Kids and Internet Porn

All things outside of Burning Man.
Post Reply
User avatar
KellY
Posts: 321
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2003 11:32 am

Kids and Internet Porn

Post by KellY » Tue Jun 29, 2004 1:20 pm

Well, the Supreme Court just ruled that the latest attempt too censor porn on the internet was to flawed to be legal, which I totally applaud. However, I do agree with the basic premise that eight year olds being able to access, or just casually stumble upon, the most hardcore porn of every description is not a terrific state of affairs. I have an idea about what might actually work to remedy this, and I'm curious to y'all's opinion, especailly all those tech-savvy webheads that frequent the board.

Now we all know that most filtering programs are totally lame, and guilty of things like stopping breast cancer information and gay rights websites while allowing a lot of porn to slip through. So what if a law is passed that says every website with x-rated content has to have some little marker that web-browsers can detect. Web browsers get an attachment that simply allows the computer to block those sites or not -it can be turned on or off with a password, so parents (or libraries, or whatever) can block porn when the kids are around and then let it through when they want.

It puts the responsibility of self-identification on X-rated sites, but that doesn't seem any more burdensome than those "If you're not 18, beat it" signs they all have, so I figure that most porn sites wouldn't mind. It's not like they want to force their product on children after all, they just want to make money. I'm sure there'd be some places that wouldn't comply with a little x-rated marker for whatever reason, but it would at least handle a big percentage of sites, and the Feds could go after sites that don't comply just the same way they'd go after a store that sold Hustler to minors. Meanwhile, sites that contain information that's related to sex but not pornographic would be accessible to anyone.

So what do you all think? Any obvious flaws, ways to improve?
"Of what use is a philosopher who doesn't hurt anybody's feelings?" -Diogenes

Simply Joel
Posts: 3483
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2004 9:08 am
Location: Land of Lincoln
Contact:

Post by Simply Joel » Tue Jun 29, 2004 1:49 pm

too bad people (including pornographers) don't apply a little self-restraint (the fair and even application of ethcs) even when trying to make a buck.

I am not clear whether a software or hardware solution is the answer... i think it is in the human software (thinking) that the solution resides.

one solution is a more parental interaction with kids, even while on the computer... but that would call for unselfish behavior by parents... so i guess that won't be happening this week...

onward with a digital solution to problems created by a digital solution.
Democrats... snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, daily!


slap my salmon, baby

User avatar
DangerMouse
Posts: 211
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2003 11:27 am
Burning Since: 2004
Camp Name: Bacon Lube - The 8th Food Group
Location: Seattle, WA

Post by DangerMouse » Tue Jun 29, 2004 1:52 pm

Blaming parents for their shortcomings doesn't get you re-elected.

Do not expect your congressfolk to begin harping on the virtues of actually paying attention to what your child does.

If you're worried about what your kid is looking at then perhaps you should actually spend time with them.

Granted there are companies that make it really easy to stumble across dirty pictures. (www.whitehouse.com)

*shrug*

User avatar
cowboyangel
Posts: 6987
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 10:32 pm

Post by cowboyangel » Tue Jun 29, 2004 5:56 pm

Simply Joel wrote:too bad people (including pornographers) don't apply a little self-restraint (the fair and even application of ethcs) even when trying to make a buck.

I am not clear whether a software or hardware solution is the answer... i think it is in the human software (thinking) that the solution resides.

one solution is a more parental interaction with kids, even while on the computer... but that would call for unselfish behavior by parents... so i guess that won't be happening this week...

onward with a digital solution to problems created by a digital solution.
this a good case in point for my occasionally agreeing with Joel.......your idea KellY would be hard to police and easy to circumvent...I'm for fostering closer parent/child ties.....
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believe is false."- William Casey, CIA Director 1981

User avatar
Zulegoona
Posts: 7097
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2003 5:54 pm
Location: Saint Paul, MN

Post by Zulegoona » Tue Jun 29, 2004 7:34 pm

Also with sites being based all over the world, the nastiest in poor countries that won't interfere with there activities there would be no way to enforce regulation. It's been a while since I went looking but a few years ago it seemed the sites must have made most of there money from advertisers according to the number of hits on the site and not on subscriptions, so they didn't care who hit the site as long as it was hit. Forcing the users internet provider to be responsible for content doesn't seem workable and would lead to over censorship the same as personal filtering programs, and wouldn't even protect the providers from law suite when the inevitable sites got threw.

As much as I hate to heap it all on the parents there doesn't seem to be any other solution. Not just limiting what the kids do when you can watch them but a discussion about porn, erotica, and human sexuality, and the parents feeling about them . It's a tall order and I'm glad I don't have to deal with it, some times it's good to not have kids.

User avatar
theCryptofishist
Posts: 40313
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 9:28 am
Burning Since: 2017
Location: In Exile

Post by theCryptofishist » Tue Jun 29, 2004 7:48 pm

I suspect that porn does a lot less damage to children than our current cultural panicky "common sense" declares. I certainly was much more damaged by the things I learned about sexuality too late, than I was by the things I learned too early. And if porn was one of my teachers (and not a particularly accurate one) well at least I was getting some information. I had to un-learn all the stuff I was taught in school too.

And I have trouble with putting everything on the shoulders of parents. We need to give parents a lot of support, not treat the family as a modular entity to be remade or uprooted at the convinience of the larger culture or the economy.

Oh well.

User avatar
cowboyangel
Posts: 6987
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 10:32 pm

Post by cowboyangel » Tue Jun 29, 2004 8:16 pm

right crypto....it takes a village......
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believe is false."- William Casey, CIA Director 1981

User avatar
Captain Goddammit
Posts: 8488
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2003 9:34 am
Burning Since: 2000
Camp Name: First Camp
Location: Seattle, WA

Post by Captain Goddammit » Tue Jun 29, 2004 8:54 pm

Zulegoona hit an important point about trying to use rules or regulations to change the state of affairs... a lot of this stuff comes from countries that don't have any reason to care what our laws are.
Personally, I like KellY's plan, but the problem is international, so legislation is useless.
Seems to me that if you wanna tackle having kids, this is another thing you gotta handle on your own. Shouldn't be, but looks like it is.
GreyCoyote: "At this rate it wont be long before he is Admiral Fukkit."

User avatar
Apollonaris Zeus
Posts: 3716
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2003 11:17 am

Post by Apollonaris Zeus » Tue Jun 29, 2004 9:15 pm

Without internet porn, where do expect kids to learn about sex with this Assecroft and the administration- School? Yea right!

A few years ago a snowcat drivers at Snowbird had this to say, "damn I wish I grew up with the internet. The girls see all this fucking on it and they're really into fucking like no other time!

We live in a puritan country were viagra is needed because most men have fucking hang ups about sex and not physical disfunctionalities.

By the way if you read the article on the NY Times did you see the Victoria Secret ads posted next to it. Bet the times made a killing on that special placement ad!


Let the children FUCK!

A II Z

User avatar
DVD Burner
Posts: 10358
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2003 3:09 am
Burning Since: 1986
Camp Name: White Trash Camp
Contact:

Post by DVD Burner » Wed Jun 30, 2004 1:05 am

Apollonaris Zeus wrote:Without internet porn, where do expect kids to learn about sex with this Assecroft and the administration- School? Yea right!
Well one thing is for sure, That teacher in New Jersey makes for a great way to learn about the birds and the bees. rrRRRRRRRRRRooooowwlwllllll.


<sizzle> Ouch! really hot. :P Has anyone heard about that?
https://www.facebook.com/NeXTCODER

rev. lucifer
Posts: 160
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 12:12 am
Location: southern california

Post by rev. lucifer » Wed Jun 30, 2004 1:35 am

No, please tell me more. :shock:
"I only became the Pope because of the hat!?"

User avatar
Wind_Borne
Posts: 290
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2003 8:53 pm
Location: Sonoma, CA
Contact:

Post by Wind_Borne » Wed Jun 30, 2004 3:21 am

Parents everywhere care about their kids. Their priorities and value system may vary somewhat, but they all care about their kids (psychotic mothers who drown their babies notwithstanding).

So parents everywhere want to control the social environment their kids experience. In internet connected places that includes what the kids see online. Some parents may worry about explicit and objectified sexuality, others may worry about violence, and still others may worry about images of rampant materialism. One can imagine a scoring system that measures a plethora of dimensions of parental concern.

And every web page could carry that score to facilitate filtering. But who would define it, evaluate the web pages, and assure compliance. The problem is supernational, so no country has jurisdiction. And it's hard to see the UN doing anything useful. The constituancy may be too diverse for a government based solution to work.

But a network based solution may work. Imagine a button on a browser that, when pressed, would send the page URL to a central database of offending pages. And imagine that same browser consulting that database to check the score for each page it intended to display. A parent could select the highest score the browser would accept for any page. The database would reflect the opinion of users throughout the world and be updated continuously.

That is just a rough sketch. Obviously clever kids may hack around the system. And some web sites might change URL to avoid scoring; but since most porn sights want business to find them, that would be counterproductive.

Here in the US the market place may provide the solution. AOL has always positioned itself as the family oriented internet provider. To do so AOL designed controls into their browser and develops ways to identify sites that don't meet their standards. There's a clear profit potential for any company that can deliver the best "family friendly" internet!
"Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."
-- George Washington

User avatar
DVD Burner
Posts: 10358
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2003 3:09 am
Burning Since: 1986
Camp Name: White Trash Camp
Contact:

Post by DVD Burner » Wed Jun 30, 2004 3:29 am

Sorry. My mistake, it was Florida. Here's the artical:

http://www.local10.com/news/3457211/detail.html

and a better pic of her.

http://wizbangblog.com/archives/002875.php

Personally I dont see what the big deal is. If it were the other way around though I do have a problem with that........well in the teacher instance anyway........well unless it's in relation to college. :P
https://www.facebook.com/NeXTCODER

User avatar
cowboyangel
Posts: 6987
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 10:32 pm

Post by cowboyangel » Wed Jun 30, 2004 7:45 am

But a network based solution may work. Imagine a button on a browser that, when pressed, would send the page URL to a central database of offending pages. And imagine that same browser consulting that database to check the score for each page it intended to display. A parent could select the highest score the browser would accept for any page. The database would reflect the opinion of users throughout the world and be updated continuously.

this sounds too invasive...like carnivore perhaps? we need to start making our schools more parent teacher interactive like the Waldorf School model...
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believe is false."- William Casey, CIA Director 1981

User avatar
Rob the Wop
Posts: 1814
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2003 4:06 pm
Location: Furbackistan, OR
Contact:

Post by Rob the Wop » Wed Jun 30, 2004 8:38 am

Porn websites are under the same mindset as SPAMmers. For every 1,000 people diverted to their website (sent a SPAM email), they may get 1 customer. They have absolutely no obligation or desire to prevent anyone from going to their pages, quite the opposite in fact. NetNanny and other programs have database lists and some porn sites voluntarily send them thier information. However, these are not the sites that you need to worry about. Ever been diverted from a seemingly innocent site to have a pop-up to some nasty porn site? Those are the ones that you need to worry about.

Legislation means fuck-all in the international community. I can see how silly it would be to ask an off-shore porn palace to be nice to American kids. And routing algorithms have made it about impossible to prevent a central authority from blocking a site from the world.

The solution? Better filters and parental supervision. Trying to tame the Internet has been impossible for the last 20 years. And you wouldn't want that to happen anyway. Once you find a way to have that ability, how long before governments start using it to block opposing politcal views from their populace? We truely don't need to open that can of worms.
[b]The other, other white meat.[/b]

User avatar
KellY
Posts: 321
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2003 11:32 am

Post by KellY » Wed Jun 30, 2004 12:05 pm

Yeah, the international angle is defintiely the biggest hurdle, and parental communication is probably the only way to accomplish anything. It's pretty wierd - I certainly sneaked around looking at Playboys and Penthouses when I was a kid, and pored over an older releative's copy of Xavieria Hollander's Supersex ( a much more interesting version of The Joy of Sex, I must say), and I don't think it did me the slightest harm -Xavieria's book probably did some good. God knows, kids are always going to be curious about sex. But so much out there nowadays is so full of hate towards women, rampant objectification, etc. It's odd to think about having a talk with your kids that starts by saying: "Now, children, I know you've probably seen stuff on the internet, and you have to understand the difference between good porn and bad porn..."
"Of what use is a philosopher who doesn't hurt anybody's feelings?" -Diogenes

User avatar
theCryptofishist
Posts: 40313
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 9:28 am
Burning Since: 2017
Location: In Exile

Post by theCryptofishist » Wed Jun 30, 2004 12:24 pm

KellY wrote: so much out there nowadays is so full of hate towards women, rampant objectification, etc.
I don't see much but I haven't noticed that. Besides what kids glean from that sort of materiel seems to have little in common with what adults see. And the hate and objectification of women in advertising is much more prevelent, extensive and pervasive. IMHO.

User avatar
Apollonaris Zeus
Posts: 3716
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2003 11:17 am

Post by Apollonaris Zeus » Wed Jun 30, 2004 1:58 pm

DVD Burner wrote:
Apollonaris Zeus wrote:Without internet porn, where do expect kids to learn about sex with this Assecroft and the administration- School? Yea right!
Well one thing is for sure, That teacher in New Jersey makes for a great way to learn about the birds and the bees. rrRRRRRRRRRRooooowwlwllllll.


<sizzle> Ouch! really hot. :P Has anyone heard about that?
I bet she's a democrat!

Yea, it too bad that the kid she was plonking was an idiot! That would have been my biggest secret of school ever!

A II Z

User avatar
stuart
Posts: 3325
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 10:45 am
Location: East of Lincoln

Post by stuart » Wed Jun 30, 2004 3:35 pm

too bad people (including pornographers) don't apply a little self-restraint (the fair and even application of ethcs) even when trying to make a buck.
Joel, if you keep that kind of talk up you will loose your libertarian membership. Still, I agree.

User avatar
theCryptofishist
Posts: 40313
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 9:28 am
Burning Since: 2017
Location: In Exile

Post by theCryptofishist » Wed Jun 30, 2004 3:52 pm

stuart wrote: Joel, if you keep that kind of talk up you will loose your libertarian membership. Still, I agree.
I'm not actually sure about that. While most libertarians I've run into are just selfish, stubborn cusses with a really bizarre view of how things operate, apparently if you go to some of the more idiolocal stuff they would regaurd community standards as just and appropriate. They simply believe in different sorts of enforcement. I'm sorry that I'm not all up on this (I find libertarianism gets quickly tiresome) and can't give you a fuller picture.

User avatar
theCryptofishist
Posts: 40313
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 9:28 am
Burning Since: 2017
Location: In Exile

Post by theCryptofishist » Wed Jun 30, 2004 3:54 pm

I probably should have mentioned that some free marketeers actually believe that honestly run businesses (i.e. those who do not aggressive advertise to the detriment of others) would prevail over time.

User avatar
shitmouse
Posts: 486
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 8:31 am
Location: sf

Post by shitmouse » Wed Jun 30, 2004 5:13 pm

KellY wrote:I certainly sneaked around looking at Playboys and Penthouses when I was a kid, and pored over an older releative's copy of Xavieria Hollander's Supersex ( a much more interesting version of The Joy of Sex, I must say), and I don't think it did me the slightest harm "
hahaha. my first "so that's how that works" came directly from my folks' upstairs hidden closet chest. -(most likely planted).
great book!
-b
=-=-= \<>/ =-=-=

User avatar
Apollonaris Zeus
Posts: 3716
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2003 11:17 am

Post by Apollonaris Zeus » Wed Jun 30, 2004 10:36 pm

http://www.tantra.com/


There you go just the index page look religious and boring- then go here-

http://www.tantra.com/mem_tour/tour_video.html


This is a non-issue especially when viagra and condom commercials get aired after 8 on the west coast anyway. When kids are ready for sex they will have it and find it whether its "some dirty little pamphlet in your daddy draw" (care of Frank Zappa) or late night Star cablevision or the internet at one of their friend's house or hosing the over-sexed divorcee on the paper route.

It's a part of fucking life and the internet is a part of our life.

And if this was an issue why haven't any women added their advice to this thread?

Sounds like a lot of insecure men that don't want their little girls turning into someone's sex hounding partner.

Now girls let me hear you say it, "Whos your daddy?"

A II Z

User avatar
theCryptofishist
Posts: 40313
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 9:28 am
Burning Since: 2017
Location: In Exile

Post by theCryptofishist » Thu Jul 01, 2004 8:44 am

Apollonaris Zeus wrote:
And if this was an issue why haven't any women added their advice to this thread?
Ahem.
1--Im not certain why gender of responders matters.
2--If you had seen me a couple weeks ago bitching about my nasty monthly cramps, I think you'd agree I'm a woman.

Aliceinswingland
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2004 4:22 pm
Location: Las Vegas
Contact:

Post by Aliceinswingland » Thu Jul 01, 2004 5:27 pm

Sure looks to me like there has been several woman post a reply but just incase I'm female and I do have an adult web site. To be frank many of you don't have a clue what you are talking about.

I'm sure I won't cover everything but lets start with the supreme court decision. The intent of this legislation was to eliminate all porn. It really had nothing to do with childern, but if you say that it's all about protecting childern then it's good. This law would have added censorship to your life even if you never connect to an adult web site. What is wrong with adults enjoying life too?

Some seem to be under the mistaken impression that women are not at all sexual. The opposite is really true women are far more sexual than men if they feel the freedom to express their sexuality. Many women including myself love being in porn. Don't give me this objectify or demeaning bullshit. For me it's not about money it's about fun and doing something I enjoy doing.

Most adult site owners do not want childern on their site. Most of us go to great lenghts to list our site with every adult site filter. I'm sure a few kids borrow Dads credit card and get a membership to the site but we do everything possible to make it very difficult.

As someone pointed out it's all about numbers. If a 1000 people visit your site some will join. That's true of any kind of sales. However, only a few send out spam, mostly from out of the country. I get more spam for drug sales, penis enlargment, and mortgages than I ever get from sex sites.

The indisputable fact is that there has never been any study that said that porn hurts childern. I'm sure there never will be a study, but the question remains is this really a problem? More than likely the kids would get bored in the first few minutes. That fact is that adult sites offend the religious values of their parents. So if their parents are offended doesn't it seem logical that they should be taking an active role to keep their kids out sites they personally find offensive? If we all had the same moral values there would be an easy solution, but we don't.

The fact remains that if Congress would enact legislation that did what they it was really suppose to and no more then it would not get struck down.

It doesn't really matter if you like adult content. The fact is that other adults do like it and they have every right to enjoy it just as you the right to your enjoyment.

As a woman I enjoy porn and hope to be able to continue to enjoy watching as well as participating in it. Hope you don't mind my venting. See you on the playa.

XOXO

Alice

User avatar
Wind_Borne
Posts: 290
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2003 8:53 pm
Location: Sonoma, CA
Contact:

Post by Wind_Borne » Thu Jul 01, 2004 6:25 pm

Aliceinswingland,

Thanks for you post. You make excellent points.

Eliminating porn is neither possible or desirable. Any supporter of the law that thought so was just deluded. The principle that protects free-speech and sexuallity between consenting adults protects porn shared among adults. And I'm sure porn is part of a healthy life style :-)

We should respect that many people see sexuality as a extension of spirituality and essentially private. Such folks do not appreciate unsolicitated porn appearing in their email or in pop-ups. And such parents want control of the quality and nature of sexuality that their children see. They have that right and responsibility. Porn may or may not be good for kids; but that choice is not up to me, you, and certainly not the state. The parents must decide.

Parents have a gross tool for carrying out their decision: they can turn off the computer. What some parents are asking for is a more subtle tool.

Responsible porn vendors want to provide access to consenting adults. And they recognize that offending non-consenting adults and children is harmful to their business. At worst, offending the wrong people results in the passing of onerous laws. The real problem are the short-sighted vendors that market without restraint. They create a problem for everyone.

Lets imagine that the problem was different. Imagine that unsolicitated images of violence showed up in emails and pop-ups. Every morning you would be greeted by scores of photos of dismembered corpses, mpegs of screaming gunshot victims, and worse. I for one would want to block such assaults. No legislation would stop the flow of these violent images. What would work?
"Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."
-- George Washington

Aliceinswingland
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2004 4:22 pm
Location: Las Vegas
Contact:

Post by Aliceinswingland » Sat Jul 03, 2004 7:13 am

Hi Wind-Born,

You express your opinions very well and I'm guessing that we agree more than we disagree. I'm guessing you are referring to spam when you refer to unsolicited images. Yes, you can just happen on adult sites but you really have to be looking for it. There is not doubt that the porn industry started spam. These days spam is making E-mail almost useless. This morning I deleted over 200 messages E-mail messages, 3 of which were of any value to me. One of the 200 was marked “Sexually Explicit.” As I said I don’t spam and I don’t know of anyone who does anymore. The only way to eliminate the problem is to completely stop E-mail.

That is exactly the solution that Virginia came up for an answer to Gay marriage http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/South/07/01/ ... index.html

When Janet Jackson flashed a nipple for 1 second at the Superbowl our legislators used that as an excuse to go after Howard Stern and Bono for using the “F word.” These days only our Vice President can use the “F word” in public without getting fined!

In this country we use a small small thing that goes against our moral principals as a way to recreate the world in our own image. The reality is we need to stop blaming all our problems on someone else and take responsibility for what we do, and that includes our kids.

See ya on the Playa!

Alice

User avatar
Wind_Borne
Posts: 290
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2003 8:53 pm
Location: Sonoma, CA
Contact:

Post by Wind_Borne » Sat Jul 03, 2004 11:25 am

Indeed, we are in agreement. Have a good 4th!
"Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."
-- George Washington

Guest

Post by Guest » Sun Mar 19, 2006 9:23 am

Hey guys Image

Post Reply

Return to “Open Discussion”