1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Porn site age-check law demanded

Discussion in 'Serious' started by danielg, 28 Mar 2014.

  1. Corky42

    Corky42 Where's walle?

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    9,648
    Likes Received:
    386
    I'm not sure i catch your drift, what does low self esteem and low self confidence have to do with parents failing to teach their children about the world around them ?
    Isn't the call for age checks taking responsibility, much in the same way as not selling tobacco/alcohol to children instead of teaching them about the harm it can do.
     
  2. Nexxo

    Nexxo * Prefab Sprout – The King of Rock 'n' Roll

    Joined:
    23 Oct 2001
    Posts:
    34,272
    Likes Received:
    1,697
    When I said:

    You said:

    Which I took to mean that you stated that parents may find it difficult to take a critical look at their own parenting. I'm pointing out that many people are very self-critical and lacking in self confidence. Although of course they could defend against that by abdicating responsibility ("Hey, it's not my fault..."), so I guess you are right. :)

    Asking other people to take responsibility (by age checks) is not taking responsibility. The best way to stop children smoking and drinking is to teach them that smoking is an expensive, unhealthy addiction and how to enjoy alcohol responsibly. It can be done, but good parenting starts early. You can't just let things slide until they start causing problems at age ten and then expect that you have any basis for authoritative intervention.
     
  3. Corky42

    Corky42 Where's walle?

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    9,648
    Likes Received:
    386
    Ahh i get ya. Yea i did mean parents may find it difficult to take a critical look at their own parenting, i never really thought that parents may lack confidence. :duh:
     
  4. supermonkey

    supermonkey Deal with it

    Joined:
    14 Apr 2004
    Posts:
    4,955
    Likes Received:
    202
    Breaking Story: Angry mob demands government intervention to protect innocent children from the detrimental and psychologically damaging effects of boobs. In other news, GTA IV and COD break sales records, and in a related story 13-year-olds inform an unsuspecting general public about the promiscuity of mothers everywhere.
     
  5. Guinevere

    Guinevere Mega Mom

    Joined:
    8 May 2010
    Posts:
    2,484
    Likes Received:
    176
    You and I know, Boobs aren't porn. In isolation (singly or in pairs) they're not even erotica. I wouldn't mind my 7yo kids stumbling upon images of boobs or genitalia, but I'd rather they didn't see porn at this age.

    Making an attempt to block porn from children is not the same as blocking pictures of boobies. The trouble is (especially in the US) violent content is more acceptable than a bit of flesh here and there.

    Would a 'click here to confirm you are over 21 years of age' check like on a Steam games trailer help to 'protect' them? Of course not.

    I think content filtering should be available to all, but made entire optional and don't make people have to phone up to ask to be unblocked. Give people some dignity.
     
  6. KidMod-Southpaw

    KidMod-Southpaw Super Spamming Saiyan

    Joined:
    28 Sep 2010
    Posts:
    12,592
    Likes Received:
    558
    Absolutely this. With all of this, we're only going to get back to the old argument of "Where are the parents in all this?" And it's right. No amount of filtering, blocking or whatever internet policing is going to make up for parenting.
     
  7. supermonkey

    supermonkey Deal with it

    Joined:
    14 Apr 2004
    Posts:
    4,955
    Likes Received:
    202
    I agree, but that wasn't entirely my point. I was making a joke about the reactionary measures parents often take to prevent children from seeing anything that might be construed as 'naughty,' yet they will happily allow their children to watch all manner of violence despite the same content ratings they should be following.

    On the other hand, while you and I don't see any real harm with a child seeing a breast, at least here in the US we can consider the aftermath of the notorious Super Bowl halftime show in which one of Janet Jackson's breasts was partially exposed for less than a second. At the office the next morning, numerous parents were upset not just because her breast was partially exposed, but because their children might have seen it.

    Ultimately I agree that content filtering isn't a bad thing if it is done at an appropriate level, and is enforced by parents themselves. Reddit self-polices its adult-oriented areas (with the exact measures we're talking about - click to agree that you are over 18), and I'm OK with that. My problem is when such measures are legally mandated. There just isn't any good way to verify its effectiveness.
     
  8. Carrie

    Carrie Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18 Nov 2010
    Posts:
    3,183
    Likes Received:
    992
    They could try asking for a d.o.b and like many kids who can't spell - "we don't need to, we've got spell checker" - a lot are crap at maths too so implement a one chance system before locking out the IP address. It'd probably stop them accessing quite a few porn sites before they figured out a d.o.b that'd grant them access ;)
     
  9. Corky42

    Corky42 Where's walle?

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    9,648
    Likes Received:
    386
    Isn't the best content filter the one we carry around inside of us ?
    Shouldn't we be teaching children about life and how to deal with the nasty things out in the real world ? And until such a time as they can understand the danger keep them away from it.

    When did the Internet become a place that children should have unsupervised access to, would you let your child wander the streets without supervision.
     
    Mr_Mistoffelees likes this.
  10. Guinevere

    Guinevere Mega Mom

    Joined:
    8 May 2010
    Posts:
    2,484
    Likes Received:
    176
    Nope, but I let my kids look out of windows safe that they stand a very slim chance of watching someone get abused and the headline 'porn' covers a lot more than just two consenting adults playing Mummys and Daddys'

    The child accessible real world has 'risks from people and situations' more than 'risks from what you can see'. The internet has both. There's the real risks of grooming etc, and then there's the hidden damage that occurs if a kid stumbles upon a snuff video or something almost equally as unsavoury that falls under the 'porn' banner.

    Sure you can educate kids, keep a close eye on them, hold their hands and comfort them if something slips though and they get traumatised. At the end of the day most of the net is pretty damn safe. Even sites like youtube are pretty okay for well balanced young kids.

    So we already have filters on the net for stuff we all consider nasty. Adding a few more that be switched on/off for 'genuine' porn (not just naked bodies and biology textbooks) isn't going to harm anyone.

    But....

    I would prefer a fully open 'Anything goes' internet to one where compulsory filtering is applied, and I don't trust any sort of filtering mechanism to not be forced upon us or incorrectly applied.

    So I'm actually against filters because it's a slippery slope. By all means offer me a filter, but don't even dare switch it on for me let alone force it upon me.
     
  11. Harlequin

    Harlequin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    4 Jun 2004
    Posts:
    7,071
    Likes Received:
    179
    these filters are already causing more problems than solutions - rape victim sites are being blocked , as is pig farming (pink everywhere).
     
  12. Corky42

    Corky42 Where's walle?

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    9,648
    Likes Received:
    386
    I can understand the need for filters on things like public WiFi or other public access networks, but don't you have to be over 18 to sign up for a broadband connection ? If so shouldn't the responsibility be on that person to make sure children either don't use the Internet or use it in a safe manner.

    Isn't akin to an adult buying alcohol and giving it to children ? If it's not i would appreciate someone explaining why it isn't.
     
  13. rathinfotech

    rathinfotech Banned

    Joined:
    30 Jun 2014
    Posts:
    2
    Likes Received:
    0
    How exactly do you check age? ???
     
  14. Mr_Mistoffelees

    Mr_Mistoffelees is not The Piper at The Gates of Dawn

    Joined:
    26 Aug 2014
    Posts:
    2,923
    Likes Received:
    952
    I play Elder Scrolls Online. If I need to look at the My Account section of the website I need to select my date of birth from drop down lists. I just click anything and never put in the same date twice but, I'm still authorised. The check is a complete waste of time. I don't see it working any better on porno sites.

    BTW, I'm more than three decades over the minimum age!
     
  15. Nexxo

    Nexxo * Prefab Sprout – The King of Rock 'n' Roll

    Joined:
    23 Oct 2001
    Posts:
    34,272
    Likes Received:
    1,697
    The age check is not meant to be a serious attempt at filtering; it is simply a legal consent form. People can lie, but it absolves the site from responsibility.
     
  16. theshadow2001

    theshadow2001 [DELETE] means [DELETE]

    Joined:
    3 May 2012
    Posts:
    5,199
    Likes Received:
    155
  17. boiled_elephant

    boiled_elephant Merom Celeron 4 lyfe

    Joined:
    14 Jul 2004
    Posts:
    6,218
    Likes Received:
    579
    WORD.

    The solution to about half the problems laid at the government's feet would simply be better parenting. I like that the government gets involved in enforcing a minumum standard of human behaviour (don't beat your kids, don't give drugs to your kids, don't use your kids as slave labour to generate electrical power in a basement) but stuff at the level of sexual attitudes and sex education really needs to be left to parents as much as possible. I remember sex ed at school, it was a total farce and really quite damaging.

    edit - although more broadly, I'm fine with the government showing concern about pornography. I do think it's a problem in some respects - particularly the lack of regulation about what can be depicted in porn, and how easy it is to access stuff that's - rightly - illegal in your own country. I just don't think they should pretend it's got a ****ing thing to do with "protecting the children". That's a cheap cover to shield your argument from criticism. Pornography doesn't damage children, it damages people; age restriction has got dick all to do with it. Like, what, once you're 18 you magically develop a natural coping mechanism for witnessing simulated interracial gang rape? Child welfare's a red herring in this case.
     
    Last edited: 2 Nov 2014
  18. liratheal

    liratheal Sharing is Caring

    Joined:
    20 Nov 2005
    Posts:
    11,929
    Likes Received:
    1,373
    Kids get onto porn sites?!

    Holy ****, guys, we need to burn the internet down.
     
  19. adidan

    adidan Guesswork is still work

    Joined:
    25 Mar 2009
    Posts:
    16,354
    Likes Received:
    2,939
    The most shocking thing I remember from sex ed was watching a video of a woman giving birth. Disgusting and unnatural - we should get that banned.
     
  20. Anfield

    Anfield Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    15 Jan 2010
    Posts:
    6,387
    Likes Received:
    746
    At least they taught you something about it, I remember the teacher who was supposed to talk about it in my school was too embarrassed, so it ended up as "there may be some bits and pieces between your legs that should never be used or talked about and now lets discuss in detail how the human ear works for the rest of the time".
     

Share This Page