The idea that it is even possibly to censor the Internet is hilarious. Anyone with even the slightest knowledge of computers can easily bypass filters.
Last edited by Aspiringlawstudent; 04-05-2012 at 16:40.
Will agree to disagree that porn is a part of growing up as we have different ideas of what growing up constitutes.
(Original post by TheCaledonian)
Pornography is a part of growing up but more importantly it is extremely culturally importance as since it's introduction society has become much more sexually permissive, which (I would argue) has accounted for greater self esteem and less people suffering from depression during puberty because they didn't understand what was happening and no one discussed it (in the Victorian era many young girls that either A didn't have an older female to talk to or B were too embarrassed/ashamed to talk to them about it committed suicide).
It can be argued that society is now too sexually permissive however surely that's better than being too sexually repressed because it's the sexually repressed that do the crazy **** and snap one day and when they snap it's usually in the form of rape.
One last point the parents that don't talk to their children to tell them that too much porn can be dangerous are also the parents that don't tell their children about the things that they will learn from pornography about how everything works and are pushing for this ban
Think what it comes down to is parents being responsible and teaching their kids how to be responsible at the same time, tougher task for some than others as some parents aren't exactly responsible, and very complex to get everyone on board, only way to do it would be to get some kind of sex ed (not government run as they are all bent and daft as ****, also there is no room for political correctness when explaining such things, put the wee wee in the nunny lol) at a certain age which is compulsory no matter what the parents beliefs/religion(because no matter what the religion they all be having sexy time other than nuns and monks and even then some of these deviate from their chosen path).
The ban won't happen anyway, or the security will be something like "you need to give your date of birth before you can enter this site".
Each to their own but lads under 16 should not be viewing porn as I don't believe their mind is ready for what they might see, plus some are more susceptible to addiction than others, and like you say it comes down to a parent saying what you view online is not necessarily a good thing to try on a girl yadayadayada.
Not too sure on history so will take your word for it.
I agree with your last point.
Last edited by SubAtomic; 04-05-2012 at 17:15.
Because, unlike schools, it costs parents almost nothing to install keylogging software/internet filters at their end and the state very generously provides child benefit so that parents can cover these costs. Putting the filters at the ISP end would not make them that much more difficult to overcome. What it would do is force adults who have chosen not to have children yet to pay yet another childcare cost.
(Original post by dreiviergrenadier)
All of these 'oh but the parents!' comments are really disingenuous. There are plenty of cases where parents have responsibilities for their children, but where the state also has responsibilities. It is the responsibility of parents to educate and provide for their children, ut that doesn't stop the state from providing schools or benefits (and nor should it). There is no reason why the two duties cannot co-exist - so if there is good reason to stop children viewing pornography, the state can step in to assist parents.
Last edited by electriic_ink; 04-05-2012 at 17:51.