain nudity or sexual content." That may be so-- that may NOT be the view of the DUer you are discussing with at the moment. It would be a mistake to presume. See?

"Look at the dictionary.com definition of "progressive": Promoting or favoring progress toward better conditions or new policies, ideas, or methods. We can have honest discussion (even disagreement) about what constitutes "better conditions". We can debate the way in which we, as an American society, would determine what is "better", and how to measure movement toward or away from that ideal. However, that debate becomes moot when the self-appointed Guardians of Truth (on the right or left) begin screaming, or when their enablers (those who stand on the flanks and act as Guardians of Progressivism or Guardians of True Conservatism) seek to stifle rational discourse."

Actually, DU cannot: "We can have honest discussion (even disagreement) about what constitutes "better conditions"." At least not currently. Snarks such as the one I pointed out are part of the problem. Belligerent and hostile "self-appointed Guardians of Truth" that you may agree with are fine-- it's the Other "screaming" "self-appointed Guardians of Truth" that aren't...... No one listens. Not every discussion (hopefully) is an automatic competitive debate. No progress comes from simply reinforcing what we already think we know, with people we already agree with.

With enough confidence and some trust in the notion that we ARE here for common reasons, we COULD have "honest discussion (even disagreement)" WITHOUT BELLIGERENCE AND KNEE JERK REACTIONS.

But this has become a very factionalized world and perhaps people, "even on DU" are more comfortable communicating within the tribe about how wrong and how threatening The Other is.

Good luck. :patriot:

[bloom]

53. " Promoting or favoring progress toward better conditions or new policies,

ideas, or methods."

Yeah - that is an interesting definition in light of this conversation.


Better conditions, policies, ideas or method....


For women - better conditions, policies, etc. would include less sexism and more equality. See the Male Privilege Checklist for a few ideas of how society is skewed in men's favor (*written by a man btw).

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=229&topic_id=3488&mesg_id=3488


...whereas porn seems to encourage sexist attitudes. Robert Jensen has written quite a bit on this subject and I trust his POV. It rings more true to me than people who say there is no effect of having porn becoming mainstream and common. Whatever I see advertised is advertised for men - not women - (IOW - there isn't equality involved). And there is the increased commodification of sex - seems more about exploitation and money than anything that resembles idealism or "better conditions, policies, ideas or methods...".

http://feministantipornographymovement.org/

http://feministantipornographymovement.org/leftissue.htm

----

Whereas the "conditions, policies, ideas or methods..." that you seem interested are more access to porn - even while there seems to be more access all the time - to where people won't be able to get away from it if they wanted to (like the woman in the store). The "Better conditions" you have in mind do not seem to include consideration for others or society at large. Or as one recent thread was titled, "Fuck being progressive -- I'm for FREEDOM"

[mongo]

57. As usual, you missed the point of the thread you mentioned.

And if Robert Jenson -- and the website you mentioned are so "progressive" -- then why are they promoting totalitarian socialism?

In addition to the slurs, we constantly face a question: Why do we “waste” our time on the pornography issue? Since we are anti-capitalist and anti-empire leftists as well as feminists, shouldn't we focus on the many political, economic, and ecological crises (war, poverty, global warming, etc.)? Why would we spend part of our intellectual and organizing energies over the past two decades pursuing the feminist critique of pornography and the sexual exploitation industry?

I would think it is far more "progressive" to let consenting adults view materials they desire in the privacy of their own homes.

Better conditions my ass -- you, and the links you provide only wish to control society. Hitler started out by burning books too.

[bloom]

63. "anti-capitalist and anti-empire leftists"

Since when does that make someone "totalitarian"?

Maybe they just happen to be anti-fascists.

Maybe you like fascism and corporate-run governments with no controls whatsoever. :shrug:

You think that is better than democratic socialism? I don't.

Maybe I should call you a "totalitarian fascist".

[mongo]

64. Well the phrase "anti-capitalist"

Sure does imply putting the means of all production into state hands.

And no, I'm not for fascism (which is another means of state control of production, even if ownership is retained privately) or un-regulated capitalism, which we have slid further towards over the past couple of decades.

I'm more of socialist than you know. You have no idea how badly the electric grid needs to be nationalized, for one. But I guess we'll all be feeling the effects of the gas companies deregulation this winter.

But my socialist tendancies do not spread into the area of private liberties. I don't want a nanny-state government telling me what I can watch in the privacy of my own home.

And with this war on porn that was started by Bush, after years of relative quiet under Clinton is why I am now defending porn so rigorously. I have to.

[bloom]

67. "anti-capitalist" and "anti-empire"

I created a poll for your benefit:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5646405

So far

15 votes - I am "Anti-Empire"

0 votes - I am "Anti-Capitalist" (by itself)

21 votes - I am "Anti-Empire" AND "Anti-Capitalist"

0 votes - I am neither "Anti-Empire" NOR "Anti-Capitalist"

1 vote - I prefer Fascism

1 vote - Other

-----

I think if the porn industry were more concerned about itself - it would clean itself up. Instead - it goes the opposite way.

http://uts.cc.utexas.edu/%7Erjensen/freelance/pornography&cruelty.htm

[mongo]

58. dupe

[The Stranger]

7. Tell her that she is invading your right to freedom of speech and press.

Then loudly use any combination of nice, choice profanity.

(Countdown to posts from DUers afraid that they are going to offend the theonazis or be made to "look bad" on the radio by that pillpopping, fat piece of shit . . . ).

[LearnedHand]

14. I DO do that...

... but only on the inside, and only after such loudmouths have left the room. I think fast on my feet in every situation except aggressive, potentially explosive ones.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

13. I agree 100 %

And you used a good term "the criminalization" of disagreement.

It is scary and it happens on both sides. I hate it, too.

[LearnedHand]

16. I know Dems have committed their share of bad behavior

...but is it just me who thinks most of the bad behavior in public comes from wingnuts and fundies?

In a related observation, is it most of the wingnuts and fundies who are publically selfish and penurious? I used to teach Freshman and Sophmore English (college level); many students who had waited tables pointed out that the most ill-behaved people, the worst tippers, were ALWAYS the church-goers. Always giving them Chick tracts rather than tips. Always the most demanding, the angriest, the readiest to make a loud, rude public scene.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

28. Actually, I don't see enough Dems

in person to really make a comparison! Well..some colleagues, but they're all teachers so they don't count.

I think good manners is directly proportionate to brain power, so you can draw your own conclusions!

[LearnedHand]

32. That's a very good scale!

It reminds me of the pirates-to-global warming scale on the Flying Spaghetti Monster site.

Edit: Oh, shoot. I can't get the right code for the rolling-on-the-floor emoticon.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

46. You know, every time I hear about that FSM

I want pasta. I guess that is a good thing: a diety who makes you yearn for a good meal?

[lildreamer316]

18. THANK YOU.

Per recent events on this board having to do with pornography and its' appropriate display; and the lack of reasoned discourse thereof; I am SO GLAD to see this. I understand that this is not your implied support of such; just your UNQUALIFIED support of completely free speech. Thank you so much; this kind of reasoned attitude is sorely lacking in the most unexpected places these days. Congrats on you being able to keep your cool....I think I would have gotten into it.

[LearnedHand]

21. Aw, shucks! Thanks!

I thought I was being rather timid, but I did NOT want to contribute to the nasty attitude. There would be no convincing her of the validity of any other argument, but I did want the store manager to know I supported him and the freedom to sell adequately covered-up pornography if he wanted to.

[lildreamer316]

19. Dupe.

[madrchsod]

22. well i`ve been waiting all day to use these

http://www.pureonline.com/info-for-wives.cfm
Overcome Pornography Addiction & Sex Addiction with Pure Online - Information for Wives









you did a great service for your fellow citzens.

[LearnedHand]

24. Is that site a parody or for real? n/t

[havocmom]

26. Lots of arrested development out there, and Newt can't take all the heat.

Too many people just never get around to growing the fuck up. Bunch of bellicose two year olds in big people disguises.

And it ALWAYS gets worse this time of year. Too many un-addressed holiday disappointments in too many pasts. Too little parenting to help people learn they are not the boss of the universe and better get used to the idea that things will not always go according to their wishes.

Mix all that with Newt's teachings and the persecution complexes fed by some religious leaders and the people who never got the memo that they aren't in charge and you have a dish I like to call Ego Stew.

Ego Stew is a nasty brew.

Will have to dig that old poem up and post it sometime. More true now than when I penned it 28 years ago.

[LearnedHand]

30. Please do!

I like it already!

Yes, it obviously takes more than Newt for things to get to this level, but he made it OKAY to behave that way in public. American is Newt Gingrich's country; we just live in it.

On a side note, it seems that he might occasionally feel a nanosecond or two of remorse. I've read some of his comments over the last couple of years that MAY suggest that to be the case. Or maybe I'm just WISHING that were the case. Personally, when I'm feeling really un-mature, I hope every one of those sons-of-bitches lives to publically regret what they brought about in our country: Rhenquist, Gingrich, LimpBalls, *, Delay, Frist, Karen Huge, Rice, and especially Rove.

[havocmom]

35. Newt is trying to cultivate a more noble image so he can run too.

If you have access to a local library with a good periodical archive, New Yorker magazine ran an most enlightening bio of the reptile back in about 95 or so. Very good read and looking back over the past decade, it would explain A LOT.

Anyone who can, should really read that bio. Wish I had a copy as I have not found it online. It is a gem.

Newt is the father of the current politics of screaming lies until people give up and believe you. He is a student of the Nazi propagandists and he is damned good at teaching it, much to the detriment of America.

Would have to dig deep into some boxes to turn up that little poem. If I track it down while looking for something else, I will PM you with it. No point boring everyone else ;)

29. Lets go back to the days

of straw skirts and body-art. Too much weirdness centered around sex.

[LearnedHand]

31. AMEN! n/t

[omega minimo]

33. He was "trying to say that politely"

 that: "if she had a problem with his merchandise, she should consider shopping elsewhere." So, he invalidated her concerns and told her he didn't value her business. "Politely."

"A youngish woman standing by a magazine section had apparently called over the store manager and began haranguing him about displaying "those" magazines."

The word "display" is a clue.

Sometimes the complaint may be more about placement than the mere presence of certain magazines. Tower used to put the skin mags section RIGHT next to the women's interest/fashion mags so women trying to look there were next to a bunch of drooling men. More and more stores are putting skin mags in prominent display, including in food markets.

We're not hearing much about what she actually said or what his response to her initially was. Did he express any concern for her as a customer or just tell her to go elsewhere if she didn't like it. There's a chance that her concerns were legitimate and met with some pigheaded resistance that let her know right off he didn't care what she thought (personally or managerially).

"I expressed my fervent wish that if she didn't like the magazines, she shouldn't buy them. He totally agreed."

Fervent? B-)

Placement of the covers in a prominent and in-yer-face location may have been a legitimate complaint --not an attack on the mere existence in the store of porn for sale-- as it was with the prominent, in-yer-face placement of the MSNBC ad that got some attention on DU this week.

[LearnedHand]

34. I just conveyed the spirit of the conversation, not the entire context

He was trying to be polite -- i.e. trying to quietly talk with her about her concerns. She was very rude and loud and aggressive. He was very unconfortable. As I said before, I totally support her right to object, to ask for a change in policy, or whatever. But she was WRONG TO DO THIS in a very crowded, very public venue. She should have asked to speak to him privately in his office. Her act of confronting him very loudly and very publically (a) assumed everyone in there agreed with her -- and there were dozens of people standing close-by, including children who were witnessing her rude behavior, and (b) put him in a no-win, no discourse position. No one could have reached an agreeable solution in that situation.

In other words, she was manipulating the situation, NOT seeking a real solution. She was trying to bully him into removing the magazines.

Edit: Clarity

[omega minimo]

36. Woud you be interested in bridging the unecessary divide that gaped open

on DU this week? It reinforced misperceptions and knee jerk attitudes that really don't need to be there-- unless for mere entertainment value or disruptive intent of those who really don't care about Dems or DU......................

This story could be a good example. You may be right that she could have done better and him as well. If he was "uncomfortable" he may not have been trained to handle her concerns professionally, without telling her if she didn't like it, he didn't want her business. Maybe that's his prerogative. In big corporate chains now, they may have a smoother way to handle it (esp. if you get a store manager and not a flunky).

Everybody needs to listen better here. Similar issues and assumptions and emotional over-reactions that cause (IMHO) unecessary strife on DU may have been in play in the scene you describe.

There is a way to respect another opinion, listen (maybe learn) without the "if you don't like it F--- you" attitude.

This guy may have KNOWN that he would get complaints about the display (or already had) and was defensive and impatient and didn't listen to her at all from the get go. He may feel guilty or "uncomfortable" about it before anyone brings it up and he overreacts himself.

It would be great if the cliches and assumptions could take a backseat in these threads on DU. Not easy, but worth it. There is common ground here, which I have tried to actually understand better, gradually, because the animosity prevents some from saying what they really have to say-- all that comes across is the ATTITUDE.

[LearnedHand]

40. He wasn't rude or impatient with her at all, or defensive

He only made an aside comment to me after she left. He was fairly young and she was so bellicose that he was caught way off guard or something.

I'm not sure what you're referring to about what happened onDU this week, but we all have our blind spots and our prejudices, myself included. And we sometimes use this forum to blow off some serious steam when we know we're in a "safe" environment and don't have to watch how we say things so closely. Whatever happened, it'll heal itself.

[omega minimo]

43. SNAFU

"And we sometimes use this forum to blow off some serious steam when we know we're in a "safe" environment and don't have to watch how we say things so closely. Whatever happened, it'll heal itself."

Safe for who? "Don't have to watch how we say things so closely." According to who?

"Whatever happened, it'll heal itself." Situation Normal All Fucked Up.


btw:
"He was fairly young and she was so bellicose that he was caught way off guard or something." = he wasn't trained or prepared or authorized to handle the comments professionally, managerially and he was incapable of a better solution than telling a customer he didn't want her business......

:hi:

[mondo joe]

48. Screw her business. Just like the person who complained about the cooking

magazine that profiled a gay couple - they can take their business elsewhere.

Better to include everyone than try to please everyone.

[omega minimo]

49. Looks like "everyone" is in the eye of the beholder....

"Better to include everyone than try to please everyone."






Huh? :crazy:

[mondo joe]

52. The pissy customer wanted some things removed because SHE didn't like

it, oblivious to the wishes of the customers who DO wish to have access.

[omega minimo]

54. So, "better to include everyone" means "everyone" 'you' agree with

and telling customers to piss off is okay?

I brought up two points here:

1. Placement may have been the issue, rather then mere presence of porn in the store. The OP mentioned children were there. That may have been part of it. Many stores now are intentionally putting the skin mags in prominent locations. Like the "neon mud flap" ad, some folks may not want it "in yer face" at centralized and high traffic areas (including where children will see it).

2. Professionalism may have been the issue, if the clerk was not trained to handle the situation any better than to let it escalate to where the OP and others here assume the women was totally out of line from the get go.

We may not have the whole story here.

:hi:

[mondo joe]

55. To the contrary - including everyone means welcoming everyone who

chooses to use the business for their own purposes. As soon as they seek to exclude others or interfere in THEIR purchases, they have decided to exclude someone. They can then just exclude themselves if they don't care for the business, IMO.

If the customer had an issue about placement she could have addressed it in a civil way. She did not.

If she doesn't care for the product the store sells, she knows where the exit is.

[omega minimo]

56. Sorry, you weren't there-- you don't know that fer sure

"If the customer had an issue about placement she could have addressed it in a civil way. She did not."

Still a possibility that the store had had other complaints and that "uncomfortable" employee was predisposed to blow her off.

You know how crappy most customer service is anymore (in most of the big stores). He didn't know how to handle it and it escalated.

We may not have the whole story here. :hi:

[melody]

37. Being a writer of erotica, I can tell you with near certainty

That woman looks at a LOT of porn. A LOT.

The biggest complainers are the ones with the piles of it in their closet.

[Cleita]

61. I wouldn't doubt it.

Otherwise why would she make such a big deal out of it.

[mitchum]

42. I care about natural resources, but I don't get all bent out of shape...

by all of the automobile and monster truck magazines at the bookstore.

[blogslut]

44. Here's my favorite reply to this kind of upset

A local bookstore suffered the wrath of the righteous because they sold softcore adult videos. In response to the outrage, the manager replied:

"We sell Bibles too."

[sweetheart]

50. I know what you mean

I was in this different bookstore, when 4 women dressed in nothing but skimpy black thongs
raced in, and had oral sex on all the couches after foaming up with cappuchino foam from the
starbucks. Really, that wasn't the half of it, as people were getting it on all over the bookstore
that the place smelled of the hot musty scent of body-sex.

Well, this young girl was wearing pants so thin, that you could "see" how she shaved her fanny.
And when the lesbians came in (did i mention they were lesbians! :-)) they all climbed
in to a giant waterbed in the middle of the bookshop and had outragious hip grinding sex for
many long hours. All the customers participated, sorta like bookTV where famous authors
speak on various subjects, except with sex as the subject. And without clothes or any inhibitions
people pretty much just had lots of sex.

Its a good thing that the girl you're talking about did not visit this bookshop! :-) :-)

[Cleita]

59. Having worked in the past at a bookstore that had a porn section,

the reason for it was the profit margin. The owner of the store couldn't compete with the Barnes & Nobles and other large chains unless he sold porn. It was what paid the bills. Ninety percent of what he sold was non-porn and he had a better backlist than any of the chains as well as publications that were hard to find outside of specialty stores.

So, it seems that lady would be happier at a Christian book store. There are plenty of them around and they do sell non-religious books as well that are very well censored as to content. I'm sure she would be pleased. To each his own.

[MadHound]

60. That's one reason why I always find it handy to carry a Bible

Slap that sucker open to Song of Solomon, or some such other passage and tell the woman, hey, you want to talk porn, let's start right here. It's shut up more than one fundy in my experience, and they hate it when they figure out that you know your Bible better than they do.

[Strong Atheist]

62. Ah, the porn wars.

Smut, By Tom Lehrer, From That was the Year That Was

I do have a cause, though, it is obscenity. I'm for it! Thank you. Unfortunately, the civil liberties types who are fighting this issue have to fight it, owing to the nature of the laws, as a matter of freedom of speech and stifling of free expression and so on. But we know what's really involved: dirty books are fun! That's all there is to it. But you can't get up in a court and say that, I suppose. It's simply a matter of freedom of pleasure, a right which is not guaranteed by the Constitution, unfortunately. Anyway, since people seem to be marching for their causes these days, I have here a march for mine. It's called:
Smut!
Give me smut and nothing but!
A dirty novel I can't shut
If it's uncut
and unsubt-le.

I've never quibbled
If it was ribald.
I would devour
Where others merely nibbled.
As the judge remarked the day that he acquitted my Aunt Hortense,
"To be smut
It must be ut-
Terly without redeeming social importance."

Por-
Nographic pictures I adore.
Indecent magazines galore,
I like them more
If they're hard core.

Bring on the obscene movies, murals, postcards, neckties, samplers, stained
glass windows, tattoos, anything!
More, more, I'm still not satisfied!

Stories of tortures
Used by debauchers
Lurid, licentious and vile
Make me smile.
Novels that pander
To my taste for candor
Give me a pleasure sublime.
Let's face it I love slime!

All books can be indecent books,
Though recent books are bolder.
For filth, I'm glad to say,
Is in the mind of the beholder.
When correctly viewed,
Everything is lewd.
I could tell you things about Peter Pan
And the Wizard of Oz - there's a dirty old man!

I thrill
To any book like Fanny Hill,
And I suppose I always will
If it is swill
And really fil-thy.

Who needs a hobby like tennis or philately?
I've got a hobby: rereading Lady Chatterley.
But now they're trying to take it all away from us unless
We take a stand, and hand in hand we fight for freedom of the press.
In other words: Smut! I love it.
Ah, the adventures of a slut.
Oh, I'm a market they can't glut.
I don't know what
Compares with smut.
Hip, hip, hooray!
Let's hear it for the Supreme Court!
Don't let them take it away!

************************************************************************

I agree with Tom Lehrer!

[Catherine Vincent]

65. She probably was in a porn movie back in the day..

heh

[mattclearing]

66. Did you mention that she was being rude?

She has a right to her opinion and all, but yelling in a bookstore is clearly uncalled for in any circumstance...it's like yelling in a library.

What an asshole.

[Name removed]

68. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.