"My point, if you happened to miss it, is that just because I look for feces in a toilet, I wouldn't mean that I look for feces more than I look for salad - I keep salad in the fridge. If you go around looking at a whole community, there might be someone who always checks the toilets, for various reasons, some of which may be unsavory - but nobody checking the toilet for salad. In short, the entire enterprise of demonstrating communities standards this way is more than tainted or flawed - it is rediculous."

This, in my opinion, is a form of semantics. You are making a point, and it seems to me correctly for what it is, that has little to do with Saletan's argument overall - he may have used a lousy analogy here, but his point, as more clearly defined at the end of the article, is that "community standards" for porn on the net are vastly and provably different from those standards within the community in the real world.

Point being, he is not comparing apples to oranges, he is stating strongly that we should not be comparing apples to oranges (what people do on the "internets" versus what they do out in public). Since without looking furthur into the details of the case being used in the article I am assuming he was not perusing this porn in public (maybe he was?) the real point here is not so much one of hypocrisy as it is of different community standards for different kinds of actions (viewing porn on the net, viewing porn in public).

They are thoroughly different (though of course both probably triggering some similar emotions) - they should be considered differently, and we actually do know via Google that the "community standards" are different for each version.

No?

(So I do think Saletan used a couple of bad analogies ...)