backtop


Print 88 comment(s) - last by Black1969ta.. on Oct 25 at 4:06 AM

"Would someone please think of the children!" UK officials argue

These days free adult entertainment is just a click away for most with internet access in the U.S. and Europe.  Some argue that sexual liberation is a sign that society has at last overcome its shame over what is an essential biological function.  Others argue it's a sign of moral degradation and a terrible corrupter of youth.

I. Britain Prepares to Disrobe Anit-Porn Plot

British Prime Minister David Cameron, leader of the UK's Conservative Party, is reportedly siding with those who argue that porn is a "nasty, bad, naughty" social apparatus.  The UK-based Guardian, the second most read English-language online newspaper in the world, is reporting that PM Cameron will announce plans to whack unfettered access to porn off the net.

The politican-cum-activist borrows his anti-porn agenda from a report by UK-based nonprofit Mothers' Union.  As one might imagine this "moral conservative" group is upset about sexualization of society and hopes to return the nation to a more platonic, repressed era.

Elements of its proposed plan, which PM Cameron plans to put, at least partially, into law includes:
  • Age restrictions on music videos (akin to ESRB ratings on video games).
  • Bans or quotas on teen-aimed clothing with "sexually suggestive" messages.
  • A new website -- Parentport (to be launched at www.parentport.org.uk) -- which allows parents to directly complain about internet content.  Suggestions will be forwarded to the UK's Advertising Standards Authority, The BBC Trust, Ofcom, the Press Complaints Commission, British Board of Film Classification, and other censorship affiliated organization, which may opt to censor the internet comment, denying UK citizens access to it.
  • A mandatory opt in for adults to view pornographic content.
II. Replacing Parenting With Gov't Censorship

The mandatory opt-in is a particularly thorny issue.  BT (BT), Sky Broadband, TalkTalk (LON:TALK) and Virgin Media, Inc. (VMED) -- some of the UK's largest ISPs -- have reportedly agreed to participate in such a scheme.  It is unclear whether existing subscribers would be required to opt in, or merely new ones.

The plot is the culmination of years of lobbying by close colleague of PM Cameron, Conservative Member of Parliament Claire Perry.  Ms. Perry, a mother of three, argues that parents should not have to put the effort in to police their childrens' internet use.  Rather she feels that the government should thrust itself into the role of playing parent.  She argues that censorship has benefited many other aspects of British society, and censoring internet porn fills an important hole in the nation's comprehensive censorship legislation.

MP Claire Perry
Conservative Party MP Claire Perry [Source: BBC News]

She states, "As a mother with three children I know how difficult it is to keep children from seeing inappropriate material on the internet.  We already successfully regulate British TV channels, cinema screens, High Street hoardings and newsagent shelves to stop children seeing inappropriate images and mobile phone companies are able to restrict access to adult material so why should the internet be any different?"

III. America Next?

The idea of America's former colonial master censoring the internet may seem offensive to many Americans, but some in America are making similar arguments in favor of beating back the sexually liberated nature of modern society.

Prominent Republican "Tea Party" politician Christine O'Donnell has long suggested that masturbation is a sin, commenting, "The Bible says that lust in your heart is committing adultery. So you can't masturbate without lust."

Christine O'Donnell
Prominent Republican "Tea Party" politician Christine O'Donnell has argued for banning sex ed in the U.S. [Source: Getty Images]

She supports banning sexual education in schools, suggesting it leads to children being sexually abused.  She comments, "[Sex ed] breaks down the natural modesty that exists within children to protect them.  Then suddenly talking to that stranger with candy on the playground is not so creepy."

And anti-pornography efforts have some support from corporate America.  Late Apple, Inc. (AAPL) executive Steve Jobs bragged of his crusade to offer i-device owners "freedom from porn".

Clearly many fundamentalist U.S. Christian "moral conservatives", like their old world peers, feel that pornography is sinful.  And many of these individuals have already effectively argued that the U.S. should be a theocracy, governed by Christian laws and politicians.  Thus it might not be surprising to see moral conservatives in the States in the next few years follow in step with the Old World's anti-pornography crusade.

Source: Guardian



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

No way
By AssBall on 10/11/2011 5:25:09 PM , Rating: 4
If they thought prohibition was bad, wait till they ban porn. There will be backlash like nothing they can imagine.




RE: No way
By Joz on 10/11/2011 5:27:02 PM , Rating: 2
I can imagine it...Apple says "we won!! No more porn on your iPhone!"


RE: No way
By ClownPuncher on 10/11/2011 5:36:50 PM , Rating: 5
I don't get why some of these conservatives hate freedom so much.


RE: No way
By Hakuryu on 10/11/2011 5:42:17 PM , Rating: 2
Because they are not making any money off free porn, do not have anything interesting about themselves nor their work to get headlines, and lobbyists are paying them to.


RE: No way
By ClownPuncher on 10/11/2011 6:23:56 PM , Rating: 4
Porn is not crude, nor is it crass... it's just the depiction of boobs and ass.


RE: No way
By Samus on 10/11/2011 9:12:38 PM , Rating: 2
When I think of people I know, I think the men and women would be hurt by this, not just because its our freedom, but because everybody likes porn. And if they don't, they're lying. Just....lying.


RE: No way
By 91TTZ on 10/14/2011 6:45:16 AM , Rating: 2
Not everyone loves porn. Most women honestly don't have the same kind of sex drive that men have. I know women pretend to when they're younger but once you get married or in a long term relationship you'll see how they really are. They suck you in with the suggestion that they like sex but once they have you, they'd rather go shopping while you clean the house.

Trust me, millions of married men have tried to get their wives to be more sexual and with some women it just won't happen.


RE: No way
By MrBlastman on 10/12/2011 12:24:47 AM , Rating: 2
Nice rhyme. :)


RE: No way
By ssnova703 on 10/11/2011 6:25:45 PM , Rating: 2
I don't get why Liberals hate freedom so much? Government taking away freedom's, people not being able to decide for themselves, etc.

At the end of the day... politicians worldwide, regardless of affiliation are slowly and subtly becoming more oppressive at an alarming rate.


RE: No way
By ClownPuncher on 10/11/2011 7:16:50 PM , Rating: 2
I agree, but this article is about (fringe) conservatives.

Don't be offended, I said "some".


RE: No way
By FaaR on 10/12/11, Rating: 0
RE: No way
By rcc on 10/12/2011 5:35:07 PM , Rating: 2
There is no easy answer to this issue, and it certainly can't be defined under "conservative" or "liberal" lines.

In many cases I've found the following true...

Conservatives will tell you what you can't do. Steal a car, beat up your neighbor for fun.... Liberals want to tell you what you can, or must, do. Be politically correct, hire x number of these people (qualified or not), don't let a child experience failure....

In the long run, which is actually more restricting??

But hey, hang a tag on something and many will blindly believe, right?


RE: No way
By p05esto on 10/11/11, Rating: 0
RE: No way
By amanojaku on 10/11/2011 8:41:34 PM , Rating: 5
I can't believe you're serious. You don't need to filter porn from searches. Companies like Google, Microsoft and Yahoo! have a tool to prevent porn from appearing on normal searches. It's called "relevance", and each company has spent years and millions refining their search logic. On top of which, many people have complained about how hard it is to make it into a search without paying for some sort of placement, which will automatically elicit scanning.

As to your kids, experts have long agreed that there is only one effective method to prevent them from visiting sites you don't want: make sure the only Internet-capable device is in a communal space, and make it unavailable when you are not around. It's draconian, but let's be honest: your kids won't be viewing porn unless they want to. And I have never heard of a kid who needed therapy because of accidental porn viewing. Otherwise, most cable companies would be out of business due to the 30-60 seconds of accidental porn broadcasts during popular shows.

As to your other post about porn ruining marriages... Idiots ruin marriages. Don't do dumb sh1t and your partner probably won't leave you. People need to take responsibility for their actions, not pass off control to someone else. Don't eat that extra Twinkie and you won't get fat. Stop playing WoW until 4AM and you'll stay awake at work. Most of what goes on your Facebook page is unnecessary and boring. At least, that's what I think. Do what you want, but don't complain about the consequences.

FYI, I put "cock a doodle do" into a search. After 10 pages I the worst I got was a link to an Urban Dictionary entry, which a young child probably wouldn't understand, anyway. I was personally offended by the Sex and the City links, but that's only because I think Sarah Jessica Parker looks gross.


RE: No way
By inighthawki on 10/11/2011 9:37:19 PM , Rating: 3
Thats funny, i typed that exactly phrase in google and turned off safe search, and not a single penis. Every image was a chicken/rooster


RE: No way
By bodar on 10/11/2011 9:38:05 PM , Rating: 2
Well, good thing Google has SafeSearch filter.

http://www.google.com/support/websearch/bin/answer...

"Moderate" is the default setting as well, so you DO have the ability to regulate within your home. Which is exactly where it should be regulated. Make it an opt-out system if you simply must do something in the name of saving the children.


RE: No way
By augiem on 10/12/2011 1:05:49 AM , Rating: 2
bing isn't quite as effective. I got quite a few near porn images with absolutely unrelated keywords.


RE: No way
By MojoMan on 10/11/2011 10:03:31 PM , Rating: 2
I have a kid. I'm a conservative. You're not thinking. You think your nine year old is going to be protected from porn just because the government censors this? REALLY!? Does your child go to school, or do you keep her locked up at home all the time? Think! You're not going to protect her from everything. It's your job to teach her how to deal with it... So deal with it. My gosh.


RE: No way
By gladiatorua on 10/12/2011 3:18:54 AM , Rating: 4
In my country porn is outlawed. And it never stopped me or anyone who wanted some porn. And it won't stop my children. Or your children. The Great Chinese Firewall made Chinese more tech-savvy. Any restrictive measures will be circumvented by creativity.
Just try to protect your children against accidents and prepare them(and yourself) morally for the time they become interested. =)


RE: No way
By delphinus100 on 10/12/2011 8:39:54 PM , Rating: 3
Yep. In the land of chastity belts, the guy getting laid the most is the locksmith...


RE: No way
By Black1969ta on 10/11/2011 10:29:03 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
You'll understand one day when you have kids and your 9yr old goes to search for a chicken picture and types in "cock a doodle do" or something and gets back 12,000 pictures of penis. Then you'll understand why we need the ability to regulate within our homes what kind of content gets through. Filtering software is not good enough, we need something more error-proof.... I NEVER want my 9yr old daughter to see some nasty porn pics because she typed something wrong into a search engine.


Then do your Job! As a parent you should police your child's Internet travels just as you would his or her bicycle travel's. Would a rational parent allow their child to ride to a strip club, then why would they leave it up to the government to set-up a checkpoint on the road to stop your child from riding to a club?

If parents did their job, children would rarely surf freely and would never surf without supervision when parental controls are not enabled.


RE: No way
By Hiawa23 on 10/11/2011 10:36:03 PM , Rating: 2
I have a 14 year old, & she has a computer but I have the naughty stuff blocked, plus I check her computer, plus I have explained to her the good & bad things that she may find on the internet, or music, or movies. I don't shield her from anything as I want her know these things, but I want to be there to guide her in the right direction. Perhaps parents should try to be parents.


RE: No way
By Philippine Mango on 10/12/11, Rating: 0
RE: No way
By Black1969ta on 10/20/2011 10:16:22 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
On a lighter note, if it weren't for my access to porn, I probably would have been charged with rape sometime in middle school. lol


Yeah cuz you would have taken you G.I. Joe and put it her toilet, cuz your Mommy and Daddy told you that sex is taking that thing you played with when you were younger and putting in the place where she pisses.


RE: No way
By AssBall on 10/11/2011 10:47:59 PM , Rating: 2
If that's how you think it works maybe I should ask kids to find porn for me, because it takes me forever to find half decent porn with no adds and no spyware.


RE: No way
By delphinus100 on 10/12/2011 8:42:14 PM , Rating: 2
And then there's the matter of educating them about spyware...


RE: No way
By TeXWiller on 10/12/2011 3:01:23 AM , Rating: 2
Great. You have the educational opportunity of make a distinction between a penis and a cock. Use it wisely, for the parents of today do have all too little time for their children, which probably leads to early experimentation out of curiosity.


RE: No way
By RjBass on 10/12/2011 1:47:01 PM , Rating: 2
Wow, ok. When my kids were that young I installed K9 Web Protection on their machines. It blocked the majority of the porn. We also talked to your kids about sex, so they understood what it was and what porn actually is.

You sir, are just a moron.


RE: No way
By MartyLK on 10/11/11, Rating: 0
RE: No way
By Menty on 10/11/2011 8:57:35 PM , Rating: 2
Religion has caused far more warfare, strife and corruption than sexual freedom, and alcohol is (I'm pretty sure) responsible for more unplanned and single parenthoods than any other factor. Can we ban those too please? :P


RE: No way
By bodar on 10/11/2011 9:43:26 PM , Rating: 2
Thanks for posting the stupidest thing I've heard all month. That was special.


RE: No way
By eickst on 10/11/2011 9:51:13 PM , Rating: 3
I have to say, this is the dumbest comment I've ever read on DailyTech. And that is saying A LOT!


RE: No way
By Black1969ta on 10/11/2011 10:34:05 PM , Rating: 2
Thank you MartyLK, way to make Pirks and Reclaimer77 look smart. this comment makes them both look like geniuses in comparison.
Thanks though I needed the chuckle, serious was there supposed to be a sarcasm tag in there?


RE: No way
By MartyLK on 10/11/11, Rating: -1
RE: No way
By Philippine Mango on 10/12/2011 2:29:31 AM , Rating: 2
omg, to think I share the planet with people like you... terrifying! I thought the Internet would teach people that freedom is a GOOD THING but apparently not.


RE: No way
By MartyLK on 10/12/11, Rating: 0
RE: No way
By PReiger99 on 10/12/2011 12:58:21 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
I'm advocating a safe and secure society.

Pretty much anyone who wanted to restrict freedom has used those exact same words. I think the burden is on you as how porn is related in any way to an unsafe and insecure society.

quote:
Pornography has done nothing but tear down prosperous societies.

In your own mind perhaps. It's a long debunked hysterical (and religious) argument that has no basis in reality.

quote:
And children now have ever greater access to the filth than they ever had in the history of civilization.

And so what? What is the worst thing that could happen? You mean children will actually have some rough idea about how reproduction works? They won't believe in bee/flower and storks stories anymore...
People seems to make a big fuss about kids stumbling upon a naked picture of another human being, but the truth is, it's not a big deal unless some retard decide to make them believe it's the end of the world, that they must repent or go to hell, or something.

quote:
But sexual desires must be controlled.

And you claim to not advocating the loss of any freedoms. Orwell would be proud.

quote:
Nobody has the right to murder, rape, rob or harm anyone. Yet I hear no complaints about not having those freedoms.

Do I really have to explain it to you? Those actions infringe on someone else freedom. Basically, it's legal to go to a random stranger on the street and say "let's have sex"; if you force yourself on her, it becomes illegal. Simple enough for you?

quote:
Pornography must be squashed. Consider it another one of those needed restrictions along with murder, rape, robbing and causing of harm

Actually, I don't. Comparing pornography to murder and rape is such a breathtaking inanity that I'm actually ashamed that we both belong to the same species.


RE: No way
By rcc on 10/12/2011 12:48:25 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Denial is a common affliction among us humans


Curious. Yet here you are preaching denial.

Go figure.


RE: No way
By Black1969ta on 10/25/2011 4:06:39 AM , Rating: 1
I keep looking for the /Sarcasm tag Marty, but alas Dailytech doesn't have that or the /idiot tag either!


RE: No way
By Spuke on 10/11/2011 11:22:24 PM , Rating: 4
"Sometimes I am walking with my daughter, I’m talking to my daughter, I’m looking at her, I’m pushing her in the stroller. And sometimes I pick her up and I just stare at her and I realize my only job in life is to keep her off the pole."


RE: No way
By TeXWiller on 10/12/2011 3:19:00 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
sexuality is a built-in drive. Gambling, drug use (including tobacco and alcohol) and other vices among humans are not built-in drives
Human do tend to have brains and those "vices" stimulate existing built-in drives. It is called pleasure. You too could benefit from experiencing it sometimes.
quote:
The deadbeat population has only increased with sexual freedom.
Oh, my mistake. You're obviously one of those people.

You're joking of course. ;)


RE: No way
By FaaR on 10/12/2011 12:56:19 PM , Rating: 1
How many wars exactly has porn started? Can you name even one?


RE: No way
By MadAd on 10/13/2011 8:33:51 PM , Rating: 2
megafacepalm that anyone thought this was a good idea, Its going to be a complete waste of money.

Its all so that buffoon cameron can cosy up to the mothers to try and gain the illusive womens vote.


RE: No way
By drando on 10/16/2011 12:28:34 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I don't get why some of these conservatives hate freedom so much.


They don't hate it, they fear it. Freedom means the ability to grow and chance, possibly away from their conservative ways.


RE: No way
By Hiawa23 on 10/11/2011 10:31:09 PM , Rating: 2
I am 37, & I enjoy porn. I am 37...

Government, I think I am old enough to decide if it good or not for me.


RE: No way
By Aloonatic on 10/12/2011 2:54:37 AM , Rating: 2
I don't get your point. You can still get pr0n if you want, and they are allowing you to decide?

All they are doing, in essence, is making an option that is already available more obvious. When you sign up for your broadband deal your will just be made aware of an option (that already exists) to block adult material (not just porn) from reaching your home.

If you want to fap away, then just ignore it.

They aren't forcing anything on anyone. It's not even active by default, forcing you to make a potentially embarrassing phone call to your broadband provider, to ask to have have your porn back.

They simply listened to a group of people and come up with a plan to make it so that they can get what they want, and you can still get all the porn that you want too.

What's your problem?

I can see why parents might want this too. We've all see comedies make the joke of the parent struggling to install censorship software on their PC, then giving up and asking their teenage son to do it as he's the only one who understands computers. A lot of kids can get passed the current filters pretty easily, so having it blocked at source makes sense.


RE: No way
By bah12 on 10/12/2011 10:41:14 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
What's your problem?
Dude WTF!!! Really all you could do yesterday was rant about how bad the police state in England was regarding some dude taking a picture on private property, and now you're advocating MORE police state?????

I'm truly confused, I can live with the fact that my belief system may clash with yours, but for the love of god pick a side already!!!

How can you spend endless posts one day complaining about too much government involvement, only to start today with the exact opposite stance. The only logical conclusion is you are a troll just looking to be controversial.


RE: No way
By Aloonatic on 10/13/2011 3:51:05 AM , Rating: 2
You're confused? Damn right you are.

Confussed by an already available option for people signing up to a broadband line to have adult content blocked at source more obvious, with a "police state".

I don't know if you think you're trying to be clever, subversive and wild by saying "police state" at any given opportunity, as if you're some kind of rebel, but you've not picked a very good story for it in this case.

FYI, I don't (and nor do you) have to agree with everything or nothing that someone or a group (such as the government, or Apple or whoever) says or does, I can agree with some things and not others. What are you, a talk show host who only listens to ridiculously polarised views?

Pick a side? Really?

Grow up.


RE: No way
By MadAd on 10/13/2011 8:32:42 PM , Rating: 2
megafacepalm that anyone thought this was a good idea, Its going to be a complete waste of money.

Its all so that buffoon cameron can cosy up to the mothers to try and gain the illusive womens vote.


Ban religous sites
By Amiga128 on 10/11/2011 5:46:40 PM , Rating: 5
The bible contains rape, incest and violence. Sites that are using the bible should also be blocked.




RE: Ban religous sites
By TSS on 10/11/2011 7:45:20 PM , Rating: 3
Ban porn *and* the bible? but what in the hell am i going to jack off to then?!?

on a side note, and how to put this tactically..... does anybody else feel that women are a bit, shall we say, overrepresented when it comes to banning porn?

Can't recall seeing a man crusading against porn, or not alot of them at the very least. I wonder why that is....


RE: Ban religous sites
By Spuke on 10/11/2011 11:33:25 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
on a side note, and how to put this tactically..... does anybody else feel that women are a bit, shall we say, overrepresented when it comes to banning porn?
Because women don't need pictures to masturbate.


RE: Ban religous sites
By delphinus100 on 10/12/2011 8:46:36 PM , Rating: 3
Not to worry. Literary porn will be next...


RE: Ban religous sites
By heerohawwah on 10/11/11, Rating: -1
RE: Ban religous sites
By lolmuly on 10/11/2011 10:17:21 PM , Rating: 3
Geez, the man only suggested we block the bible on the internet in an ironic fashion, and you assume he's an atheist? You christians are an uppity bunch aren't you?

Furthermore, what exactly is the link between trafficking children and internet porn? You seem to be watching the wrong kind of porn, perhaps you should send your hard drive in to the FBI for inspection.

And you wonder why everyone thinks you people are crazy.


RE: Ban religous sites
By heerohawwah on 10/11/11, Rating: 0
RE: Ban religous sites
By TeXWiller on 10/12/2011 3:43:26 AM , Rating: 2
There is some differences between the regulated American sex industry and the unregulated and usually illegal world of prostitution and pornography at large. Look for those Section 2257 notifications on your favourite porn sites. Regular model reappearances and the way they promote themselves are also a good indicator of well behaving members (pun intended) of the industry.


RE: Ban religous sites
By foolsgambit11 on 10/12/2011 4:34:03 AM , Rating: 2
It sounds like what you're arguing for is better regulation of the porn-creation industry (and the sex-trade industry). Those issues are distinct from concerns about the porn-distribution industry, and could (read should) be handled separately.


RE: Ban religous sites
By Hiawa23 on 10/11/2011 10:40:02 PM , Rating: 2
The bible contains rape, incest and violence. Sites that are using the bible should also be blocked.

There has also been alot of killing over the years in the name of Allah, God, or whatever you want to him if there is one too...


RE: Ban religous sites
By Aloonatic on 10/12/2011 3:16:46 AM , Rating: 3
I think they should make sure that the bible's banned too, if only to see a protest march where there are nun's and porn stars (maybe dressed up as sexy nuns) holding hands in solidarity.

Bring the word together with censorship :o)


I was with you Jason
By Reclaimer77 on 10/11/2011 5:38:32 PM , Rating: 2
Until the "America Next" part. Using O'Donnell is a bit of a stretch. She couldn't even win a damn Congressional seat. She's a wacko with no political or social power, she doesn't make policy. And Presidential hopeful? Only in her own mind lol.

I'm not going to flip out and accuse you of trying to make Republicans look bad again by picking the most radical of the bunch and projecting them as the norm. I'm just wondering, why O'Donnell? She's basically just some random person with absolutely no political position at all. She's not even going to make the primary, much less a legitimate Presidential hopeful.

I'm not a writer but for "America Next?" it would have been cool to focus instead on the FCC's victory in "Net Neutrality" which could easily grow into the Federal Government having a significant controlling interest in Internet content. Much like the proposed bill from England. That's a lot more scarey to me than O'Donnell's ravings.




RE: I was with you Jason
By JasonMick (blog) on 10/11/2011 5:50:29 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Until the "America Next" part. Using O'Donnell is a bit of a stretch. She couldn't even win a damn Congressional seat. She's a wacko with no political or social power, she doesn't make policy. And Presidential hopeful? Only in her own mind lol.

I'm not going to flip out and accuse you of trying to make Republicans look bad again by picking the most radical of the bunch and projecting them as the norm. I'm just wondering, why O'Donnell? She's basically just some random person with absolutely no political position at all. She's not even going to make the primary, much less a legitimate Presidential hopeful.

I'm not a writer but for "America Next?" it would have been cool to focus instead on the FCC's victory in "Net Neutrality" which could easily grow into the Federal Government having a significant controlling interest in Internet content. Much like the proposed bill from England. That's a lot more scarey to me than O'Donnell's ravings.

Oh don't get me wrong, I think there's scary things going on with both sides of the aisle when it comes to censorship.

My point was merely that certain religious conservatives have long posed similar arguments about sexuality and legality here in the U.S. (e.g. see how many "moral conservatives" continued to support sodomy laws -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomy_laws_in_the_Un... -- until they were struck down by a Supreme Court ruling in 2003).

I'm of the personal opinion that both parties express some whacko views as the goal of most politicians is not to do good, but is to get money and get elected.

Thus they pander to whatever sentiments they think will appeal to the voters, however ridiculous they may be. That's true of both (R)s and (D)s.


RE: I was with you Jason
By The Raven on 10/11/11, Rating: 0
RE: I was with you Jason
By ShaolinSoccer on 10/11/11, Rating: -1
RE: I was with you Jason
By Camikazi on 10/11/2011 6:54:30 PM , Rating: 2
I do have a daughter, and while I wouldn't exactly be ecstatic about her going into porn, if it is her decision alone then she can do it, who am I to try and stop her from doing something she wants to do once she is of age to make her own decisions. First thing I would ask, is why has she decided this and is it really what she wants, either way I will not disown her or turn my back on her just cause she went into that line of work. As for the family and others views on it, they can all go to hell for all I care, I've never given a damn what random strangers think of me and I've taught my kids the same. I teach them to be their own person and not be shaped by some random person who thinks something is wrong or that they should do this cause it's what they consider right.

As to the shame to the family, why would it? most every job in the world is selling your body for money, porn is just more direct in how it goes about it, work in an office you are selling your body and brains to get the job done, work in construction you are damn sure selling it to get things done. Don't think just cause you keep your clothes on that you aren't selling yourself to make money, everyone in the world does it.


RE: I was with you Jason
By Reclaimer77 on 10/11/2011 7:34:39 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Maybe you should try imagining what it's like raising a child just to see her go into porn


Umm than I wouldn't be much of a parent if my child went down that route in the first place now, would I?


RE: I was with you Jason
By ClownPuncher on 10/11/2011 8:01:09 PM , Rating: 2
Seriously. I don't understand why some parents can't just face the fact that how a child is raised will likely heavily influence their goals in life.


RE: I was with you Jason
By topkill on 10/11/2011 9:52:43 PM , Rating: 3
Thank you! This guy is worried his kid will turn out bad and wants to blame it on some random picture he/she might have seen on the internet?

Wow, just spend the time to raise your kids folks. The values YOU SHOW THEM YOURSELF will have a much greater effect on their lives than anything else.


RE: I was with you Jason
By topkill on 10/11/2011 10:24:53 PM , Rating: 1
I do have two daughters as well. No, I wouldn't be thrilled to see them go into porn, and I'm not that happy to see them exposed to porn...But seeing a picture is not going to set them on "some evil path", that is based on how we raise them. And I sure wouldn't shun them if for some reason they did end up in porn. We make way too much about sex and nudity in general in this country.

I'm much more concerned with whether or not they are healthy and then whether they are good people who add to society and care about others, supporting family and friends. I just have more to worry about than a naughty picture in life.

We have people struggling to feed their children and keep a roof over their heads. There are just too many serious issues in life to freak out over dirty pics.


Keep Bachmann from your kids
By dew111 on 10/11/2011 5:37:25 PM , Rating: 2
"Then suddenly talking to that stranger with candy on the playground is not so creepy."

Is it just me, or does this statement make it seem like she wants to make it easier to abduct kids with candy? Clearly this was her goal all along.




RE: Keep Bachmann from your kids
By Omega215D on 10/11/2011 5:39:08 PM , Rating: 2
This message was approved by Pedo Bear...


RE: Keep Bachmann from your kids
By AssBall on 10/11/2011 5:41:43 PM , Rating: 1
*** that's O'donnel, dunno where you got Bachman...


RE: Keep Bachmann from your kids
By TeXWiller on 10/12/2011 4:07:17 AM , Rating: 2
They often come simultaneously, which is a good thing. ;)


Opinion
By p05esto on 10/11/11, Rating: 0
RE: Opinion
By Philippine Mango on 10/12/2011 2:37:17 AM , Rating: 2
Btw, assuming my other reply didn't post, I have to ask two questions... One, why do you think porn is degrading? Two, don't you think you're suffering from cognitive dissonance when you say you believe in free speech yet feel the need to limit such speech? Free speech believe it or not does not entirely encompass things you agree with but also things you may find abhorrent and objectionable to say the least....

Back to the first point.... why do you think porn is degrading? Is it because that's the kind of porn you're into? I don't know about you, but if anything, I think porn is a medium that accentuates the flattering and desirable characteristics of women while ignoring the undesirable ones. Just think, instead of porn, replace it with "political speak" where "P.C people" feel the need to point out the good characteristics of 'protected classes of people' while dismissing or flat out denying the existence of negative characteristics of said protected class.


RE: Opinion
By foolsgambit11 on 10/12/2011 4:30:58 AM , Rating: 2
I'm not going to bother arguing ideologically here. I'll just look at the practicality of your ideas:
quote:
I'm in favor of ALL porn being under an .XXX domain extension and then as parents it would be easy to block all such web sites, maybe it could even be done at the ISP level if a custom chooses.
In order to do this, there must be an actual definition of pornography. This definition would vary from country to country (even from region to region within countries). No global system for regulating the domain names of porn could ever be introduced. For instance, are photographs of topless women porn? Totally naked women? Videos of 'sexual acts' (which then has to be defined explicitly by law) which don't show actual penetration, but which imply it? Maybe in Saudi Arabia, even scantily-clad women could be considered pornographic material (I don't know exactly what their laws are, I'm just going on the popular opinion of how things seem to work there).

So you see, your solution is impracticable. In fact, many of these objections apply to any censorship system, including the one suggested in this article, although the variance in definition of 'porn' is probably smaller in a single country than worldwide.


RE: Opinion
By cjohnson2136 on 10/12/2011 12:34:14 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Porn also ruins marriages


No the guy does that. My wife and I watch it together so we can experiment and try new things. Porn can be used to spark that light back in the fire. Just like most things porn can be used for bad or good but it ultimately lies in the hands of the user how it turns out.


Christine O'Donnell
By GPig on 10/11/2011 5:44:18 PM , Rating: 4
Bottom picture, looks like she's waiting for someone to "sin" all over her face.




RE: Christine O'Donnell
By amanojaku on 10/11/2011 6:35:04 PM , Rating: 2
With that mug she'll be waiting a long time. 42 years and counting, I believe...


i c wat u did thar
By rabbitslayer21 on 10/11/2011 5:27:22 PM , Rating: 3
Jason, your punnery is sublime :D




What?
By tamalero on 10/12/2011 6:42:49 PM , Rating: 3
It's amazing how many people and politicians.. wants to move what is supposed to be the responsibility of the parents..
to the government.... something that can be abused to detriment of the freedom of the citizens.

It's amazing how fast the current supposed "free" countries, are transforming into heavy weights fascism states, no better than the country they loved to attack (china).




Not Opt Out
By MozeeToby on 10/11/2011 5:45:17 PM , Rating: 2
Oh no! They're going to force you to call your ISP to get access to porn. Except wait, no. Actually, you have to call your ISP to not have access to porn.

This article, like most of the articles on the net about this subject, somehow flipped around the opt in nature of the filter. What is mandated is that ISPs must provide an optional, opt in service that blocks pornographic content for the entire household. They must make this service available to the account holder and it is to be turned off by default. While not exactly encouraging for internet freedom, there is very little to see here that hasn't been available in one form or another for a good decade or more.




Hypocrites?
By transamdude95 on 10/11/2011 6:12:02 PM , Rating: 2
I'm willing to bet at least half of the people against porn are secretly getting off whenever they can. Most are probably into bondage and S&M. It's kind of like how most of the extremely anti-gay folks are secretly giving out handies and blowies like they are Halloween candy.




By Labotomizer on 10/11/2011 6:30:21 PM , Rating: 2
People are idiots, plain and simple. I consider myself fiscally conservative but that doesn't mean I'm a prude. That said I'm tired of people saying we've lost our moral compass because we don't shy away from the subject of sex. These people use porn and violence in video games and TV to probe their point while completely ignoring our past. So slavery was morally correct? What about child labor? Let's not forget a scant 50 years ago no one would have batted an eye at someone beating their wife and children. Or that 100 years ago prostitution was the number one profession amongst women. Yes, let's go back to the good old fashion "moral" days since sex education is corrupting our society.




More Jason Mick Sensationalism!
By themaster08 on 10/12/2011 2:39:15 AM , Rating: 2
Seriously. Why do you guys fall for this crap all the time?

This is not a mandatory opt-in service. It's completely optional! You can choose to opt-in if you wish.

This is no attempt to take away anyone's internet freedoms. Would you let your 9-year-old child walk into a strip club, or brothel? The internet has been non-accountable for too long.

150,000 Talk-Talk customers have opted in for the service so far. That's 150,000 customers from 1 ISP. That clearly shows there is a desire for this service.

Next time, try to get your stores from a more reliable source rather than the socialist Guardian. One that actually tells you how it is, rather than in a manner to cause the most controversy, clicks and comments.

Nothing to see here. Move on.




all i can say is....
By inperfectdarkness on 10/12/2011 12:19:17 PM , Rating: 2
nice pearl necklace.




Porn
By macca007 on 10/13/2011 2:28:28 AM , Rating: 1
Would be interesting to find out just how many women have been saved because of porn, Without Brothels or videos I think prisons may be even more overcrowded!
Withholding any sexual urge is BAD, Only have to look at Catholic Priests as an example. I bet half of you out there probably ran into your parents bedroom as a young kid at that "Wrong time" while they were practising horizontal dancing, Are you an emotional wreck now that you are an adult? I doubt it, Grow up! Wether you like it or not kids will find out from friends in playground or other means, Be a parent and educate them instead of sweeping it under the carpet. The more you hide or ignore something the worse it gets and they will rebel later on,Or they will indeed be emotionally fucked up as adults because of your bad parenting skills.




Fail....
By torpor on 10/11/11, Rating: 0
"Google fired a shot heard 'round the world, and now a second American company has answered the call to defend the rights of the Chinese people." -- Rep. Christopher H. Smith (R-N.J.)














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki