Slashdot Mirror


British MP Calls For Pornography 'Opt-In'

Robadob writes "Internet providers should create an 'opt-in' system to prevent children gaining access to pornography, a Conservative MP has said. Claire Perry wants age-checks to be attached to all such material to reduce exposure to it. The mother-of-three, who has prompted a Commons debate on the issue, said internet firms should 'share the responsibility' of protecting children."

24 of 335 comments (clear)

  1. Claire Perry, way to admit to being a bad mother. by bertoelcon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That is all.

    --
    Anything can be found funny, from a certain point of view.
  2. How adorable by antifoidulus · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's so cute that this mom ACTUALLY believes her kid(s) when they say that they "stumbled upon the porn by accident".

    Junior:'Honest mum, somehow my keyboard just magically typed naked sluts and somehow the mouse must have moved on it's own to click on the links. I'm innocent I tell you!'

    1. Re:How adorable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's so cute that this mom ACTUALLY believes her kid(s) when they say that they "stumbled upon the porn by accident".

      Junior:'Honest mum, somehow my keyboard just magically typed naked sluts and somehow the mouse must have moved on it's own to click on the links. I'm innocent I tell you!'

      Junior, "I was actually trying to type Nakid Slutz the well known Dutch Poet. I also yesterday came upon some disturbing sites when I misspelled the name of the German composer Hornay Coeden."

    2. Re:How adorable by wvmarle · · Score: 3, Interesting

      As a child I had a computer (no Internet at the time yet - just games); which was installed in the living room.

      And I think that's actually quite good. There's more to the Internet than porn, much more. Children, especially the younger ones, need supervision. I don't think a porn filter is necessary (and then I'd rather have a filter against stuff like mindless bloody violence - but for some reason that's totally OK).

      And when I hear about people having actual problems related to Internet use it's never porn, it's games and to a lesser extent chatting and social networks. MMORPGs are infamous, but there are more. They can be addictive, and can really lead to interference with normal life - and study or work. I've never heard about porn doing anything like it.

    3. Re:How adorable by fearlezz · · Score: 3, Informative

      Well, sometimes it actually is by accident. I have spoken to a few parents about their kids' internet usage. 3 of them told me the exact same story: their own kids in the age of 7-12 were looking for kittens, as in "Felidae". When they typed "poesjes.nl" (poes is the Dutch word for a cat) they got pussy, as in "vagina", instead.

      --
      .sig: No such file or directory
    4. Re:How adorable by SuricouRaven · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I've heard of porn addiction. I've also heard of television addiction. Let's ban television.

    5. Re:How adorable by agm · · Score: 3, Informative

      This issue isn;t just about porn though. It's about any content that a parent doesn't want their children to see. This could be anything to do with war, with religion, with particular political views or just websites that criticise whatever superstitions they adhere to.

      If parent want to control what their children have access to, then it's up to the parents to control that, not the companies that distribute such content.

    6. Re:How adorable by SuricouRaven · · Score: 3, Informative

      Web censorship proposals are never by people concerned about keeping their children from seeing things they dislike. They are by people concerned about keeping *everyone else's* children from seeing things they dislike.

  3. Here's a ground-breaking idea: by lowlymarine · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How about parents take all the "responsibility of protecting children." Seeing as they are the ones who want to decide what "protecting" means, why should the ISPs, or government, or anyone else have to "share" (or more accurately in this case, shoulder entirely by themselves) that responsibility?

    Also: come on people, it's not like your children are going to be scarred for life if they see a penis. Get over yourselves.

    1. Re:Here's a ground-breaking idea: by MrQuacker · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Its not the penis itself that will cause mental trauma. However accidentally watching slutty nurse cut one up and eat it while beating off a horse, yeah, that will cause trauma... (on that note, fuck you internet)
      If anything I want to see legislation that just forces porn makers to label and/or tag all porn. That way not only can I avoid what I don't want to see, but I can find the stuff I do want to see. Its win/win for all.

    2. Re:Here's a ground-breaking idea: by ScrewMaster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      How about parents take all the "responsibility of protecting children." Seeing as they are the ones who want to decide what "protecting" means, why should the ISPs, or government, or anyone else have to "share" (or more accurately in this case, shoulder entirely by themselves) that responsibility? Also: come on people, it's not like your children are going to be scarred for life if they see a penis. Get over yourselves.

      No, but if they see a breast, they'll be severely stunted, emotionally, and God help them if they ever glimpse a pussy before they turn thirty. Gagh. Spare us from the prudes.

      My father handled the whole pornography issue very simply when I was twelve or thirteen years old. He trucked over to his ex-Marine brother's place, picked up a three-foot stack of magazines, brought them home and plopped them on my bed. I still recall my eyes bulging out of my head. So naturally I overindulged for a week or two and then ... kinda lost interest in pictures, at least compared to all my friends who were still being victimized by their parents, "forbidden fruit syndrome" and all that. They would come over to my place and see this huge stack of Playboys and Penthouses sitting in my room, and would flip out: "Oh my God, hide 'em quick before your parents get home!" When I explained the situation, the reaction was, "Gosh, your Dad is so cool."

      Now I'm a senior engineer, about the only crime I've ever committed is the occasional speeding ticket (very occasional, I've had three in my entire life, lucky I guess) and some of my best friends are women. I also prefer participation to observation when it comes to the female body, and otherwise have experienced no ill effects from my early exposure to, well ... nature. That's it, folks: the human body isn't some artificial evil, it's who we are.

      If your kid needs psychotherapy after seeing a picture of a nude woman, it's because you convinced him that what he's doing is so wrong that he needs to punish himself for it.

      Fucking prudes. They should all just get laid, and get over it.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  4. Internet Fragmentation by Palmsie · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Here is another attempt at splintering the Internet into what is palatable. By this logic, we should include opt-in programs for any kind of objectionable content: unhealthy sites (because I don't want my future children exposed to McDonalds marketing), politically opposed websites (because I don't want my children exposed to those liberal crazies, with all their gay rights and pro-choice propaganda)... or any other kind of website that I object to. Pornography has become the scapegoat for Internet control. I mean, what politician is going to object to it? First it was child pornography because no one can or should say that they don't want it censored. Now it's legitimate adult porn. As minute as this might seem, it's the first in a series of steps that is fracturing the Internet.

    --
    Carl Sagan quotes get you an automatic +5 on all posts.
  5. How about by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 3, Insightful

    We just leave kids the fuck alone? They don't need to be 'protected' from pornography anymore than they need to be 'protected' from any other kind of media. It doesn't harm them. It may raise some questions, it may gross them out, but it's not a life-ruining situation that must be stopped at all cost. Protect them from things that can actually harm them, not media.

    This "for the children" mentality, as many have said, has been and always will be illogical.

    --
    Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
  6. Not an invasion of privacy, no sir by guyminuslife · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Alright, citizens of the United Kingdom, you're all going to need to opt-in if you want to get porn on your computers at home. So everyone who likes to watch porn on their computers, please raise your hand and sign this form. Here, can you pass this around for the perverts to sign?"

    Mind you, I'd be standing in front with my hand up, jumping up and down yelling, "Oooh, me! Me! I want to sign!" But maybe some people would have a problem with that.

    --
    I don't believe in time. It's a grand conspiracy designed to sell watches.
  7. Re:Claire Perry, way to admit to being a bad mothe by cappp · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Thats what I don't understand about this anti-porn crusade. It's good parenting to allow your kids to experiment and explore in a safe environment - and surely home is the safest of all? When parents let their kids drink a little at home it's not because they want them to be alcoholics, its because they realise that kids are curious; make bad choices; and need to learn to deal with the complexities of the adult world in managable pieces - the same should be true of sexuality.

    When I was going through those awkward teenage years I got curious, like pretty much every other guy ever born. But, unlike those unlucky enought to be born before the internet, I had a safe place to experiment and explore - somewhere I could get away from with the yank of a power cord, complete with anonymity and free from labels. I didn't need to hang out in sketchy nightclubs inviting all kinds of potential dangers, I didn't need to risk STDs or scarring or pregnancy or whatever else - it was all safe and relativly educational, and without having to leave the house. I could look at girl bits and relieve some pressure, I could look at guy bits and see if those odd feelings were going to last or if they were passing, I could look at various combinations of those and explore the full richness of human sexual experience - and I could do a little light flirting when and where it *ahem* arose.

    I want my kids looking at porn at home. It's safer than looking for sex on the streets, and they just may learn a few things.

  8. Re:Claire Perry, way to admit to being a bad mothe by cappp · · Score: 4, Insightful

    True, but dirty magazines lack the breadth of the internet. You’re not going to find that your dad’s secret stash accurately reflects the full expanse of sexual predilections, and you can bet your local corner-store isn’t stocking anything that’s slightly off kilter. Moreover, the internet isn’t just the pictures. It’s the movies, the chartrooms, the message boards – all those sister-sites that would inevitably fall under the same restrictions.

    While it’s almost a rite of passage, a teen shouldn’t have to sit up in the early AM watching scrambled porn and hoping for an occasional flash of breast. They shouldn’t have to try to sneak into an adult store so they can indulge their curiosity about leather, or call sex lines to see if they actually like dudes. The internet gives kids the opportunity to explore their own undefined sexuality without leaving the house – it’s a great way for teens to learn what they like, what they don’t like, what’s even possible, without incurring the risks of going out into the world and doing the same.

    I guess I’m just trying to say that good parenting should be about letting your kids grow up safely into holistic people – and that includes a developed sexual identity. Part of that means providing them the ability to learn, to explore, and ultimately to decide.

  9. Re:Claire Perry, way to admit to being a bad mothe by Tom · · Score: 4, Insightful

    True, but dirty magazines lack the breadth of the internet. You're not going to find that your dad's secret stash accurately reflects the full expanse of sexual predilections,

    I hate to break this to you, but - neither does any porn flick. The "full expanse" includes emotions, touch and smell and many other fine details that even the best porn does at most hint at.

    I'm with you on most of your points, but I consider it equally important that kids are taught the difference between actors in a movie and people passionate about each other (no matter if it's love or a ONS).

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  10. Re:.SEX & .XXX & Routers.. OH MY! by boxwood · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Exactly how do you define porn?

    A naked breast? A girl in a bikini? A diagram of female/male anatomy?

    Different people define porn in different ways. Should wikipedia be changed to wikipedia.xxx because there are some naked pictures on there? Who decides?

    Every individual need to make the categorizations for themselves. Supervise your kids when they're on the internet.

  11. Backwards, again by Angst+Badger · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is like the .xxx TLD. It's exactly backwards. We don't make the entire physical world child-friendly; we build playgrounds and schools and other kid-specific places for them so they can enjoy themselves safely, and adults can do the wide variety of things that adults do everywhere else that eight-year-olds probably shouldn't.

    The prudes and their kids should be pushing for a TLD that is "family friendly", whatever that means to them, and let everyone else go about their business. It could be .kid, or something else -- .beige, .vanilla, .whitebread, .boring, .babyjesus, and .uptight come readily to mind. They configure their machines to access only that domain, and filtering software providers could focus their efforts on making sure .lame domain registrants host only incredibly dull content instead of blocking access to breast cancer awareness sites in the net at large.

    --
    Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
  12. Re:Claire Perry, way to admit to being a bad mothe by Hojima · · Score: 4, Funny

    Ms Perry, who represents Devizes, in Wiltshire, said: "As a mother with three children I know how difficult it is to keep children from seeing inappropriate material on the internet.

    Truth be told this woman is right, it IS difficult to keep kids from getting porn. I remember my mother put parental settings on me back in the dark ages of AOL. I used a key logger to track her password and disabled them in a cinch. Then she payed good money to install a program that restricted websites. Again, I got a hex editor, modded a few files and crashed that sucker every time it started up. When I have kids, I'm convincing them that they can't get their fix of big breasts without proving p!=np. They'll win Field Medals in no time.

  13. Story time. by SuricouRaven · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I don't usually start a new conversation, but... this time I have a story worth telling.

    I was raised to be fairly sexually repressed. No, not religious fundy, anti-sex crusader level. But enough that I would lock up from embarassment at the mention of the subject, and couldn't keep my eyes open in sex-ed class. Really a bit problematic. I couldn't have had this conversation, or even read this thread - my hands would have just trembled too much to handle the laptop touchpad.

    Of course I stumbled upon porn from time to time, but it didn't interest me. When I was in secondary school - I forget which age exactly - I stumbled by chance and wikipedia's random button upon FurryMUCK. It's a freeform furry roleplay place. Though intended for non-sexual roleplay, there's also a lot of sex there - it's just confined to clearly delimited places. I enjoyed the place, a lot, and made many friends there over a period of months without ever venturing into the sex-ok places. Still, temptation loomed, as I often saw my new friends venture in. Eventually I followed. It took a long time, but my inhibitions were gradually worn down. I became capable of watching others RP without feeling terrible shame, and eventually took part myself.

    I still have the logs. The emotions of that learning experience were quite intense.

    It's many years later now. I routinely attend social events that would have been impossible had I not gone through those experiences - it's hard to be social when the mention of sex reduces one to a quivering wreck. I still enjoy sexual roleplay online very frequently, too. It hasn't ruined my life: I hold a steady job, dabble in programming, and watch more television than is healthy just like everyone else. Thanks to my experiencess of pornography and socialising with the extremally sexually-open furry community online, I have been greatly improved as an individual. The repression is just about gone - I've even made some rule-34 artwork of my own. I can participate in debates like this now.

    If such an opt-in system as was discussed existed, none of this could have happened. Can you imagine any minor going to their parents to ask 'I want to look at a chat site, but the ISP blocks it as obscene. Can you call them and fix it?' For that matter, even couples without children would have a hard time opting in, as each one would likely react with culturally-ingrained horror that the other would want to 'cheat' on them by looking at porn. The only way most non-single people could find an excuse to enable it would be if it were broad enough to block non-pornographic sites they needed - in which case, what's the point?

    Besides all that, there is no practical filter that will stop a moderatly determined person of some skill getting around it. Most children don't know how, but they do know how to google, and they do have friends at school who will share the knowledge.

  14. Re:Claire Perry, way to admit to being a bad mothe by neokushan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    My wife and I have discussed this at length and we've come to the conclusion that if my Son is savvy enough to get past all the parental restrictions that we'll put in place, then he's old enough to look at porn. And fair play to him.

    --
    +1 IDisagreeSoHeMustBeATrollOrAnAstroturferOrAShill
  15. Re:Claire Perry, way to admit to being a bad mothe by HungryHobo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    When I have kids, I'm convincing them that they can't get their fix of big breasts without proving p!=np. They'll win Field Medals in no time.

    I find this plan oddly appealing....

    You could probably turn a teen into a network engineer by gradually ramping up the hurdles between them and pornography....

  16. Re:Claire Perry, way to admit to being a bad mothe by Tom · · Score: 4, Informative

    That depends on what you consider right and wrong.

    The problem with people is that most of them truly believe that what they do, say and think is "right" in some sense. Conservatives believe that protecting children from sex is incredibly important. They believe that as honestly as the colour of the sky. Some of them believe that protecting people of all ages from sex is incredibly important. At the same time they are against artificial insemination. And decry the low birth rates. It doesn't match up, but then again neither does the extreme on the other hand of the spectrum, where everyone should be able to do whatever he or she pleases. And of course drugs don't hurt anyone. And people are always nice to each other. And someone would take out the garbage, without the evil necessity of taxes.

    It is my personal belief that children aren't harmed by sex in the least, and that you could let your 5 year old watch all the hardcore pornography he wants - which would probably boil down to quick boredom and a "can you switch to the Disney channel, please?" request. It is also my personal belief that when at 9 or 11 or whatever the age is these days, when the kid does get curious, sitting down with him and watching some good porn and answering questions about it just like any other topic your kid needs to learn, would help the next generation overcome this curious attraction/repulsion fetish we have with sex and porn.
    Don't do it later than 11 or so, because there comes a time when kids insist on having secrets from their parents and discovering the world on their own, and knowing everything better than the oldsters. If you haven't done basic sex education by then, you have put your kid at the risk of teenage pregnancy and STDs. Now what is the better parenting - having a talk about sex or turning your kid into an HIV infected teen parent?

    That is my personal belief. The funny thing is that any conservative with a brain (they exist!) could probably argue his belief just as consistently and eloquently, and find as many flaws in mine as I in his.

    Which is why it's a good thing to have discussions with the people you don't normally discuss with - those with a totally different opinion. It helps you find the flaws in yours. Your friends with the same opinion share those flaws and thus won't find them.

    So, please, do rip my argument apart.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org