Talk:Sexual explicit conduct (dictionary)

Question: Are Sexual explicit conduct, explicit sexual conduct, and Sexually explicit conduct the same? Or are they used to describe two different things under the law? --Etenne 14:36, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

No, they are not the same. But I'd have to think very carefully before I can explain the difference. "Explicit" means "stated clearly or precisely," and when talking about sex, it means "describing or representing sexual activity in a direct and detailed way."

Something that is "explicitly [that's an adverb] sexual" means something that is "clearly sexual". Something that is "sexually explicit" means something different.

And I just realized that I am still too tired right now to figure it all out! I'll have to get back to you on that, OK? Sorry... User4 (talk) 15:02, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Uh, oh. I just realized that an edit that I made to that entry did not get saved. And I've got well over a hundred different tabs open in Firefox. I don't know if the tab is still open where I made the edit. It will take quite a while to figure out exactly what went wrong. I might have to do the research again, and then do the editing all over again, too. Hmm... multitasking is not always the best way to do things, they tell me. User4 (talk)

OK--Here's the explanation from Enochian

https://www.boychat.org/messages/1338273.htm

The Magic Transposition of Two Words

Posted by Enochian on 2013-March-12 12:43:58, Tuesday

Notice how the postal service has invented the term "Sexually Explicit Conduct," designed to sound like "Explicit Sexual Conduct," but which can refer to simple nudity.

Nudity, photographed so the genitals are clearly visible, is "explicit." The kind of explicitness is "sexual." So nudity is Sexually Explicit Conduct, as opposed to Explicit Sexual Conduct, which is sexual acts shown explicitly.

This subtle transposition is lost on the typical reporter, who sees "Sexually Explicit Conduct," and writes a story about "sex acts" and ruined children.

Another of society's many problem that could be avoided if people were just a little bit more intelligent.

To sum up the above:

"Sexually Explicit Conduct" can refer to simple nudity (without showing any actual sexual activity, like intercourse, fellatio, etc.)

"Explicit Sexual Conduct" is sexual acts shown explicitly (intercourse, fellatio, etc., clearly displayed).

Does that help?

(NOTE: This is what "citations" are really all about--to avoid plagiarism. Had I "stolen" Enochian's words, it would have been plagiarism. But by giving a citation I am crediting Enochian for the ideas formulated in this manner. Whether his explanation is true or false has nothing to do with the citing--it is just a matter of "giving credit where credit is due".

Here's another citation: "The Earth is flat," (2012 address made by the President of the Flat Earth Society, etc. etc..) Is the Earth really flat just because I gave a "correct citation"?

The second reason citations are given is to allow the reader to himself check whatever supporting evidence may exist (from scientific studies, etc.) for some statement made. But if some "study" is faulty, then that study may support a statement which is a completely false statement.

Then again, I can make a statement that is absolutely true, without giving a citation to some "scientific study," etc. to "prove" anything.

"Two plus two is not always four"

That is an absolutely true statement. Now, if a reader is smart, he can figure out why that statement is true. If the reader is not smart, he may have problems with accepting the validity of that statement. As a courtesy I may include a reference to something that explains the nature of what occurs when combining cups of different kinds of fluids, or combining cups of finely grained substances with more coarsely grained substances, but I don't have to give such a "reference" or "citation". My statement is just as true, with or without giving any references. User4 (talk) 23:12, 3 May 2016 (UTC)