A great song which always makes me pause for thought, (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=izQB2-Kmiic).
Kevin
Zager And Evans In The Year 2525
4 Replies
Tag Archives: ethics
Dialogue
A school playground
A hut
Rain drumming
“Are they coming?”
Debating
“Escaping?”
“From what?”
“From the crowd which stifles”
“But you want to be part of the herd, to play and run with the pack”
“Do I?”
“You long to be lost in the waves, to become part of the great tide”.
“But the tide is impersonal with neither heart nor soul. It sweeps all before it battering the weak and the vulnerable”.
“Oh, but to be part of the whole, to feel the power of the mass, the banners waving, torches blazing”.
“Thank you kindly but I would rather sit, alone in my hut”.
Young Woman Older Man
Some time ago, while in a humorous or cynical frame of mind (take your pick as to which one applies), I penned the below poem entitled, “Young Woman Older Man” which runs thus:
“Young lady older man, is there love or a cunning plan? Middle aged man with younger girl, does love exist in this world? What thoughts pass through your heads, as you lie entwined in your bed? Girl are you there or far away? What holds you, makes you stay?
“Oh my darling man why worry? enjoy me while you can. Life is short, I am sweet. Give in to lust then let us sleep”.
Yesterday I was chatting with a female friend regarding my writing. I can’t remember how the matter arose but at some point during our conversation she mentioned that older men (in their 70’s) shouldn’t be allowed to date young women in their 20’s. Her argument was that the young women could take advantage of the lonleness and/or vulnerability of the older man. On me questioning my friend further she mentioned she found it distasteful for people with big age differences to date.
I hear all my friend says. However, as I said to my friend, such a relationship cuts both ways. Many older men (and women) are in possession of all their faculties and know exactly what they are letting themselves in for. Lets take the worst case scenario where a much younger woman (or man) enters into a relationship with someone considerably older than themselves in order to gain financial staibility (I.E. love does not enter into the equation). I am sure that in many such instances the older party in the relationship is well aware that their other half entertains no romantic feelings for them. However both are gaining something from the transaction. The older person is gaining companionship and (yes) other things, while the younger participant is obtaining financial security. No one’s rights are being violated. Of course if the older person is suffering from dementia and the younger party takes advantage of this fact, this is wholly immoral and downright illegal. However many older people in such relationships are in full possession of their faculties and would, quite understandably feel patronised were anyone to suggest they didn’t know what they where doing.
What about the younger participant in the relationship, can not she (or he) be exploited? Yes they can. However if the law says (as it does in the UK) that people may marry, without parental consent at 18-years-old (and at 16 with their parents consent), then on what basis can a law stopping younger people from marrying those considerably older than themselves be based? Also how old is too old? Is it OK for a lady of 21 to enter into a relationship with a man of 41? If yes is it OK for the same lady to date a man of 51? If not, why not? And were, exactly does one draw the line and on what basis?
There is, of course the possibility of genuine love. People with vast age differences can (and do) fall in love, not all such relationships are based on crude calculations of financial gain and, ultimately provided both parties are adults and compus mentus it is, no concern of anyone other than themselves how they live their lives.
To say the above is not to argue that one should never offer advice in such situations. A parent who’s 18-year-old daughter announces her intention to move in with a man in his 60’s might well feel grave apprehension and (rightly) counsel her to think extremely carefully before taking such a step. It would, however, in the final analysis be the choice of the adult woman. One can argue that 18 is to young and that the law should (as was previously the case) stipulate 21 as the age of adulthood in the UK, however unless that happens (which is extremely unlikely) we must respect the decisions of others to do as they wish in matters of relationships.
So there is no doubt in the matter I believe that relationships should, in the ideal world be based on love and friendship. However it is not my role to tell other
The Affair
Richard felt that familiar frisson as he pulled Julie close. The smell of her hair, scented with jasmine sent his pulse off the scale. He never tired of gazing into those blue eyes, they held oceans of desire in which he could swim forever.
The illicit nature of the affair was, Richard thought part of it’s attraction. His girlfriend, Susie sat in the room next door watching television, blissfully unaware of the betrayal which was taking place virtually under her nose. The thought of his girlfriend catching him in the act made Richard feel sick with fear and desire.
Richard was addicted. He had reached that stage in his addiction in which the only way to deal with his feelings of guilt was to drown them by plunging ever deeper into the inviting waters of lust. Fully immersed, Richard gave way with desperate abandon to his desires. Julie had no limits, they had engaged in acts which Susie would never entertain in a thousand years.
“I love you, I love you” Julie moaned as Richard’s hands explored her perfect body.
She was his ideal girl. They never argued. Julie’s perfectly manicured nails, her immaculately styled long brown hair and those ideally proportioned breasts (not to big and not to small) where just as Richard desired them to be.
Richard knew that he could never become bored with this beautiful girl and, in the extremely unlikely event that their relationship became stale he could always purchase another of the increasingly life-like sexbots which the mid 21st century had to offer.
Why risk sexually transmitted diseases when one could have your perfect virtual girlfriend made to order? No danger with a virtual girl of her becoming jealous of your other partner. Julie would be making no calls in the dead of night, there would be no incriminating texts for Susie to discover on Richard’s mobile. It was, he thought the perfect solution, an affair without guilt accept, for some unaccountable reason Richard’s conscience gnawed away at him.
“You’re a bloody doll. Well a highly developed one but still a damn doll. This means nothing. Absolutely nothing” Richard whispered in Julie’s ear so as not to be overheard by his girlfriend next door.
Was it a trick of the light or where Julie’s eyes swimming with tears?
—
Susie sat, her head pillowed on Jon’s shoulder. Softly she traced his strong jawline.
“I love you Susie”, Jon said, gently taking her face in his hands and planting a tender kiss on Susie’s lips.
Guilty desire welled up in Susie. Richard was in the room next door, what if he where to come in and see her in the arms of another man. He would never forgive her. Lust and common sense contended in Susie’s breast. Then, as is so often the case hot lust triumphed over staid rationality.
With a moan Susie grasped Jon to her. “It’s only a sexbot” Susie thought as she released the great tide of desire pent up inside her.
Richard Dawkins: Immoral Not To Abort If A Foetus Has Downs Syndrome
Scientist and author Professor Richard Dawkins has caused considerable controversy by stating that it is immoral not to abort a foetus with Down’s Syndrome, http://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/aug/21/richard-dawkins-immoral-not-to-abort-a-downs-syndrome-foetus. I have scant knowledge of Down’s Syndrome. I am, however disabled so have a highly personal interest in Dawkin’s comments. Having been born fully sighted I lost the majority of my vision at around 18-months-old as a result of a blood clot on the brain. I have gained a MA in Political Theory and live independently although I must confess to employing a cleaner which stems from my dislike of cleaning rather than the inability to perform household tasks.
As stated earlier, I have scant knowledge of Down’s Syndrome. Due to my lack of understanding I wouldn’t dream of advising women carrying a foetus with Down’s regarding whether the pregnancy should proceed. I most certainly wouldn’t advise a lady facing such a difficult and highly personal decision that they should opt for an abortion as to carry the foetus to term would, in the words of Dawkin’s be “immoral”. The fact is that many parents with Down’s Syndrome children love and cherish them and the danger with Professor Dawkin’s comments is that they can be construed as devaluing people with Down’s Syndrome.
A civilised society should value all people irrespective of disability. Individuals with Down’s will not become leading scientists or world leaders but they are non the less human because of this.
As a disabled person I am used to people making erroneous assumptions regarding my life. I well recollect passing by 2 elderly ladies and hearing one remark “He’s blind” to which I aught to have responded, had I been on the ball “but he isn’t deaf”.
The above comment demonstrates the “pity” which many in society feel towards people with disabilities. In effect such people are putting their own fear of becoming disabled onto people with disabilities. I have, on several occasions had individuals say words to the effect of “I admire you. I don’t know how I would cope in your situation”, failing to realise that I and many other disabled people cope extremely well.
The fear of disability causes people to believe that the lives of Down’s Syndrome individuals and other disabled persons are a constant trial rather than realising that, in many instances our lives are fulfilling.
As stated above I am not an expert on Down’s Syndrome and I am sure that parents of children with Down’s face many issues. However I wouldn’t be arrogant enough to presume to tell potential parents of a Down’s child that they aught (or aught not) to give birth to a baby with the condition. I most certainly wouldn’t tell potential parents that they should abort a foetus with Down’s on the grounds that to carry the pregnancy to term would be “immoral”. Professor Dawkins is a great scientist but ethics and science do not necessarily meet.
The Lie By Sir Walter Ralegh
The Lie by Sir Walter Ralegh is one of my favourite poems. I first came across it on BBC Radio 4’s Poetry Please many years ago and return to it often
—
Go, soul, the body’s guest,
Upon a thankless errand;
Fear not to touch the best;
The truth shall be thy warrant.
Go, since I needs must die,
And give the world the lie.
Say to the court, it glows
And shines like rotten wood;
Say to the church, it shows
What’s good, and doth no good.
If church and court reply,
Then give them both the lie.
Tell potentates, they live
Acting by others’ action;
Not loved unless they give,
Not strong but by a faction.
If potentates reply,
Give potentates the lie.
Tell men of high condition,
That manage the estate,
Their purpose is ambition,
Their practice only hate.
And if they once reply,
Then give them all the lie.
Tell them that brave it most,
They beg for more by spending,
Who, in their greatest cost,
Seek nothing but commending.
And if they make reply,
Then give them all the lie.
Tell zeal it wants devotion;
Tell love it is but lust;
Tell time it is but motion;
Tell flesh it is but dust.
And wish them not reply,
For thou must give the lie.
Tell age it daily wasteth;
Tell honor how it alters;
Tell beauty how she blasteth;
Tell favor how it falters.
And as they shall reply,
Give every one the lie.
Tell wit how much it wrangles
In tickle points of niceness;
Tell wisdom she entangles
Herself in overwiseness.
And when they do reply,
Straight give them both the lie.
Tell physic of her boldness;
Tell skill it is pretension;
Tell charity of coldness;
Tell law it is contention.
And as they do reply,
So give them still the lie.
Tell fortune of her blindness;
Tell nature of decay;
Tell friendship of unkindness;
Tell justice of delay.
And if they will reply,
Then give them all the lie.
Tell arts they have no soundness,
But vary by esteeming;
Tell schools they want profoundness,
And stand too much on seeming.
If arts and schools reply,
Give arts and schools the lie.
Tell faith it’s fled the city;
Tell how the country erreth;
Tell manhood shakes off pity;
Tell virtue least preferreth.
And if they do reply,
Spare not to give the lie.
So when thou hast, as I
Commanded thee, done blabbing—
Although to give the lie
Deserves no less than stabbing—
Stab at thee he that will,
No stab the soul can kill.
Richard Dawkins Believes Fairytales May Be Harmful
Richard Dawkins is a very clever man but his militant atheism is just as bigoted as the religiosity of fundamentalist believers, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/professor-richard-dawkins-claims-fairy-tales-are-harmful-to-children-9489287.html
Virtual Girl
On 26 October 2013 I published “Dark Angel” (for the original post please visit http://newauthoronline.com/2013/10/26/dark-angel/?relatedposts_exclude=1377).
“I love you because I can tell you my darkest secrets, things which would make the strongest of men go blubbering in search of his mummy. You judge me not,
my blackest fantasies are your deepest desires.
In the depths of night when all but the vampire sleeps we speak of philosophy, of the darkness which lurks within the human heart. You are always there
for me, my girl beautiful and serene. You laugh in time with my laughter and weep as I weep. Never changing, fixed, emortal caught in the brightness of
my screen you are my virtual girlfriend, a machine”.
Back in October I gave no inkling as to how I came to write “Dark Angel” but, coming across the poem today I thought that an explanation might be of interest.
I am no scientist (the results of my school biology exam are best forgotten)! I have, however always maintained an interest in matters scientific. In particular the subject of artificial intelligence has always held a fascination for me. Back in October I came across various articles regarding men who have “given up” on the idea of finding a relationship with a human, opting instead to seek solace in the arms of virtual girlfriends, hence the artificial lady in “Dark Angel”.
Flesh and blood humans possess what philosophers term morality or ethics. It is sometimes claimed that one reason why people (mainly but not exclusively men) use the services of prostitutes stems from the fact that they can play out their darkest fantasies with sex workers without being judged, (the prostitute may, of course inwardly pass judgement but she is extremely unlikely to vocalise her thoughts). In contrast the voicing of one’s darkest desires to a loved one may cause him or her to head for the hills never to be seen again.
As artificial intelligence develops it becomes easier for individuals to interact with virtual persons. We all do it, for example many banks now have automated systems enabling customers to perform certain financial transactions without the necessity of communicating with a fellow human being. Such technology is also being employed to create virtual chatbots which can act as tools for education or, as in the above poem sexbots allowing the user to express his/her most secret yearnings, the articulation of which would make Mr or Ms average (and perhaps some sex workers also)recoil in horror. Machines have no such scruples which does, perhaps help to explain the popularity of virtual girlfriends in countries such as Japan.
Don’t Blame The Mirror
Earlier today I came across the following post which caused me to think about whether I, as a writer have a moral responsibility regarding my writing, http://dverted.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/a-writers-moral-responsibility-what-is.html. Do I bare any moral responsibility if a reader of one of my stories takes it upon himself to break the law?
To take a concrete example. In my story, Samantha, http://www.amazon.com/Samantha-K-Morris-ebook/dp/B00BL3CNHI, Sam is date raped and blackmailed into becoming a prostitute. To ensure authenticity I researched GHB (a date rape drug) and included in my story details of how the drug works. Am I morally culpable if a reader of Samantha takes what I have written concerning GHB and employs that knowledge to commit rape? The answer has to be no as the information concerning GHB is freely available online (I gleaned my information from a site aimed at warning women of the dangers of date rape and furnishing information on how to avoid being subjected to it). Most people accessing such information will do so for legitimate reasons (E.G. to avoid becoming a victim of crime). A minority will, however access the information with the malign intent to commit a criminal act. This is deplorable and anyone guilty of rape ought to be severely punished. Rape destroys lives (literally)! Having said that I can not be held responsible if someone uses information contained in Samantha to commit the horrendous crime of rape. Where writers to be held liable for the actions of the mentally ill or the criminally minded we would, as authors be constantly looking over our shoulders (watching what we write) and the creative process would wither and die. Samantha merely reflects what, sadly happens all to frequently up and down the land, the story holds up a mirror to society, it is not responsible for what is reflected back however ugly the reflection may be.
In my story The First Time, http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-First-Time-K-Morris-ebook/dp/B00FJGKY7Y, Becky, a young graduate becomes an escort (a kind of prostitute) in order to pay off her creditors. If a student or graduate saddled with debt reads The First Time and sees in it a way out of their money problems am I responsible in any manner for their decision to enter the sex industry? Again the answer has to be an emphatic no. The First Time does, as with Samantha hold up a mirror to society reflecting it back, warts and all. Students are getting into debt and an admittedly tiny proportion of them are turning to various forms of sex work including (but not limited to) prostitution. It is the financial situation in which female (and a few male) students find themselves, not my writing which acts as the catalyst for their entry into prostitution.
So do we as writers have any moral responsibility? To me the primary role of the writer is to tell a good story without pulling any punches. The writer who Is constantly fearful of the reaction of others will not give of their best. The fact of the matter is that someone, somewhere will be offended by something or other. We can not, as authors be forever walking on egg shells. We do, however have a duty to be true to ourselves, to tell the best tale we can and to behave with integrity.
The Silence Is Deafening
One of the joys associated with e-books is the fact that most are accessible to people with a visual impairment. As a blind book lover who is not able to read print I relish my ability to read e-books either on my Kindle or using the Kindle app on my iPad, via the text to speech facility (on the Kindle) or by Apple’s in-built screen reader, Voiceover on my iPad.
I was disappointed to find that a book recommended to me by an acquaintance (and available in the Kindle store) does not have the text to speech facility enabled thereby rendering my purchase of the title in question pointless as I would be unable to read the work in question.
As an author I can understand the legitimate desire of writers to protect their work from copyright theft. All of my books are Digital Rights Management (DRM) protected rendering them virtually impossible to copy. However all of my books as with the majority of those available in the Kindle store have text to speech enabled thereby allowing visually impaired individuals to purchase them. I would never disable text to speech because, by so doing I would be locking out blind people from the possibility of reading my works independently.
I have sometimes heard it argued that authors disable text to speech because their book is also available as an audible download from companies such as audible.co.uk/audible.com. If the book is available as an audio download then what is the point (the argument goes) in providing a text to speech enabled version of the book on Amazon.
In answer to the above I would argue that visually impaired readers should have the same choice as to how they access books as their sighted friends and acquaintences. If a copy of a book which does not have tex to speech enabled is available from Amazon and, in addition as an audio download then the sighted reader has a choice of either purchasing the Kindle book or the audio download. In contrast the blind reader has only one choice, to download the audio version as the Kindle book is inaccessible to him or her. This is, to my mind grossly unfair as blind people should (as stated above) be afforded the same opportunity to access books as their sighted compatriots.
Certain works are only available as inaccessible (non text to speech) enabled Kindle downloads with there existing no audio alternative. Consequently blind people have their ability to access such books severely curtailed. They can request a sighted friend to read the book which negates their independence or request a charity such as the Royal National Institute of The Blind (RNIB) to record the work or transcribe it into braille. However the latter option can be time consuming and can leave the visually impaired person feeling like a second class citizen who must rely on others for his or her reading enjoyment.
I won’t name the book or the author as I hope to be able to make contact and persuade them to make their book available, on Amazon with text to speech enabled (there appears to be no audio alternative).
Most authors who sell their books on Amazon do make them available with text to speech enabled and I am, as a blind person grateful to the vast majority of writers who do the right thing. To those authors who don’t enable accessibility for visually impaired people, I am sure that most of you do not realise that the effect of your decision is to make the lives of blind readers difficult by reducing their choice of reading material. If you are one of those authors please look again and ensure that your books are accessible to all not just those who can read print.
In conclusion this post is not aimed at the vast majority of writers who make their works accessible by enabling text to speech (on the Kindle) or Voiceover (on Apple products), it is aimed at the minority of authors and publishers who do not do the right thing.
K Morris - Poet 