China Makes Arrests To Stop Internet Porn

thefickler writes "The Chinese Government is expanding a crackdown on Internet pornography. Xinhua news agency, which is owned by the government and can safely be used for reporting in China, says the campaign to scrub the country's Internet of 'vulgar' content has so far resulted in 29 criminal cases. Police have ordered the removal of 46,000 pornographic and other 'harmful' items from websites. The latest crackdown comes after official warnings of rising social unrest as the economy slows. It's no coincidence that this year is the twentieth anniversary of Tiananmen Square, or, to use the acceptable nomenclature, 'the June 4th incident.'"

Comments

What for?

[4D6963]

OK, I understand why they would want to choke civil unrest by censoring dissidents online, but porn? How's that helping them?

Re:What for?

[amRadioHed]

Considering their overpopulation problem do they really want to discourage wanking? This seems very counter-productive to me.

Re:What for?

[philspear]

Chinese porn stars have a habit of yelling out antigovernment slogans as they finish. Sounds weird to us, but consider some of the foul words they use in American porn, it's not that strange.

Re:What for?

[4D6963]

Indeed. What the Chinese government really needs to give to its people is porn, addictive dumb reality TV shows, food and booze. You feel less angry after a good wanking, you'll forget why you were angry in the first place when you'll cross your fingers for Wang Wang to be the next Chinese Idol, a full stomach and some booze will finish knocking you out.

Re:What for?

[patro]

Probably the keyword is: control. They can't leave something in the hands of people (no pun :) over which they don't have control.

Loosing control in one area of society (namely sex) leaves the door open for loosening up in other areas.

That's why dictators try to control everything.

Re:What for?

[Mashiki]

I don't understand comrade. You do want to do what's best for your countrymen don't you? Or are you questioning us?

Re:What for?

[BillOfThePecosKind]

lol. seriously.

Re:What for?

[WGFCrafty]

Go watch idiocracy.

Making people stupider does not help population size.

Re:What for?

[Anonymous Coward]

They can't leave something in the hands of people (no pun :) over which they don't have control.

well, they could at least have the common courtesy to give them a reach-around then...

Re:What for?

[HadouKen24]

Ah, yes, Idiocracy. You make a compelling argument.

Forget factors like poverty, education of women, and social expectations. It's being stupid that drives up the birth rate.

And I know that because a movie told me so.

Re:What for?

[Hal_Porter]

Ah, yes, Idiocracy. You make a compelling argument.

Forget factors like poverty, education of women, and social expectations. It's being stupid that drives up the birth rate.

And I know that because a movie told me so.

Oh, snap!

Re:What for?

[jimicus]

Forget factors like poverty, education of women, and social expectations. It's being stupid that drives up the birth rate.
 

In either case, the whole point of the movie is that evolution favours those that breed the most.

So by your definition you eventually wind up with a population full of poor people with badly educated women and no social expectations. Similar net result, different cause.

Re:What for?

[donscarletti]

What the Chinese government really needs to give to its people is porn, addictive dumb reality TV shows, food and booze.

You've never watched CCTV have you? They run 18 channels of pure shit 24/7. Soap operas, inane stock-character comedies that just drag on for hours (which I admit might be funnier if I were a native speaker) and news that tells you the exact same trivial things three times an hour. On other channels there are some form of reality shows and all the mind numbing goodness you'd expect in the west.

Food is a huge part of China, Sure, the rural poor may be living off bowls of congee but if anything the urban middle class generally eat far more lavishly than those of western countries with both dishes, more exotic ingredients, more complex preparation and larger portions (even KFC's menu is roughly double its normal size).

As for booze, everyone should try Tsing Tao or Harbin beer when over there. It just costs a few RMB, comes in massive bottles and due to its sparse flavor you can keep drinking it and drinking it and be thoroughly drunk well before your mouth feels like you've been drinking beer. If you ordering, make sure you pronounce "Tsing Tao" as "Tchingdao" and emphasize the "r" in Harbin or they won't know what you are asking for.

Anyway, I'm not going to do any further analysis here, apart from mentioning that the Chinese government is not stupid in these matters and has probably realised the exact same thing as you and most western governments have.

Re:What for?

[HadouKen24]

That is, in fact, the situation we're in today, and it's only getting worse. The birthrate is highest in countries like Pakistan and India, especially. (I was referring, by the by, to social expectations that people have large families, if possible.) The biggest problem for everyone, though, isn't the risk of a world dominated by poor people who mistreat their women, but a world in which overpopulation leads to serious negative environmental impacts and a population crash.

Fortunately, the impact of poverty, education, and social norms on population growth can be mitigated. And of those three, the one with the biggest impact--education for women--is the easiest to deal with. There's a tremendous drop in the birth rate with available birth control and only a primary school education for women.

Re:What for?

[h4rm0ny]

I don't know whether to believe that or not. I could see how in a culture without the same Judeo-Christian moral foundation and with a restrictive government, that anti-government rhetoric takes the niche of obscene talk away from sexual words. It's a hilarious idea, scary if real. citation?

Re:What for?

[Anonymous Coward]

OK, I understand why they would want to choke civil unrest by censoring dissidents online, but porn? How's that helping them?

I have no idea if it is the case here, but it could be a moral issue. Like "Porn is just wrong.". Isn't that why people usually object to porn?

Re:What for?

[4D6963]

Hehe, interesting. What's up with that porn censor thing though then?

Re:What for?

[5865]

"So the sage's governing methods are:
Emptying the mind, Vitalizing the stomach,
Softening the will, Strengthening the character."

- Tao Te Ching, Chapter 3:2

Maybe they think porn ruins a person's character? Though I think it's more applicable to the "Softening the will" part.

Re:What for?

[moxley]

Yeah, seriously!!!

They could improve their image worldwide AND become more efficient in their repression by using your suggestion, (which henceforth shall be referred to as "The American Model."

Re:What for?

[aeroswift]

Reputation, I suppose. After the whole Muzimei fiasco, I frankly am not surprised.

But I don't think it's going to work. China's had a pornography problem ever since it's had the internet. If you've ever visited Chinese websites (I'm Chinese so I know), even the mainstream news websites are plastered with 18+ advertisements. Needless to say, it's a bit late to start fixing the problem, eh?

Re:What for?

[gnarlin]

Oh, you mean the USA method then.

Re:What for?

[izomiac]

Hmm... it seems that being stupid could cause all of those factors. That's not saying poor people are stupid, just that stupid people are likely to be poor (separating a fool from his money and all). Ditto for people strongly buying into social expectations and women who don't feel the need to be educated.

Re:What for?

[commodore64_love]

In the U.S. public schooling doesn't decrease pregnancy rates - it increases it. Suddenly your average teen finds him or herself surrounded by lots of other horny teens, and the opportunity to make babies.

The pregnancy rates among homeschooled teens is much, much lower.

Re:What for?

[commodore64_love]

Perhaps the Chinese have suddenly turned Christian. It certainly sounds like something Pat Robertson or other fundamentalists would say:

"the campaign to scrub the country's Internet of 'vulgar' content"

Re:What for?

[Anonymous Coward]

In America, every time someone masturbates a kitten dies. In China everytime someone masturbates an endangered species goes extinct.

Re:What for?

[TaoTehChing]

You basically quoted an ancient Chinese proverb:

"Therefor in governing the people, the sage empties their minds but fills their bellies, weakens their wills but strengthens their bones. He always keeps them innocent of knowledge and free from desire, and ensures that the clever never dare to act."

From the Tao Teh Ching (III)

Re:What for?

[nurb432]

Its all part of the citizens towing the governmental line without question. Anything that could remotely promote individualism is bad.

Or they are just jealous.. take your pick.

Re:What for?

[BakaHoushi]

Well, I think the main problem is that people assume the way to decrease a population boom is to keep teens from from . This doesn't work. Because teens want to have sex. And they will. They always have and they always will. Instead of preventing them from being near members of the opposite sex and then expecting them to understand and live properly with them a la homeschooling, or the good ol' method of an angry health teacher telling them that if they have sex even ONCE before marriage they'll get pregnant with the AIDS, or the timeless "Almighty God, in his infinite mercy, will painfully smite your ass for eternity if you so much even LOOK at a pair of breasts, you horrific sinner (P.S. He loves you, though)" we might consider, I don't know, telling teens "You really shouldn't go wild with sex, but if you do have it, at least be safe."

It's crazy, I know, but I just think it might work.

Re:What for?

[hairyfeet]

Yep, this rates a good ten on the stupid meter. Have the Chinese never heard of the concept of Bread and circuses? Folks will put up with a lot of shit as long as they have a full belly and entertainment. and what is more entertaining than nekkid lesbians? Nothing!

Re:What for?

[hairyfeet]

Let us not forget to add the stupid junkies to the list, which also cranks up the birthrate in the stupid column. I went to school with a girl named Nikki(and yes the Price song just went through my head too). Head cheerleader, really pretty. She is now a crank whore. She has had SIX kids, all born drug addicted and are wards of the state, and last I heard she was pregnant with the seventh. So for all you anti abortion folks out there, please feel free to raise all 7 of Nikki's fucked up kids.

Sadly you go into the junkie neighborhood in most towns you will see way too many just like Nikki. Thinking about something like birth control would mean sparing a brain cell that is too busy trying to figure out where her next fix is coming from, and that ain't never gonna happen. We should be willing to pay a $500 "bounty" as well as the surgery to those women who will get their tubes tied. The cost savings from the treatment and the raising of those kids in foster care would pay for itself. Meanwhile guys like myself with a 156 IQ are choosing to have very few kids(or zero in my case) so sorry! I guess I added to the problem. My bad. But with girls like Nikki out there every geek, nerd, and egghead could be breeding like bunnies and I doubt they would ever break even.

Re:What for?

[HadouKen24]

That's probably less true than you think. While stupidity might be a factor, it's by far outweighed in importance by other factors.

Re:What for?

[HadouKen24]

Where exactly did you get that statistic? I'm somewhat skeptical that it's as powerful an effect as you seem to be implying. It's very difficult to obtain valid statistics on homeschooling, in the first place. Then you have to consider that there are powerful social mechanisms in place causing homeschooling families to want to hide pregnancies within the home, and that it is much easier to do when teenagers are cloistered within the home.

It's almost impossible to homeschool without at least two involved parent figures, which drops the likelihood of teen pregnancy significantly right there without a causal link.

Homeschooling families, in addition, are more frequently very conservative, which would have a dramatic impact on teen pregnancy; the average age for first sex among highly conservative people is 21, regardless of whether they homeschool or not.

Re:What for?

[Anonymous Coward]

Considering their overpopulation problem do they really want to discourage wanking? This seems very counter-productive to me.

Porn doesn't only encourage wanking; it also encourages people to imitiate the acts they see.

They should do what the Japanese do; censor everything but anuses. Thus encouraging interest in something not likely to help worsen the population problem.

Re:What for?

[izomiac]

Far outweighed? That would imply one has little control over one's life and success is mostly random. That's partially true of course, but I try to be optimistic in believing that it's a lesser factor. It also matches my own non-scientific observation better than mostly attributing success or failure to external factors. I am conflating intelligent with a number of other personal traits though, and assuming that success and lower birthrates are causatively correlated (social evolution).

Re:What for?

[easyTree]

..or the timeless "Almighty God, in his infinite mercy, will painfully smite your ass for eternity if you so much even LOOK at a pair of breasts, you horrific sinner

The teens showing early s&m tendencies are sat there thinking "awesome :D"

Re:What for?

[justinlee37]

What if it isn't socially expected for women to go to school, and when a woman suggests it her father laughs her right out of her patriarchal family dining room? Granted, you could argue that that is just highly codified and distributed "stupidity," but it does mean that the woman herself isn't always in control of her outcomes.

Re:What for?

[jimicus]

=== SPOILERS BELOW ===

Of course, where Idiocracy does make a few mistakes are where it assumes that high-tech things (eg. the diagnostic machine in the hospital, all the equipment that runs the television station) can be kept operating more or less indefinitely by a bunch of people who can't manage a more coherent word than "shit". And assumes that in the event of a serious worldwide food shortage which, let's be honest, would have been bordering on famine, the entire world would have been sitting in front of the TV thinking "Damn. But you can't do anything about it".

My guess is that we'd be looking at another period of time like the dark ages. A lot of knowledge would be forgotten and in the course of a few generations (which, with current population levels, would almost certainly include some pretty nasty wars) we'd be scratching a living off the fields again.

Re:What for?

[Duradin]

It's too bad that once you're pregnant, you have to have the kid(s). If someone could find a way around that problem lots of issues would be solved (including all those birth control hormones that end up in the water supply).

Re:What for?

[jythie]

Recall that china has an asymmetric birth rate, more males then females. China is trying to find ways to keep all those raging hormones with no outlet in check. Unfortunately they are taking a page from the puritan page book and hoping that if the males have less access to things that arouse them then they won't lust after women so much and be good little sexually repressed workers.

Re:What for?

[amRadioHed]

Why single out public schooling? Private schools also surround teens with other teens. So does summer camp. Home schooling is not the answer since it requires a time commitment that is not possible with every family. Also you disregard the fact that surrounding your children with other children is a very good thing, despite the possible negative consequences of socializing.

Re:What for?

[hairyfeet]

I don't think so, Mr. Gutenberg quite possibly has saved us from such a fate. Before all it took was a few major cities gone or even a fire(look at the library at Alexandria) to cause us to lose hundreds and even thousands of years worth of knowledge. Today even the smallest hick town has a library filled with "How To" books on everything from basic car repair to building radios.

Of course if the nuclear power plants were abandoned that would be a world of bad, but IMHO the more likely outcome would be dozens of little fiefdoms like in the middle ages, ran by those that have the knowledge backed by serious muscle who like having access to the weapons and machines that the others can't keep functioning which of course will give them power. Sadly with as many people as we have now I bet it wouldn't take much for society to collapse and for something like Mad Max to become a reality. If you'll remember the smart ones, even though one(the leader of the oil refinery) was old and not in great shape and another(the mechanic) was crippled they were given respect and looked up to. Why? Because they could make the machines work and keep them alive. While I do hate to use a cheesy road movie as an example I do think after a collapse of society it would be a lot like that. The smart and the moral strong huddled together for mutual safety and support while the "animals" with a "strongest rules,keep what you kill" mentality would be roaming looking for prey and resources to steal. Whether that would be better or worse than another dark age is up to you.

Re:What for?

[mi]

OK, I understand why they would want to choke civil unrest by censoring dissidents online, but porn? How's that helping them?

During the USSR days, it was customary for Mr. Putin's agency to declare political dissenters as common criminals to soften the West's attempts to free them.

Your asking the question and its high moderation both explain, why the tactics worked. Unable to perceive the actual levels of evil of the Communist regimes, Western "liberals" (who seriously think, G.W. Bush is vilest creature ever to rule a country) fall for their lies:

• Release all political prisoners!
• Oh, no, we don't have any.
• What about so-and-so? We demand, he be released at once!
• Oh, but so-and-so attempted to rape a young athlete last year and must serve his sentence.
• Really? Ah, ok, then, sorry to bother you...

Similarly:

• Your shutting down of such-and-such.cn is an intolerable violation of the principle of Free Speech!
• Come, come, even your country would not tolerate the pornographic content we've found posted on their servers.
• Oh, really? Never mind then, sorry to bother you...

Re:What for?

[HadouKen24]

That might be true to some extent in free societies like those in Western Europe, America, Canada, etc., though I think you probably overestimate the potential upward mobility even there.

However, I don't see how you could reasonably generalize your experience to China, India, Southeast Asia, or Central and South America.

Re:What for?

[ljgshkg]

Your quote skipped the first part of the paragraph, which affects the interpetation of the meaning.

The words before your quote is:
Not to value/employ men with superior ability keeps people from rivalry; not to prize articles which are difficult to procure keeps people from becoming thieves; not to show people what is likely to excite their desires keeps their minds from disorder.

The real meaning of Lao Zi's quote (the quote in the above post) actually centred to two things: 1) Fulfill their physical need/keep them strong. 2) Decrease people's desire.

Lao Zi himself is a history scholar who is very wise, knowledgable, and good in ethic that Kong Zi (the "founder" of Confucius) describe him as "dragon" (an animal that reaches the "god" level).

The writing does say "keeps them innocent of knowledge" etc. literally. But reading Chinese writing, you can never take it word by word. You need to get the "atmosphere" or "real meaning" of the writing.

Various times in history, Chinese did try to implement his ideas into ruling system. Those times results into the strongest time of China. And it's not really about not letting people know, but about "controlling desire" (that's part of Chinese culture) and "let nature fix things naturally by not imposing unneccessary laws and controls".

What mainland government doing is not really associated to what Tao Teh Ching says. They fails to clean up desires amoung government officals (probably not including the very top ones). Then they can't possibily clean up the desire amoung the people, except the scholars who care (not talking about those university people, but scholars, if you know what I mean).

Re:What for?

[cyn1c77]

In either case, the whole point of the movie is that evolution favours those that breed the most.

So by your definition you eventually wind up with a population full of poor people with badly educated women and no social expectations. Similar net result, different cause.

But then the educated people in power get involved in a war that sends those poor people, who got drafted because they didn't go to college, to die. So who does evolution really favor in the end?

It's like the Matrix. The poor and uneducated are the power supply that makes the country go round. You give them just enough to keep them nonrebellious, but not enough to be free. And above all else, make sure they have more poor, uneducated kids. It's modern day slavery and the rich reap the benefits.

Decide for yourselves what countries use that philosophy to govern.

Re:What for?

[4D6963]

You are stupid.

"Stupidity" (let's assume it means low IQ) has little to do with success. Success has more to do with education or social background. Or gifts. I.e. you can have a lower IQ, but not be impaired by it by say strong human skills, in which you might do very good in managerial positions, that's just an example. "Stupidity" these days is really just a blanket term that doesn't mean much, but quite often (too often) it's used for poorly educated.

That movie in question is flawed because it's based on the assumption that poor people are stupid. People are no more genetically stupid in Mississippi as they are in Hawaii, it's just that they have different factors, like a poorer diet during childhood which results in a few less IQ points, and obviously an education that Congolese kids wouldn't envy.

Re:What for?

[Anonymous Coward]

> In either case, the whole point of the movie is that evolution favors those that breed the most.

So, how did we evolve intelligence to begin with if the stupid are that much more prolific?

Re:What for?

[nomorefreedom]

Do you think porn is going to uplift their society or bring them down to the level a 3rd world country like the US? Your obviusly a bleeding heart liberal and anti-God.

Re:What for?

[amRadioHed]

Are you a clever troll or just an idiot?

Re:What for?

[nomorefreedom]

Ill bet your parents are really proud of you.

Re:What for?

[HungryHobo]

Or it could be that parents who choose to homeschool are more likely to be
1:Religious nuts who convince their children that sex before marriage will make their heads explode
2:People who are afraid of the outside world and pass on that fear to their kids.
3:Controlling as fuck.
4:Intent on stopping their kids from having friends and social lives.

messing up the the stats a little

Re:What for?

[izomiac]

You're completely right if you accept the assumption that stupid means low IQ. Ever since I learned a bit about what IQ is I've disregarded it as a useful measure. As you hinted, it's a linear measurement of a multidimensional quality. A person might be great at math, but horrible with people for example. Psychologists can't even agree on how many dimensions intelligence has (most thought ~7 last time I checked), and each of those might not be measurable with a simple number either.

Here's something else nifty about IQ testing. Who has a greater average IQ, males or females? The dude that pioneered the test thought males would, but it turned out that females scored higher. So now, any question that shows a gender difference is removed from the test. Similarly, african-americans score ten points lower than whites. That could be cultural views and access to education, or it could be the same kind of deal. But questions showing a race difference aren't discarded (to my knowledge). I would expect similar trends for a variety of other factors, so it's hard to compare between populations with IQ testing.

Now, IMHO IQ testing is a poor indicator of intelligence. So what do I use if I must compare intelligence? I gauge it on the ability to make intelligent decisions (in so far as one is able, as other posters have pointed out). Intelligent decision making obviously increases the chance of being successful. Now, I suppose I am cheating a bit by altering the definition of "intelligence" to make my position justifiable, but I can't really see any other way to fairly assess it. No clue if the movie does the same, since I've never seen it.

Now for you first statement, how did that help your point?

Re:What for?

[unitron]

Its all part of the citizens towing the governmental line...

One doesn't "tow" a line, one "toes" it, as in someone draws a line in the dirt or on the floor and everyone is expected to line up right behind it, with their toes almost touching it but not extending over it. The kind of control freak/submission/conformity thing for which gym class and military basic training are famous.

Re:What for?

[Peeteriz]

Well, population crash is one (though unpleasant) way of solving the overpopulation problem. If people are too fussy to consider population control now, then after a generation or two of starvation and resource wars all the currently politically unacceptable population control methods will seem quite ok.

Re:What for?

[HadouKen24]

It's not so much that they'll seem ok as that there won't be any other way things can go.

The major thing I'm worried about is what might happen to nuclear weapons during the ensuing conflicts.

Re:What for?

[Ifandbut]

I dont know why the above got modded troll. I thought he was being sarcastic.

Re:What for?

[4D6963]

That didn't intendedly, I was just speaking my mind.

Why?

[Tubal-Cain]

What morals or principles are the Chinese government claiming to enforce with this?

Re:Why?

[Plutonite]

Modesty and sexual conservatism, which are not unique to the Chinese culture, but rather understood and appreciated by almost all [organized] societies. Nobody, however, has ever been able to 'enforce' these things, which is what the Chinese don't get. If you are in a Free(TM) country, consider yourself lucky.

Re:Why?

[benjamindees]

Masturbation *is* sexual conservatism. It doesn't take a billion Chinese to figure this out.

Re:Why?

[lukas84]

Modesty and sexual conservatism, which are not unique to the Chinese culture, but rather understood and appreciated by almost all [organized] societies.

Well, i don't know what you classify as "sexual conservatism", but i sure don't think that we have that now - neither in the US nor here in Europe.

Porn is everywhere and completely legal, prostitution is legal in most places in Europe and some places in the US.

12 year olds that want to dress up as whores as the idols on TV also dress like that isn't my idea of "sexual conservatism".

However, sex is often a somewhat "taboo" topic, which leads to problems like teenage pregnancies, transmission of STDs, etc.

Re:Why?

[HadouKen24]

I'm not buying it, chief. Read a comedy by Aristophanes and tell me that the Athenian Greeks were much into "modesty and sexual conservatism." Read the poems of Martial, Juvenal, and Catullus, and look at the architecture and decorations preserved at Pompeii, and tell me that the Romans were.

Some of the ancient and beautiful temples in India happen to have bas-reliefs depicting bestiality. Illustrated sex manuals were a popular form of literature at one point in China's history. Japan has had tentacle porn since at least the 18th century.

Sure, every culture has its sexual mores. But that's not exactly the same thing.

Re:Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

Modesty and sexual conservatism, which are not unique to the Chinese culture, but rather understood and appreciated by almost all [organized] societies. Nobody, however, has ever been able to 'enforce' these things, which is what the Chinese don't get. If you are in a Free(TM) country, consider yourself lucky.

I would think it is pretty well understood by generals, dictators and rulers throughout history that providing entertainment and sex to the soldiers and populace is a great way of controlling them and making them like you.

Rulers with no morals are using plenty of sex as a means of control and to strengthen their power.

The rulers that try to enforce modesty are the ones with a moral agenda, and they try to use the morals to strengthen their power.

Two faces of power.

Re:Why?

[betterunixthanunix]

"Modesty and sexual conservatism, which are not unique to the Chinese culture, but rather understood and appreciated by almost all [organized] societies."

*cough*

Not sure which organized society you are from, by here in western civilization, sex is by no means modest or conservative. Maybe it is "supposed" to be, according to the evangelicals, but it is not. Nor is sexual conservatism appreciated, except by a small but vocal minority composed mainly of puritans.

Re:Why?

[Scrameustache]

Read the poems of Martial, Juvenal, and Catullus, and look at the architecture and decorations preserved at Pompeii, and tell me that the Romans were.

Women in ancient Rome had little importance as independent citizens, but could be very influential in their primary roles as mothers and wives. Devotion to one man was the ideal. A good Roman matron was chaste, honorable, and fertile.

Re:Why?

[ScrewMaster]

Masturbation *is* sexual conservatism. It doesn't take a billion Chinese to figure this out.

Well, it appears that it does.

Re:Why?

[ScrewMaster]

Well, i don't know what you classify as "sexual conservatism", but i sure don't think that we have that now - neither in the US nor here in Europe.

Yes, and our birth rates are leveling off or falling (Germany, for example, and the U.S. population is increasing largely because of the influx of illegals and all their offspring.) Consequently, it seems to me that if you want to have a high birthrate take away all the porn, make masturbation illegal and give people no other sexual outlets other than sex itself. Oh, and don't forget to keep women in the dark as to consequences of their sexual activity, and take all forms of contraception off the market. Guaranteed Baby Boom.

Re:Why?

[beckerist]

Which can be reformed by education, which is a tool of the masses, which the Chinese authorities most certainly don't want to propagate.

Re:Why?

[mdwh2]

Porn is everywhere and completely legal, prostitution is legal in most places in Europe and some places in the US.

Don't worry, the UK will no longer be one of those countries where possession of porn is completely legal, in one week's time.

But I don't think that negates what the OP is saying. Sure, on the one hand there's porn and a pressure for young girls to dress pretty. OTOH, there's still other groups of people who want to stigmatise any form of sexual expression they see as abnormal or unethical, calling for censorship, or to criminalise acts between consenting adults. He never said that the sexual conservatism was successful, he simply said that these people who call for it exist. And indeed, he specifically stated that "Nobody, however, has ever been able to 'enforce' these things".

However, sex is often a somewhat "taboo" topic

Yes, indeed.

Re:Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

Birth rates have more to do with the education level of females (probably including sexual education, but not in total) which allows them to survive and earn without depending on males. Countries with a high literacy rate among the females tend to have lower birth rates.

Re:Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not buying it, chief. Read a comedy by Aristophanes and tell me that the Athenian Greeks were much into "modesty and sexual conservatism."

How did this get marked insightful?

Most of the point of ancient Greek comedy was a relief from their much more modest society. Indeed, one of the main principles to live by was "everything in moderation" and was carved on to the temple at Delphi.

Nooooooo

[BennyLava]

But, but.... I need it.

100 Million Horny Men

[Anonymous Coward]

Frustrated, desperate men.

Think wisely, China /clicks AC

Re:100 Million Horny Men

[4D6963]

Imagine if they did that in our countries? You would feel a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of Slashdotters cried out in anger and considered stepping outside of their home to do something about it.

Re:100 Million Horny Men

[Anonymous Coward]

Germany promised to filter child porn from the internet, one wonders if they will do as great a job as in finland.

Re:100 Million Horny Men

[4D6963]

Hey thanks for the list :-)

Re:100 Million Horny Men

[ksd1337]

Or their basement, for that matter.

Re:100 Million Horny Men

[Anonymous Coward]

Hasn't the average slashdotter, laboring tirelessly in the face of ridicule, collected 10TB of porn in preparation for that day?

Re:100 Million Horny Men

[Anonymous Coward]

mine goes up to 11.

Prejudice abounds in the summary

[Rakshasa Taisab]

No, it really _is_ a coincident that China started targeting porn sites on the twentieth anniversary of 'the June 4th incident'.

You think they looked at the calendar and realized... OMG, this is the year we must start censoring internet porn!

Re:Prejudice abounds in the summary

[OrangeTide]

"You think they looked at the calendar and realized... OMG, this is the year we must start censoring internet porn!"

Perhaps internet porn is devaluing their pin up calendar?

Re:Prejudice abounds in the summary

[cp.tar]

No, it really _is_ a coincident that China started targeting porn sites on the twentieth anniversary of 'the June 4th incident'.

You think they looked at the calendar and realized... OMG, this is the year we must start censoring internet porn!

Well, since there are so many important Chinese anniversaries this year, how come the author picked Tian'anmen? Why not the ban of Falun Gong (10th anniversary)? Why not the declaration of The People's Republic (70th anniversary)? Or May 4th Movement (90th anniversary)?

I'm sure there are some more, but I can't think of them off-hand.

numbers

[stonedcat]

What I don't understand is that if there are so many damn people in China why they don't just overthrow their government... it wouldn't be difficult.

Re:numbers

[4D6963]

What do you think all the civil unrest is about? Chinese officials themselves have said they were preparing themselves for a year of chaos. Not sure that'll be enough for them to get rid of their government, provided that's even what the protesters want.

Re:numbers

[philspear]

What I don't understand is that if there are so many damn people in China why they don't just overthrow their government... it wouldn't be difficult.

Well, a lot of chinese people happen to like the chinese government and approve of what's going on, at least enough to put up with it. I'm sure a lot of people around the world were probably wondering why Americans didn't overthrow Bush. I personally hated the guy from before day one, but I wouldn't want to overthrow the government even if we were facing 8 more years of Bush. Probably similar in China, they don't agree with everything, but the government does reflect a lot of their values, an overthrow would be damaging, and they don't see a lot of other people willing to rise up.

It's not like the government holds on to power entirely by force, in other words.

Re:numbers

[cheekyboy]

step 1. Get the names of all communist govt people, and all army people and all police people.

step 2. Get their home addresses, and family names.

step 3. do the coup, while the police/army are rounding up people, go to their homes and take them hostage.

step 4. over throw govt, no cop/army guy will be in sight as they all will be going home.

Expect all routers/internet to be turned off, so make sure everyone gets ham radio sets.

Re:numbers

[4D6963]

step 1. Get the names of all communist govt people, and all army people and all police people.

step 2. Get their home addresses, and family names.

That's really the easy part, all you have to do is look them all up on the Red Pages (redpages.cn), that's like the White Pages except that on top of giving the phone number and name it also gives you their occupation, street address, maiden name and birth date.

Re:numbers

[Anonymous Coward]

a lot of chinese people happen to like the chinese government and approve of what's going on

Quite right. This is anecdotal, but the Chinese people I've spoken with about this simply do not see the problems that I try to ask them about. They largely agree with what the Chinese government is doing. They see government as their protector, and mostly agree/assume that "the government knows best." They point to the remarkable progress and advancement in China (in terms of tech, economy, society, etc.) to prove their point.

At worst, I've gotten some of them to begrudgingly admit that some things the government is doing may be "necessary compromises" in order for the country as a whole to grow.

Those that I've met are among the more educated and traveled/worldly of the Chinese population. I'm not sure which way that biases the sample. I'm well-aware that there are dissidents in China trying to stop things like censorship; but doing so must be exceedingly difficult when the average person (and even the "intellectual elite" if you will) support the government.

Re:numbers

[Klootzak]

Overthrowing a Government just means you'll end up replacing it with something that'll eventually become worse.
The best course of action is to talk to them, remind them why Governments should be afraid of their people and not the other way around.

Please note, this doesn't necessarily mean using violence.

Re:numbers

[CodeBuster]

It's not like the government holds on to power entirely by force, in other words.

Just because the threat is more often implied than actually followed through doesn't mean that force wasn't or isn't used. China has made so many 'examples' over the years that most people are easily pacified with just a disapproving look from a policeman. For those who aren't there is always the re-education camp where attitudes, among other things, are adjusted.

Re:numbers

[Kokuyo]

We Europeans asked ourselves the same question when Bush Jr. got 'voted' president. Obviously, the American population did not find their situation as bad as we outsiders.

Same thing with Britain. Either it looks worse than it is from the outside or the people have been lulled into a false sense of 'everything's okay'.

Re:numbers

[Anonymous Coward]

What I don't understand is that if there are so many damn people in China why they don't just overthrow their government... it wouldn't be difficult.

Well, a lot of chinese people happen to like the chinese government and approve of what's going on, at least enough to put up with it. I'm sure a lot of people around the world were probably wondering why Americans didn't overthrow Bush. I personally hated the guy from before day one, but I wouldn't want to overthrow the government even if we were facing 8 more years of Bush. Probably similar in China, they don't agree with everything, but the government does reflect a lot of their values, an overthrow would be damaging, and they don't see a lot of other people willing to rise up.

It's not like the government holds on to power entirely by force, in other words.

I suspect that Chinese people in general haven't got the big idea about the difference between their form of democracy and the western form of democracy. The Chinese are in many ways a very proud people. (I suppose that they have a few millennia of encouraging imperial history to lean on.) In their mind they are the best - and if they aren't already the best in some minor area they will soon be, thanks to their economic progress.

For example, I watched our national parliament election over here together with a student from China. He saw the results, and concluded that our elections are quite similar to the Chinese elections. In that there are two blocks with rather similar ideas - except that one block wants higher taxes and one block wants lower taxes.

It was not until the results from the small parties came up on the TV screen that he understood what it means to vote freely for any party, regardless of whether it is accepted by the government or not:

Nationalistic/xenophobic party: 3%
Feminist party: 0.7%
Pirate party: 0.6% (Yes, I'm from Sweden and the Pirate Party is what you think it is.)
Pensioner's party: 0.5% ...

Think it may have been the pirate party, with 0.6% of the vote, that helped to get the idea across. This man, who was obviously from an upper middle income family, had been staying in Western Europe for over a year. Imagine how much the Chinese working class people who actually live in China under Chinese censorship know about western democracy.

Re:numbers

[diopter72]

That is actually not entirely true. Many Chinese people still do not see our point-of-view and perspectives. "Brainwash" is probably the closest colloquial term I can think of at the moment, without the science hoo-ha.

The belief that the Chinese government is good and all-powerful is rooted in their society; in other words, they are BROUGHT UP thinking the Chinese government is good, so asking those people if the government is good is moot. It is analogous to why boys like car toys or action-hero figurines or why girls like to play dress-up and barbie dolls in the Western world. It is simply a norm; and like always, not everyone follows the norm (and so you will have dissidents even in China), but a good majority do follow. Not to mention, if you don't like the government, you get in all sorts of trouble, legally or illegally. You just don't hear about them because of China's censoring policies. To get a better perspective, you really have to watch one of the foreign language outlets close to China such as Japanese of Taiwanese News to get a better understanding.

Re:numbers

[couchslug]

The Chinese government has managed to rocket China from an impoverished post-WWII and post civil-war famine-plagued disaster into the modern China of today in under sixty years.

That's absolutely amazing.
To expect our idea of freedom and democracy to work in China is to ignore its situation and culture. The US and Europe haven't had serious famines in living memory. China has.
Order and prosperity are more important than freedom.

People don't generally revolt because they aren't free, they revolt because freedom is seen as the path to prosperity they do not have.

Re:numbers

[jmccay]

As much as people want to complain about Bush, he didn't use censorship. One needs only look at all the people that were allowed to complain about him. For all the "fears" of liberals about Bush's various legislation taking away there freedoms, we still have all the freedom we had before he got in. The true test will come with this next president. The liberals have been whining a lot because they can't some up with a version of "talk radio" that actually survives on its own--public "welfare" radio doesn't count because it gets government funding and doesn't have the audience talk radio does. All the efforts to create a liberal talk radio network failed because they were just nauseating cheer leaders for the liberals. They never questioned, or challenged, the liberals when they strayed from the agenda. This is why conservative talk radio took off. They were not afraid to let the conservative leaders have to their face when they came on the show. Look at the liberals in almost any interview that isn't on a conservative show. They don't get asked the really hard questions, and if they are asked, they are allowed to skate by with a lame answer. It is nauseating. Like the current economic depression in the United States (I don't know about anything outside of the US), the media is over dramatizing the effects. There are unemployed people, but not as many as they want you to think. There are plenty of under-employed people--like myself. I hate what I am doing now, but I am employed and paying my bills. I am smart enough to know that things will not always be rosy. There will have times when I am doing things I don't like. The point of this comment is you have to always consider the source of the news and ask questions about it. Use your brain for something other than a hat rest.

Re:numbers

[Alex Belits]

And how is this any different from Americans? Other than, of course, Chinese not messing with other countries regardless on their point of view on the quality of governments there.

Re:numbers

[Anonymous Coward]

The elite Inner Party also supported Big Brother the strongest in 1982. My theory is that the people who are most educated will do their best to convince themselves that things are fine and dandy because they can't stand to think of the alternative.

Just my theory, though.

Re:numbers

[cp.tar]

As much as people want to complain about Bush, he didn't use censorship.

As much as people want to complain about China, at least China didn't wage war on the rest of the world.

I guess different things matter to different people.

Re:numbers

[Scrameustache]

a lot of chinese people happen to like the chinese government and approve of what's going on

Quite right. This is anecdotal, but the Chinese people I've spoken with about this simply do not see the problems that I try to ask them about. They largely agree with what the Chinese government is doing. They see government as their protector, and mostly agree/assume that "the government knows best." They point to the remarkable progress and advancement in China (in terms of tech, economy, society, etc.) to prove their point.

same with the US, all the wiretapping and fingerprinting and tasering and "free speech zoning" is mostly agreed to by the people who make up their mind by absorbing whatever propaganda is thrown at them.

They point to a lack of another terrorist attack since 9-11 to prove their point (never mind the anthrax, happy face bomber, the beltway sniper...)

Re:numbers

[Jamie's Nightmare]

the Chinese people I've spoken with about this simply do not see the problems that I try to ask them about.

You forget that the Chinese put a great deal of importance on "saving face", and really won't share some more private, internal matters, such as feelings of discord about the government with anyone who is not a close friend. You did not get an accurate picture.

Not to mention there are a great deal of patriots, who would never speak ill of the government because they "Love China"

Re:numbers

[Guppy]

The Chinese government has managed to rocket China from an impoverished post-WWII and post civil-war famine-plagued disaster into the modern China of today in under sixty years.

Also notice that all that rocketing happened in the last half of that time frame. The first half was spent wasting staggering amounts of human life.
So, after holding back China for a few decades, they're back to the single-party capitalist system of Republic they overthrew -- while proclaiming the new model was actually "Socialism with Chinese Characteristics" (ie, not Socialism). Given their past history and what they've done to the nation, I absolutely refuse to give them any credit for their belated accomplishments, which they came upon by making every single wrong decision first.

Re:numbers

[Jamie's Nightmare]

It was a lot of American students that were pushing the Chinese students to fight the government.

No, it was not. That is a little conspiracy theory that the most patriotic of Chinese will peddle as a catalyst for the Tiananmen Square protests. Blame the Americans rather than their own people. It has no basis in fact.

Re:numbers

[jmccay]

<sarcasm>Your right. China SO much better than Bush. Why didn't I see that?</sarcasm>

I know...because your wrong. Bush didn't wage war on the rest of the world. There was a lot of misrepresentation on the part of most of the media about Iraq. WW II was a lot worse, but if you believed them, then Iraq was far worse! Bush preemptively attacked two nations who were supporters of terrorism before they could harm us more. Both now have a freely elected governments, and Iraq is now running their own security. The plan was always to hand over (& eventually leave) the country when Iraq was capable of protecting itself. That is now the case, and we now have a timetable to leave with Iraq able to stand on their own. If you believed Obama, Clinton, et. al. then this was never going to be possible. They were wrong, and the media, and the liberals, misrepresented Iraq to a majority of the people in order make themselves look better to regain power. A lot of people/suckers fell for the smoke and mirrors.

Bush liberated people, and China suppresses people. They censor the internet, and they use their prisoners (some of whom are just religious people) for spare body parts for other people. Did you get a transplant from China? Then it came from a prisoner (also (second article),). To be fair China has placed a ban on sales of body parts requiring a signature from the donor, but I don't know how this effects the human body parts harvesting from prisoners.

China doesn't need to place a value on human life because they have over a quarter of the population of the Earth (even with the 1 baby per family law). The value of life in China is cheap. Kill one person, and there are still many left to take that persons place. Take the treatment of baby girls. According to this article China is taking steps to prevent this from completely devastating their population.

<sarcasm>Oh yeah, you are so right, Bush is so much worse. Didn't you hear about the human harvesting in the inner city?</sarcasm> For those that don't get it, there is no human harvesting in the inner city.

Re:numbers

[cp.tar]

First of all, YHBT. YHL. HAND.

Furthermore, let me just say that we in the rest of the world do not see these things the way you do. Your rhetoric is pathetic, and as long as your army goes on killing people all over the world, please do shut up about the value of human life. I have lived through a war in my own country, which I am willing to bet you have not; kindly do not give me this kind of propaganda-shit. After living through a war, I'm immune.

Re:numbers

[Bill, Shooter of Bul]

To expect our idea of freedom and democracy to work in China is to ignore its situation and culture.

No, To expect our idea of freedom and democracy to work in China is to believe that democracy transcends culture. That freedom is not a cultural accident, but speaks to a more fundamental aspect of the human experience, which all deserve.

Re:numbers

[budword]

Yeah, China has done very well. For instance, just contrast China with Taiwan and Hong Kong. Oh wait.....

Re:numbers

[jmccay]

Troll or not, you are immune from nothing. So what if you have lived through a war in your country. Plenty of people have. The US has not because, in the past, we don't generally let the war come to our country. We are smart enough to realize that it is best to fight the battles before they are on our front doorstep and in our front yards. If the rest of the world would get off their posteriors and take care of the small, and big, fires around the world, the US would more than likely just stay in our own country, but let's face it the United Nations is pathetic. Their peace forces are useless, a joke, and sometimes even criminal, and don't even start with accusations of "American soldiers are committing war crimes" because when they do, we prosecute the soldiers. Most of the time, as in this latest struggle for Iraq, the rest of the world believed liberal propaganda that was simply not true at best (& down right lies at worst). It's not my fault you people are suckers. I have heard from American soldiers in Iraq, and a vast majority them were shocked at the misinformation displayed by the likes of CNN et. al..

If the US pulled out of everywhere today. I am sure a lot of people would be happy--like dictators who abuse their people. I also know that the Europeans would probably do nothing but "talk" about the problem and try to negotiate with no positive results. Most of the time (not all of the time) if something needs to be done the US has to do it because nobody else will. This is not propaganda it is just the truth. If the rest of the world doesn't like the way the US is handling things, then they should start solving problems around the world instead of sitting on their collective rear ends bitching at their TVs, radios, etc. because the Americans are doing it all wrong in their experienced and expert opinion.

Get off your high horse and get a clue. The US does stuff because the rest of the world generally won't do anything. Some in America still believe it is possible to make the world a better place for everyone. It will not happen by everyone holding hands and sing peace songs. Some still believe it is possible to make a change for the better, and that governments should be by the people and of the people. Some of us still believe that differences of opinion need not lead to fighting, but the differences sometimes do lead to fighting--and should only lead to fight as a last resort when ones nation/self is in danger. (Of course, there are exceptions.) I know you are not smart enough to read this with an open mind because you just hate the US (or just hate my comments an/or me). In fact you'll probably reply with another troll or lame comment at best. That seems to be all your capable of at the moment.

Re:numbers

[francium de neobie]

If you try to interview those freshly fired sweatshop workers in Guangdong, they'll have a different opinion.

The educated and traveled/worldly Chinese population is also those in the the top 1% income bracket in China - have you seen one of those Dongguan sweatshop workers in the United States? Even those guys and girls are doing much better than their rural counterparts. If you're among the top 1% earners of your country, have a nice house (or more than one house), a nice car, a nice wife, eats gourmet food every day, people hail and bow down to you every day, can freely cut into queues due to your "good relations" with government officials, etc... Then of course you'll feel fine and dandy.

Re:numbers

[francium de neobie]

They don't have to convince themselves, things are fine and dandy for THEM. It's just not so nice for the other 99% of the population.

Re:numbers

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, it may seem totalitarian to us outsiders (mainly because, well, it is), but when you talk with mainland Chinese people, their response is along the lines of "It's not perfect but it's getting better". The first is an understatement and the second is something of an overstatement, but I guess technically it is a true statement. I'd certainly prefer to be a Chinese citizen today rather than 10 or 20 or 30 years ago.

Re:numbers

[cp.tar]

The US doesn't do stuff because by golly, someone should. You do it because you profit from it. Even if your government is from the people and for the people (which is a laughable delusion in itself), it does not speak for the rest of the world. The rest of the world did not get to veote. So kindly do sod off.
I wish you could see yourself from my eyes. Americans like you are the reason a good part of the rest of the world despises you.

Your empire will fall. I might live to see it. Your bully face will be stupefied with shock. I'll just watch the fire.

Re:numbers

[philspear]

Second that. I was just going to ask why it was assumed that the chinese were the ones brainwashed instead of us, or more realistically, both.

Re:numbers

[philspear]

The Chinese are in many ways a very proud people. (I suppose that they have a few millennia of encouraging imperial history to lean on.) In their mind they are the best - and if they aren't already the best in some minor area they will soon be, thanks to their economic progress.

That's true of pretty much every country, although the specific reason of economic progress is different in each case. It's definitely true of the US. Reminds me of a great quote by David Sedaris:

"Every day we're told that we live in the greatest country on earth. And it's always stated as an undeniable fact: Leos are bown between July 23 and August 22, fitted queen-size sheets measure sixty by eighty inches, and America is the greatest country on earth. Having grown up with this in our ears, it's startling to realize that other countries have nationalistic slogans of their own, none of which are 'We're number two!'"

Re:numbers

[Anonymous Coward]

Bush didn't wage war on the rest of the world. There was a lot of misrepresentation on the part of most of the media about Iraq. WW II was a lot worse, but if you believed them, then Iraq was far worse! Bush preemptively attacked two nations who were supporters of terrorism before they could harm us more.

The US didn't make any pre-emptive attacks in WWII - Japan attacked the US, and Germany declared war on the US a few days later. Neither Iraq nor Afghanistan declared war on or took any offensive action against the US. Any comparison that does not take those facts into account is inherently flawed.

The US government's response to the terrorist attack in New York was both inappropriate and proportion to the attack itself.

The war in Afghanistan was based on a desire for vengeance, not for justice. Let me remind you of something it says in a book with which you ought to be familiar, Mr Jesus-Is-Savior-Dot-Com: Vengeance is Mine, saith the Lord. If you're a Christian and you believe what's written in the Bible, then you believe that men may seek only justice, and that God Almighty reserves retribution to Himself. And if you don't understand the difference, you just might wind up being eternally damned for it.

The war in Iraq was based on lies. Lie #1: "Saddam is helping the terrorists." No, he wasn't. Lie #2: "Saddam still has weapons of mass destruction." No, he didn't.

Bush liberated people...

Bush has killed a lot of people in order to make them free. Quite a few more than bin Ladin and Saddam Hussein have killed, put together.

Re:numbers

[Anonymous Coward]

Order and prosperity are more important than freedom.

How pathetic; is this what the world is coming to?

Perhaps it's time for me to go study some geology in hopes of getting a position in Antarctica.

Re:numbers

[Anonymous Coward]

Utter bull. The Communist government screwed things up for years (see stupid economic policies under Mao), until it figured out that a (limited) free market system would work better than a command and control economy.

The prosperity you see now is what we'd have seen many years earlier if only the government hadn't gotten in the way.

Re:numbers

[Anonymous Coward]

The first half was spent wasting staggering amounts of human life.

In order to feed the ego of Mao Zedong.

Re:numbers

[Anonymous Coward]

The Chinese government has managed to rocket China from an impoverished post-WWII and post civil-war famine-plagued disaster into the modern China of today in under sixty years.

Nitpick: Immediately after the WWII, most countries were more ore less on the equal footing, i.e., devastated by the war (except the U.S.). China had the unique window of opportunity to catch up. Unfortunately, thanks to Mao, the country was plunged into bullshit like the Great Leap Forward, the Cultural Revolution, etc. They wasted a good 30 years. The booming only started to happen in the second 30 year period, which makes the progress even more amazing.

Re:numbers

[kilodelta]

Sure there are some in China that are just fine with the government as it exists. Keep em' stupid and happy is the goal of most government.

But then you get the malcontents. That is why a) Taiwan and even Hong Kong exist and b) There are a hell of a lot of Chinese in the U.S.

Re:numbers

[BuddyJesus]

The introduction of capitalism has managed to rocket China from an impoverished post-WWII and post civil-war famine-plagued disaster into the modern China of today in under thirty years.

Fixed that for you.

Re:numbers

[Gavagai80]

Americans can read Xinhua's english news (and I do, sometimes). Chinese are usually blocked from western news in their language. Not having the option to look at other viewpoints is a bit different from just not bothering.

Re:numbers

[Anonymous Coward]

> They point to the remarkable progress and advancement in China (in terms of tech, economy, society, etc.) to prove their point.

Exactly. EVERYTHING is now measured in terms of economic success. If you are a student in Asia, you think hard before choosing a business school or Arts school. Everyone is so focus on making money, everything else is not important anymore. Therefore if a government managed to boost the economy, nothing else matters. It will take China at least 50 years to realize the last 50 years of cultural development was the Stock Exchange, and they are slaves of banking corporations if they ever get a mortgage.

Xinhua news agency

[Anonymous Coward]

Xinhua news agency, which is owned by the government and can safely be used for reporting in China

What does this even MEAN? How does a news outlet being owned by the government make it a "safe" source of news? AFAI'mC, all news sources are tainted in one way or another. Governments twist the facts of any story to fit desired political influence. News corporations only cater to whatever their board of directors/consumers want (which is always money).

There's really almost no such thing as decent reporting. I'm not even talking about the bias that plagues nearly all news. All I'm referring to is that the people who report the news are not paid to "report the true news"; they're paid to make governments and corporations "look good" and "make profit".

Re:Xinhua news agency

[dnwq]

Safe for use by second and third parties to redistribute published news, in that if you republish or distribute a Xinhua article in the PRC, you probably won't get arrested, because the article's already been vetted. It doesn't mean "safe to take for granted, without scepticism".

Countries that censor news often don't explicitly define what is acceptable, and the standards can change often, hence why internal political commentators need to rely on such gauges to see what the current acceptable topics are.

Re:Xinhua news agency

[Anonymous Coward]

'Safe' in that you're LESS likely to 'disappear' if you refer to a news item from Xinhua. Of course by 'disappear' I mean, move to opposite side of country, have prosperous 'government' 'job' for rest of 'life' without ever having any contact with family or friends.

arrests not necessarily due to porno

[Anonymous Coward]

Whoever made the summary ever RTFA?

"28 suspects arrested in the campaign included 4 men in their twenties who ran the Midnight Prostitute Call website from eastern China. They also included two men accused of using a video chat service to defraud customers."

Enough.

[powerslave12r]

Communism just got personal.

So, what is making China so prude?

[rolfwind]

It's not like America with a puritanical past, Communist regimes actually tend to suppress religion. Not that most eastern religions were like the western ones. I think the Soviet Union didn't care about that stuff, but am not entirely sure.

So what's the deal?

Re:So, what is making China so prude?

[Anonymous Coward]

Russians don't have problem with porn. In fact they're so good at producing it and giving it away for free on the internet, that some American porn makers have been asking for a bailout.

Hmmm... Now back to looking at Lenka and Iveta...

You wanna see civil unrest...

[kimgkimg]

Well take away their porn and you'll see what kind of civil unrest that'll cause...

Re:You wanna see civil unrest...

[auric_dude]

The Devil finds work for idle hands.

China.

[Anonymous Coward]

The Chinese government is obviously correct, right, accurate, faultless, unerring, precise, exact, and correct. The Chinese government is the most noble organization of any kind in the world and is made up entirely of honorable, worthy, reputable, and decent individuals who have the best interests of the country at heart. It is horrible that any harmful content is allowed to exist and as such it should be removed. The Chinese government is correct in this just as it is correct in every decision it makes. The Chinese government is perfect and praiseworthy. This story makes just one more example of why the Chinese government is the best in the world and why China is the best place to live in the world.

Re:China.

[Narcocide]

I agree. Can I please have a job now?

political porn ... mmm a new subtree

[cheekyboy]

Id like to see that in a porn film, the girl yelling out, "freedom to all, death to taxes, no riaa, get rid of older 50yos in govt!!!, release all aliens info"

Re:political porn ... mmm a new subtree

[RichardJenkins]

Maybe they do. I've never watched a porn film through to the end.

hypocrits

[scientus]

LOLOLOL

the china officials have already been found coult red-handed with porn on government servers:

http://w3.cultdeadcow.com/cms/2008/03/cult-of-the-dea.html

any they ironically didnt find any on us offical servers..

Re:hypocrits

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm unsure for the others, I don't read chinese, but for the sex toys picture, it's actually taken from a gouvernment website plateforms promoting ecommerce/ebusiness and it's for an import/export company working in the sex toys industry. I suppose that the other ones are in the same league, so it's silly to say such.

Re:hypocrits

[scientus]

theres a ton of pornographic mangas and such is you actually look at the servers, its amaing that the stuff is still on government serevrs

Re:political porn ... mmm a new subtree

[4D6963]

Id like to see that in a porn film, the girl yelling out, "freedom to all, death to taxes, no riaa, get rid of older 50yos in govt!!!, release all aliens info"

Porn actresses rarely share the same agenda as libertarian Slashdotters, you know? ;-)

An IT analogy

[r6144]

The same reason system administrators are reluctant to reboot their production servers in order to apply a kernel patch that fixes serious performance issues. Government downtime is costly. And in this case we have a fairly invasive patch involving a new algorithm, and although the algorithm itself is well researched, the specific implementation needs extensive testing for which good spare hardware is unavailable.

If only we had a good simulator to test political ideas on...

Re:An IT analogy

[cp.tar]

My Chinese teacher says China is not yet ready for democracy. For one, it is a huge country, which also means it is inert. Such radical changes, if implemented haphazardly, mostly lead to problems.

The Chinese do not plan in 4-year mandates. They plan in chunks of 20 or 50 years. At the same time, they do not tend to improvise as much.

There is quite a number of issues here, and the more I learn about China, the more I understand that applying the western model would be the wrong thing to do. It is a different culture, with different values. Forcing our values on them, in any way, would meet – and is meeting – much resistance.

Evolution, not revolution. That's the answer.

Re:An IT analogy

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm actually writing this from a hotel in Ch*na, and this different culture thing is bullshit. I spend most of my time in Ta*wan, and TW really does feel like somewhere that has 5000 years of history. The culture is open enough to debate different solutions to problems, and that lets them add value.

E.g. I visited the CH factory of a TWese electronics manufacturer. The TWese company is one of the top 5 ODMs that design something like 90% of the laptops and motherboards in the world all of them are based in TW and do their design there. When you visit them in TW, they are very pragmatic about solving problems and clearly based on market share they are good at what they do.

The CHese factory by contrast is organised on very strict lines. They have absolutely no authority to question anything or make any changes. And wider TWese society vs CHese society mirrors this distinction. If you're in CH you don't talk about problems. Talking about problems will get you fired, beaten up, locked up or even killed. That just means that problems are never really solved, just papered over. All the rhetoric about 5000 years of history and a very different culture is just something the government says to foreigners who don't recognize it is bullshit. CHese people most likely do, but they know the consequences of speaking up. Also the current government spent most of its time eraseing those 5000 years of history and culture in favour of a sort of generic Stalinism.

In fact as a liberal you should be aware that sometimes governments spout self serving nonsense to excuse stomping their opponents. And hell, governments are sometimes corrupt too. Imagine what the US would be like if criticizing Bush or Haliburton was widely believed to cause you to disappear. And imagine if the Republican party/Haliburton had been in power for 50 years and owned everything.

I'm sure that TW's more open political system influences people to discuss problems at work and try to solve them and CH's system discourages this. And for what it's worth, TW did not have 'our political system' forced upon them. The US would occasionally raise reform during the cold war, but it never forced it - given that it does not recognize TW that would have been hard. It was actually student protests coupled with a sympathetic TW President Lee which triggered TW's transition. Before that it was a party state like CH. They actually happened at the same time as the student protests in CH.

I.e. regardless of people's culture, they don't like being ruled my a bunch of murdering crooks. No one plans 20 to 50 years ahead blindly, that leads to catastrophe. You need to be able to change tack as new facts appear. TW can do that, CH can't. Not politically, and not in an engineering project.

Mispellings are for obvious reasons. Hope the proxy works.

I realise the above would be very bad Last Words on the Internet...

Re:An IT analogy

[u38cg]

I have long been of the opinion that methods of implementing democracy in previously autocratic countries has been badly flawed. The only country in the world that managed to get it essentially right from the outset was the US, and they had a massive momentum behind getting it right. When you arbitrarily hand over democracy to a people not used to it, or used to the exact opposite, you end up - in the extreme case - with Zimbabwe.

I believe that the best way to go is to follow an evolutionary path, following the experience of countries like Britain or Switzerland, which essentially evolved democracy from what had gone before. Don't impose a democratic structure from the top: create thousands of village councils, each with enough teeth to make an impact but not enough to do severe damage. Ensure you have an effective and ethical policing and judiciary function. As people get used to dealing with their problems through local politics and courts, extend it up the way.

I reckon that in ten to twenty years time Iraq will freely elect yet another lunatic, and we'll be going back again to try and straighten out another mess. You heard it here first.

Re:An IT analogy

[drinkypoo]

There is quite a number of issues here, and the more I learn about China, the more I understand that applying the western model would be the wrong thing to do.

You're talking about "applying" the western model, but that is a statement clearly founded upon a western view of applying your worldview to everything. This does make some sense, since the USA's hobby is "applying" its model everywhere.

The Chinese will have a revolution if they can handle one. It has nothing to do with anyone else, nor should it.

Re:An IT analogy

[cp.tar]

There is quite a number of issues here, and the more I learn about China, the more I understand that applying the western model would be the wrong thing to do.

You're talking about "applying" the western model, but that is a statement clearly founded upon a western view of applying your worldview to everything. This does make some sense, since the USA's hobby is "applying" its model everywhere.

Since that is precisely what I meant in the first place, I'm left befuddled. Should I now thank Captain Obvious, or am I missing something important?

The Chinese will have a revolution if they can handle one. It has nothing to do with anyone else, nor should it.

Precisely so. If and when the Chinese decide to start a revolution, it will be their own matter. Although should that happen, I cannot imagine the US staying out of it. The US has meddled in almost everything anyway.

Re:An IT analogy

[amorsen]

I reckon that in ten to twenty years time Iraq will freely elect yet another lunatic, and we'll be going back again to try and straighten out another mess. You heard it here first.

More likely a major nation will decide that the freely elected government isn't to their liking and stage a coup. That's how most aspiring democracies around the world end.

Re:An IT analogy

[Xifeng]

Take off your tin foil hat. The GFW doesn't block websites with the words "China" and "Taiwan", amazingly enough, and using proxies to get to blocked websites is common practice (at least among expats, not sure about the locals).

Re:An IT analogy

[Anonymous Coward]

Can I ask AC, have you spent much time in CN, outside of where ever in GuangDong you visited?

It just seems like your view is pretty extreme compared to most of the foreigners I know living and working in both CN and TW.

We could spend a few hours debating most of your points, whilst many have an element of truth you've twisted them or pushed some of them way beyond the real situation.

instead I wanted to focus on the last point, Chinese can't change tack as new facts appear...

in engineering?

holycrap dude.

I DO work with design engineers in CN, JP and TW and have done for years (disclaimer: I am a laowai living in CN and spend about a 3rd of my time in either JP, KR or TW).

Your comment doesn't align with failing design industry in TW (look at the big name TW businesses shifting R&D to the mainland), the almost niche industry of JP and general clusterfuck that is the design industry of KR.

There were some dark dark days in the past and there still is some very fucked up practices especially in the downstream / manufacturing segments, but even just the last 5 years of progress here is a clear example that the country (including her leaders) knows how to deal with rapid change and knows how to deal with it on a huge scale.

perhaps the TW parent doesn't like / trust their CN divison / contractor to make changes on the fly. you'll also find in downstream businesses like manufacturing, they pride themselves on doing exactly as theyre told and not being creative thinkers... ...it's part of the job.

apparently posting through a proxy, self censoring and fearing those were to be your last words on the internet... I haven't been in THAT china since the late 90s.

wake up, ffs.

Re:An IT analogy

[couchslug]

"I reckon that in ten to twenty years time Iraq will freely elect yet another lunatic, and we'll be going back again to try and straighten out another mess. You heard it here first."

Saddam was and is quite popular. Only his methods can keep order in Iraq, which is why it will revert to disorder if it is not allowed to break up into its natural components. Saddams only "lunatic" behavior was external aggression against Kuwait. He could have cut deals and stayed in his box. He certainly played Sunni against Shia quite well.

Democracy does not suit primitive religionists, which is why they have always killed people who espouse it.

Re:An IT analogy

[hackingbear]

Talking about problems will get you fired, beaten up, locked up or even killed.

I had lived in China for years and managed a group of software developers. While I agree that they are less inclined to point out problem. That's more like a cultural / educational thing. (Even if I put up awards for filing bugs, they rarely did.) But "Talking problem ... get you ... killed." I found that exaggerated too much. I've yet to read of anyone get killed speaking out problems in a *factory*. Did you actually know of an example? Or you just make it up?

And outside of works, Chinese make a lot of complains from the cost of healthcare to the lack of ... democracy ... (though they don't really demand it desparately.) There are plenty of criticism against the government in the Internet too, just ask the 91589 people complaining about the lack of train tickets in one website.

You are either not living in China or you have a wrong perception of what happen around you.

Re:An IT analogy

[ChinaLumberjack]

The Chinese do not plan in 4-year mandates. They plan in chunks of 20 or 50 years. At the same time, they do not tend to improvise as much.

Couldn't be farther from the truth!

China has had, and continues to have, a series of five-year plans which are essentially the mandated objectives of the PRC

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five-Year_Plans_of_China

Re:An IT analogy

[cp.tar]

Yes. Those are only the short-term plans.
And yet they seem to be keeping with Deng Xiaoping's plans even today.

Re:An IT analogy

[u38cg]

That was more or less the thrust of my point. Bear in mind though, that Iraq was a fairly advanced country with a strong and educated middle class when Saddam first came along. The reasons for his success were more complex than ascribing it to religious nuttery.

Re:political porn ... mmm a new subtree

[sqrt(2)]

Don't you usually skip to the end when you're ready to finish? ...or is that just me?

The Soviet Union DID care about it...

[Klootzak]

I think the Soviet Union didn't care about that stuff, but am not entirely sure.

Government persecution of Christianity continued unabated until the fall of the Communist government, with Stalin's reign the most repressive.
Stalin is quoted as saying that "The Party cannot be neutral towards religion. It conducts an anti-religious struggle against any and all religious prejudices."

Re:The Soviet Union DID care about it...

[kanweg]

Of course they could not. It was ORGANIZED religion in Russia (i.e. a church). And churches have power over people. And one power structure always wants to control another power structure for more power. Why do you think that churches in the US interfere with government while they could spend all their time praying to their god? It is a kind of conceding that praying doesn't work if you have to interfere directly.

Bert

Re:The Soviet Union DID care about it...

[Anonymous Coward]

I think by "that stuff" he means pornography and other such things, not religion.

Re:political porn ... mmm a new subtree

[cp.tar]

So are libertarian Slashdotters betraying their principles when watching porn?

Or is it just that they are wankers?

It is tradition act of the government

[_Qiang_]

I work in the mobile game industry in beijing.

In the past, the government had done many gang/crime enforces during certain month of year before, they call it "Yan Da" which basically mean strict enforcement.

But everyone in china knows that It doesn't solve anything permanently and the people who are involve with such act just keep low profile and wait for it finish.

As for the porn busting thing.. my coworkers are making jokes about it and pulling out any thing vaguely sexual. such as, you can't mention "Mei Nv"(beatiful girl) in the game description.

Bottom line, Everything will be business as usual in a month or two.

Re:political porn ... mmm a new subtree

[4D6963]

Sure, if one of your principles is to avoid anything produced by anyone who doesn't strictly adhere to your beliefs and principles.

1984

[socha23]

"The sex instinct will be eradicated. Procreation will be an annual formality like the renewal of a ration card. We shall abolish the orgasm. Our neurologists are at work upon it now."

Yeah, I know Orwell wasn't writing about internet porn, but still...

Re:1984

[TheTurtlesMoves]

I prefer the Iain Banks Culture universe, where they have enhanced the orgasm and made it possible to have a lot more of them in a given time.

I wonder what treatment the neurologists would pick. ;)

I wonder how much of the P0rn in china is streaming directly too government computers?

Chairman Rudd also likes your idea

[CuteSteveJobs]

Great Idea China. In the face of falling property prices, your economy slumping and people losing their jobs and riots growing... take away their porn.

http://www.propertywire.com/news/asia/property-prices-fell-sharply-china-2008-200901072355.html http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jYY3ugKb9diKGictWunUrDVu-aBw http://uk.biz.yahoo.com/07012009/323/china-fears-recession-riots-europe-joblessness-grows.html http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/11/20/china.jobs/index.html http://uk.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUKPEK226188 http://libcom.org/news/chinese-factory-workers-riot-26112008

Re:Chairman Rudd also likes your idea

[Alex Belits]

Why would property be expensive in a healthy economy in the first place? It's not US, where all wealth comes from ability to print money and stuff them into pockets of consumers by all kind of idiotic means including overpriced cardboard houses. In China people actually make stuff.

Re:Chairman Rudd also likes your idea

[Anonymous Coward]

Check out the links, but not that different from the US. For many Chinese it was their first chance ever to buy property, so they borrowed to invest in condominium developments that developers were knocking up everywhere. The concept that prices can go down is unknown to them so they borrowed big. Trouble was, there was oversupply and the developers ran into financial difficulties, so started sharply discounting apartments in complexes they hadn't started building. Imagine investing $200K for a condo not even built yet, to see another the same for $165K the next month. People actually rioted. BTW great analysis of the American bubble: http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2008/s2387463.htm

Re:Chairman Rudd also likes your idea

[Anonymous Coward]

Prices going down is unknown to them?? You've gotta be kidding me. During the early 90s prices went south, during the asian financial crisis price went down, during SARS price went down. Your analysis is laughable.

Re:political porn ... mmm a new subtree

[1001011010110101]

Only if you get off on credits

Meaningless use of cliche in summary

[Anonymous Coward]

"It's no coincidence that this year is the twentieth anniversary of Tiananmen Square..."

Why is that, editors? Is the Chinese government commemorating this "joyous" event with more police crackdowns? Or are you simply referring to the fact that it's no coincidence that time keeps marching on? Exactly how did you mean that it's no coincidence that these porn raids are taking place 20 years to the week after Tiananmen? Please explain how the two are related. You're supposed to be an editor. You can't just pull unsupported and unclear statements from your ass and leave them hanging out there, douchebag.

cat got my tongue

[Anonymous Coward]

praises to China for doing something that should have been done here in North America. Freedom to distribute porn to your children is wrong.

Re:political porn ... mmm a new subtree

[Bender Unit 22]

Only if they paid for it.

Claims about Thailand in the article

[Anonymous Coward]

are silly. No matter what the law is technically in Thailand, the government has never shown that it can be bothered with such nonsense in practice.

simplest answer: somebody forgot to pay the cops.

[anon mouse-cow-aard]

this month's cheque bounced. they got raided. nobody else is going to skip a payment...

Better than Korea ... South Korea that is

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

South Korean authorities have arrested a blogger for saying the won will fall after he predicted that Lehman Brothers would implode. Apparently he is being charged with "spreading false information" -- which seems funny to me, if the guy is predicting the future, how does the government know it is false? Are they claiming to be able to see the future?

I know if *I* was in charge of a country

[Snarfangel]

with over a billion people, I'd want to have male births outnumber female births for awhile, and then take away all the porn.

Re:I know if *I* was in charge of a country

[bugi]

Right you are. That leads to desperate men, much the way harems and isolating the women in middle eastern culture has bred desperate men. Without frequent wars to keep their population in check, they lash out in other ways. Various evil masterminds have done an amazing job of directing those testosterone poisoned men.

Re:political porn ... mmm a new subtree

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't you usually skip to the end when you're ready to finish? ...or is that just me?

Sounds gay to me - what straight guy wants to watch some other guy blow his load?

Think Of The Children?

[SanityInAnarchy]

Maybe it's similar to the kind of push we get here -- porn is seen as immoral, and is a natural scapegoat, so no one minds censoring it. From there, it's easy to justify censoring whatever you want -- after all, it does say "other 'harmful' items..."

Now, granted, the US is at least only censoring child porn, so far, which we can all agree on, right? And swear words, now, in South Carolina, if that bill passes -- which we can all agree on, right? See how slippery the slope is?

Re:political porn ... mmm a new subtree

[alx5000]

Well, women do, if only to find out whether they marry or not in the end...

Re:arrests not necessarily due to porno

[commodore64_love]

What's wrong with prostitution? It's my body and if I want to have an abortion & kill a fetus, I can due to those bodily rights. Likewise I should be free to sell my body in exchange fox wages. There's no valid reason to limit how I use MY body, unless you endorse enslavement.

Re:political porn ... mmm a new subtree

[Anonymous Coward]

t n a, 50 euros!

Re:political porn ... mmm a new subtree

[Anonymous Coward]

Only if you get off on credits

If only I had mod points..

Re:political porn ... mmm a new subtree

[Trailer Trash]

Don't you usually skip to the end when you're ready to finish? ...or is that just me?

I don't know what's scarier - his wanking practices being marked "informative" or the fact that his name is "SQuiRT".

other 'harmful' items

[nurb432]

AH, like the truth.

Re:political porn ... mmm a new subtree

[Scrameustache]

Id like to see that in a porn film, the girl yelling out, "freedom to all, death to taxes, no riaa, get rid of older 50yos in govt!!!, release all aliens info"

Oh, you'll like her.

Cicciolina is a Hungarian-born Italian porn-star and occasional singer, turned politician and the first hardcore performer in the world to be elected to a democratic parliament

Re:political porn ... mmm a new subtree

[e-Flex]

You watch movies with guys at all in them? That's gay.

"no coincidence"

[toby]

You keep using that word...

I'd say that this feeble anti-porn initiative occurring 20 years after Tiananmen is a great example of a coincidence.

(Why do people get so excited about anniversaries anyway?!)

Perhaps a less muddled way of making your point might be to say, "Twenty years after Tiananmen, not much has changed in government policy." But we all learned that anyway, through the disgusting, ugly, wasteful and pathetic charade that was the 2008 Olympics.

Re:"no coincidence"

[bugi]

(Why do people get so excited about anniversaries anyway?!)

You're asking the wrong crowd. Ask your wife.

Smokescreen for cracking down against all dissent

[Anonymous Bullard]

2009 will be a major anniversary for the 1959 Tibetan Uprising (which lead to tens of thousands of Tibetans fleeing their homeland), the 1979 Democracy Wall, the 1988/1989 Tibetan Uprising and the 1989 Tiananmen Massacre.

With the economy not growing fast enough to creat new jobs and millions of labourers being sent packing to their poor home provinces (often without pay), there are bound to be even more local "incidents" against the regime than the estimated 87,000 in 2007.

By targeting "internet porn" the Chinese dictatorship can flex their "penal muscle" and increase their leverage over various service providers (that is, play by our rules or you'll hang over porn which is impossible to totally weed out anyway).

Ask your Republicans

[toby]

Who are constantly trying for the same double play.

Obviously, in China...

[pr0nitor]

They need to put the Power of Pr0nimation in the Palm of the People's Hands!

Internet censorship will never work, neither will a voluntary reorganization to xxx.com. I hate the thought of kids running across the stuff you can see out there.

Granted, my silly product is abit risque, but probably half the reason it's not made me any money, is because I'm not willing to go the extra mile and have outright nudity and stuff on the site. Too racy for mainstream, too clean for pr0n. (Ya, Slashdot wouldn't run a story on it either!)

Anyway, the netnanny type of stuff is the only answer to protect the young and those governments that want to, uh, protect their people. Maybe that's what they need, and I'm sure the Chinese government would be willing to pay for half a billion legitimate licenses...

Bleah, give them access to pr0n and all the free viagra they want, and maybe the balls of the last 3 tigers on earth won't be ground into "traditional medicines".

Re:arrests not necessarily due to porno

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not really an argument for or against prostitution, merely a point that it isn't just China that cracks down on prostitution Websites, Catholic organizer charged in online sex sting.

pr0n

[religious freak]

I always thought it was mainly the puritan/protestant/western religious values that drove our (i.e. Western) governments and institutions to not like porno.

Recently I've discovered India "outlaws" (according the book I read) porn and now China is cracking down. If anything, I'd think they wouldn't care. What is it in these Eastern cultures that makes them not like porn? I didn't think they were uptight like that.

Porn Bad. Rampant Prostitution Good.

[ChinaLumberjack]

So stupid. Apparently. porn is bad but outright prostitution is okay. China has such a massive prostitution industry, high-end brothels literally in major city centers with bright neon lights. They are sex KTVs, sex showers, sex massage, sex 'barber shops' and advertised call girls services. Places ranging from $50USD all the way up to $1000USD and beyond.

obligatory

[Anonymous Coward]

In capitalist China, porn takes down government!

not working... .

[Anonymous Coward]

*fap* *fap* *fap*

Re:Smokescreen for cracking down against all disse

[4D6963]

I see, so in a way it's like "think of the children/teh terrists" here, it's only here to create a leverage to do other stuff, like censoring or wiretapping.

No Foreign Aid = Reduced Population

[TFGeditor]

Western do-gooders bringing food and medical care to third-world countries accounts for much of population growth. Having lots of kids (with multiple wives, in some cases) has been the encouraged norm for centuries because it was the only way to ensure at least one or two survived to adulthood (disease, famine, and infant mortality, you know).

Enter the Western do-gooders. Suddenly, almost all children survived to adulthood, and the average life expectancy increased dramatically. Population boom, but the available resources remained the same.

So, if you want to solve third-world overpopulation problems, cut off the foreign aid and let natural equilibrium with the environment resume.

Harsh, but nonetheless true--and effective.

Re:No Foreign Aid = Reduced Population

[HungryHobo]

On the same note we can solve the problem of supporting the large aged population by simply cutting off food,water,electricity and medical care to over 65's.
Harsh, but nonetheless true--and effective.
Sure you're mother might die but it's for the good of humanity.

ya, there's a reason people don't run with this kind of logic too often.
Educate, hand out birth control and population growth drops like a rock and you also get to keep your soul.

"Losing, not "loosing"

[Anonymous Coward]

"Losing, not "loosing" for the first one

it's not about morals

[GregNorc]

Masturbation and casual sex are at their core, about the individual. The pleasure of the individual. In a totalitarian society, having people caring more about themselves than the ruling party can cause problems.

Lovely stalker-modding

[Anonymous Bullard]

The content of my message was straight from any mainstream media in the free world and also supportive of ordinary Chinese people but apparently some CCP regime backer (a communist/fascist who supports Chinese regime's oppression) has kept me on his hitlist.

It is tragic that they can roam freely to suppress others' freedom of speech and opinion while no one is allowed to support those freedoms in China.