Resolved: Children should be allowed to see anal sex, S&M, cum shots, etc. on the Web

Great Debates
41

I STILL don’t see the objection to .xxx. Make it voluntary. Why would a porno site NOT want .xxx? And all current porno sites who switch to a .xxx should be able to maintain the rights to their .com name without extra payment, in order to automatically link to their new domain…so old links will still work. If you don’t want a .xxx, if you don’t think your stuff is really porn, you don’t have to get a .xxx if you don’t want…but you’d probably find that it’s best to have one.

Parents, as administrators on their kids computers could block all .xxx names. That way, the kids can go to informational sites, or learn about breast cancer without getting blocked. Sure, they may still be able to find the odd .com porn site…but I imagine that more than 90%* of the current .com porn sites would voluntarily switch. What’s the incentive to stay if they get free forwarding? And kids would have to WORK to find their porno again!

*this percentage of porn sites that would switch has been made up on the spot.

42

Disclaimer:

Stoidela does not represent the general, mainstream liberal point of view! It is ok to let your children read newspapers and magazines with a liberal point of view, they won’t necessarily grow up to…

End disclaimer.

We used to say in the 60’s,“We are the people our parents warned us about”.

To me, it comes down to matters of law and the importance of the issues.

As has been proven over and over, it is virtually impossible to define what porno actually is, though everybody is certain that they know what it is. I’m a bit of a prude, I suppose, there’s a bunch of stuff I don’t want to watch, and frankly, would be happier if nobody wanted to.

But they do, and its none of my damn bidness.

But even if I wanted to, there is no definition that we can supply so that an person can clearly know what is and what is not illegal. The law is not the way.

The way is shrugging tolerance. Communities enforce standards by custom, more than law. Let 'em. Theres nothing that we depraved persons are being deprived of, or at least, if there is, it defies my imagination. Our rights are not being hindered enough to worry about, pick your battles and dont waste yer ammo. Ditto for worrying that children’s growth might be stunted be such strictures. They’re monkeys, they will find shit out, you bet on it.

All in all, I think access to porno, kids or adults, yea or nay, is too small an issue to concern us.

To end, a quote from Erica Jongg :The first ten minutes of a porno movie, all I want to do is fuck. After ten minutes, I never want to fuck again as long as I live.

Or Woody Allen: Is sex dirty? It is if you do it right.

43

From someone whose handle is a classic Groucho Marx nom du guerre? :slight_smile:

First, just for the record, I’m a parent, but I am neither a “prude” nor a Republican. :slight_smile: With that in mind, here’s a quick summary of my thoughts on the topic:

  1. Restricting access to undesirable/risque/whatever materials to consenting adults is censorship.

  2. Minors are not adults, and do not have all the rights of same.

  3. The fundamental difference between the strip joint/magazine rack and the Internet is that the latter doesn’t have a reliable way of enforcing age checks. E.g., we can’t determine with a high degree of confidentiality on the net whether the person requesting porn is an adult or not.
    (Granted, real-world age checks are not perfect either, as any kid with a fake ID will attest to. But the accuracy rate for checks in the real world is sufficiently high for most people to accept, so that’s a moot point IMO)

  4. Assuming we do not develop a reliable way to overturn point #3, I would rather see open access to internet porn – and place the burden of supervising underage web surfers on the parents or guardians – than to see clumsy attempts at censoring the net and inadvertently hampering the access of adults.

Have we? If little Timmy goes to the park with a copy of Hustler that he found somewhere (under the parents’ bed, in a rubbish bin, or whatever), and he shows it to the other kids, who gets “blamed” for the incident?

Because the people opposed to letting kids see on-line pornography are not proposing ways (and legislation) to prevent that – rather, they’re proposing ways to censor adult access to pornographic materials, under the guise that it’s better to treat adults as children than to risk that a kid will see some naughty bits. E.g., it’s not unlike saying “Kids should not see positive depictions of smoking, so we’re going to remove smoking scenes from all TV shows, movies, and novels.”

My two bits, anyway. Not sure if anyone can actually make sense of it…

44

I’m going to have to hand aynrandlover the dreaded Mr2001 Seal of Approval. I’m opposed to arbitrary age restrictions of any type, as well as the notion that watching or participating in sexual acts will necessarily harm minors.

45

Why not? I think the real fear here is that the younguns’ll be exposed to “deviant practices” before the society-taught taboos over that “deviance” has had time to firmly take root. Thus, they’ll have an honest first reaction to these things, and (gasp) might even actually like them.

I’m not seeing this as a bad thing. If we let folks grow up freely learning about their sexuality (which is a relatively large part of life) then maybe we won’t have so many head-cases of people that have been brainwashed against their sexuality by the time they come to realize it. Pictures of porn, etc, aren’t going to “warp” anybody…if they’re turned on by something, they’re GOING to find out sooner or later, and if they’re not, then being “exposed” to it isn’t going to do anything either way. And personally, I think sooner is better than later in such things: check out the suicide rates for, say, gay Christian teens…I would not be surprised that the figures are lower for those that come to terms with it earlier in life, where they can deal with it before they get a crippling dose of stigma. (that’s what really “warps” people…)

I mean, heck, I dug up some bestiality pics from a BBS when I was 14…I thought they were pretty cool. I tend to think it helped me in life…it’s yet another thing that got me to actually think on a subject instead of settling on a knee-jerk reaction. I don’t think I’m “warped” for it…although I freely admit that some people would argue with me over that. You’d be amazed how many people think it’s weird to draw pornographic dragons in your spare time. :smiley:

46

But Milo, how is this any different than Junior rummaging through the basement and finding Daddy’s old copies of Oui or [Shaved* or one of many porn mags? How about Junior staying the night over at Freddie’s house where they have unlimited sateliite channels and it’s a Debbie Does Anything that Doesn’t Run Away marathon? Yet, I haven’t seem any “Save Our Precious Children” organizations wanting to ban basements or DirecTv. Why? Because we assume that parents can control those situations–why is the net any different? Because it’s everywhere? So are garages, basements and satellite systems. If kids are curious and want to seek something out, they are sure as hell going to find it.
I agree that something needs to be done about a kid trying to do a paper on hedgehogs being bombarded with porn sites showing Ron Jeremy. However, the answer is not to block everything that might be considered questionable. Many of these “net sitter” type programs block many pagan sites. There has to be a way that my kid can be able to freely look up information on Wicca and yet still be protected from an unwanted invasion of Naked Cheerleaders meet Zoo Animals porn!

47

The library in my home town warns parents that, unless they specifically request otherwise, the library will permit their child to check out any circulating book in the library without parental consent.
I understand that this is an unusual policy, even though it is the policy advocated by the ALA.

48

Wow! From zero to conclusion in nothing flat! I knew that was coming, and I have to say that even so I am a little taken aback by how quickly you pounced!

I’m not about to hold my parents up as perfect. They were anything but. However…their failings have little to do with protecting me from porn. To have accomplished that, they would have had to put me in a cage and controlled every single thing I heard and saw. That was not possible then, it is not possible now. And that was my point. You can do your best, and guess what? It will never be enough. Unless, of course, you actually do put your children in cages. But as long as your children have friends, go to school, and leave your house…well, shit happens.

As for my life story being an illustration of “why” parents should be extra-vigilant, I think you are making an arrogant assumption. What’s wrong with my running a porn site? Nothing, as far as I’m concerned. Nor as far as anyone else I know is concerned, and I know a very wide variety of people…presidents of companies, Disney animators, parents who actually * bring their young children into my home! Gasp! * journalists, etc. It is not simply accepted wisdom that what I do is inherently bad, wrong, or unacceptable. Hey…before I did this I was flat broke for most of my life. I was a lousy employee. Now I’m doing something people apprecaite and making good money for it. It helps me to care for my aging parents and help my family in other ways.

So as far as I’m concerned, if you can make the leap that seeing porn as a kid turned me into a pornographer in middle age (and actually, I think that’s a ridiculous leap to make) then it was a good thing! (A more accurate leap would perhaps be that seeing porn when I was a kid didn’t flip me out, because I could and did talk about all kinds of sexual things with my parents. As a result, I never looked upon pornography as evil. Which allowed me to feel perfectly ok about taking it up as a profession as an adult.)

stoid
PS: Never forget…I am not merely a “pornographer” - I’m a coooool pornographer!

49

Maybe it’s just me, but I don’t worry about this at all. As some of you know, I have 2 kids, now aged 13 and 14. They were about 8 and 9 when we first got the internet (we were on the dreaded AOL) and I set them up with ‘kid’s access.’ Didn’t work – a lot of the legitimate stuff they wanted to see (country music sites for my daughter, historical and dirt bike sites for my son) was blocked, even with ‘young teens’ or ‘older teens’ access. So I let them have free access and told them not to abuse it. I also put the computer in a central area of the house, so I could monitor what they were viewing in an inobtrusive way. I also gave them a list of ‘internet safety’ rules – don’t give out personal information in chat rooms or message boards, etc. In years of internet access my son came upon porn accidentally ONCE and my daughter never. The time my son – he was 10 – found some porn, he was appalled (“MOM! Look at this GROSS stuff!”) but it doesn’t seem to have harmed him in any way. Now that he’s 14, things are a little different. I keep in mind that it is perfectly normal for 14 year old boys to want to look at naked ladies. A few peeks aren’t going to hurt him. Anyway, the computer is still in that central area, so he can’t abuse the privilege. I also try to keep things humorous and open – things are a little quiet around the corner in the computer area, “Nick? You aren’t in there looking at titties, are you?” “MO-OM!”

Bottom line, IMHO – the issues of censorship are more important than a kid seeing a flash of porn now and then.

50

I don’t think that is the “real fear”, or at least, it’s not mine (YMMV). I’m not afraid of my son becoming a <dramatic music> deviant by viewing unusual sexual practices on the web. But I really don’t think Milossarian is that far off when he says some of the more fringe stuff could “definitely mess up a youngster.”

Look, I’ll just speak in terms of the youngster I know best, my 11 year old. He’s a level-headed but sensitive boy, who is about to go through some tough years physically and emotionally, as all boys do in the early teens. I really don’t care if he sees pictures of sex acts between human beings; images of one, two or how ever many people having fun with their bodies with straight, gay or otherwise oriented companions are not going to scar his tender soul. I make sure he gets any information he wants (and some he doesn’t ask for, but needs) about human sexuality, and I emphasize safety and responsibility. I understand that, especially as he gets older, he’ll want to find titillating material that doesn’t try to educate or inform him. Hoorah for that.

But I know beyond any doubt that my son will not benefit, either educationally or emotionally, from web page after page of shit-eating, electrocution, pig-fucking, golden showers or mock pedophilia.

Don’t get me wrong; he’s definitely smart enough and strong enough to comprehend and evaluate the concepts mentioned above. It doesn’t matter if he reads all about any of this stuff. Furthermore, his eyes won’t fall out if he sees the odd “fun with Lassie” photo, and his brain won’t implode if he stumbles across a bondage site. (His stomach might turn over with some of these sites, but that’s another story…) But just because he can handle these things doesn’t mean he should freely browse sites with thousands of themed images and movies depicting scary, confusing, sometimes dangerous and often illegal activities. He’s trying to establish in his own mind what sex between people means; he needs to understand that these “fringe” things exist, and that some people enjoy them, but he certainly doesn’t need to be bombarded with so many powerful images.

Sure, it’s my responsibility as a parent to provide guidance and control, and I accept that. But my job would certainly be easier if there wasn’t such free availability of the scarier types of images.

51

evilbeth:

What xeno said. The difference as I see it is, the situation as it has existed in countless American garages, attics, and under-Dad’s-beds for decades, has been one where a curious child would typically find what I would call mainstream pornography - nudity and “typical” (oral, vaginal, maybe anal, maybe a threesome) sex.

That in a way is healthy, and would tend to promote a healthy view of sex and sexuality in a developing, curious kid.

Back in the day, pedophilia, rape depiction, bestiality, shitting and peeing on someone and extreme S&M was much, much less prevalent. The average American, if they wanted it, wouldn’t have had a clue of how to go about getting it (particularly Middle America, outside of big cities).

Now it’s a mouse-click away for ANYBODY, kids included.

Not saying adults don’t have an absolute right to use, purchase and anything else with all porn that doesn’t involve illegality. I’m saying parents should also have an absolute right to be assured that it’s at least made difficult for their children to have access to it.

It’s a whole different world from back when I was sneaking peeks at Dad’s Playboy or Oui.

52

Uh.
Healthy sex, eh.
Um.
I agree that “people beating the shit out of each other” isn’t something I find particularly tasteful, and it does indeed promote an activity that I don’t find especially conducive to good sex, but I still don’t like the line of reasoning used.

I mean, I never had a problem finding porn as a kid, even around responsible parents. They can’t be there 100% of the time, and neither can a Net Nanny. For every three parents with Net Nanny (for example, or some hypothetical wonder proggie which does better) there’s still gonna be one kid who doesn’t, and the kids are gonna pile over there.

Really, fighting pornography is a waste of money. get a grip. People have sex. I have watched ultra-violent scenes, live war footage of people getting their throats cut, violent sex, etc, etc. And yet, miracle of miracles, I still manage to lead a normal life, have good friends, girls who like me, and I stay out of jail. You want to cite extremes? Here I am: the guy who “should” be a fucked up individual but isn’t.
I’ve been sexually “abused” as a child, but I don’t get a Neitze (how the hell do you spell his name?!) will-to-power. I’ve grown up under multiple step-fathers; I am neither effeminite nor a misogynist (sp again? too lazy today). No Oedipus for me, thanks.
In fact, to continue a nice big rant before I go smoke a life-threatening cigarette that I wasn’t brainwashed into smoking, I find myself better adjusted than my friends who grew up in “stable” homes and who now have their reality crashing down on them out of the pretty fucking shelter their parents made.

Give me a break. This whole topic is making me sick, guys, honestly. Children are not stupid. They are not incompetent. They aren’t fragile eggshells.
[/rant]

53

The library of which I spoke earlier, the one where Mr. Internet Guy patrols, has the following policy concerning library cards for children:

When you get your kid a library card, if she’s under 14, you have to sign a consent form in order for her to be allowed to check out materials from the adult section. It doesn’t matter whether it’s a Fodor’s travel guide or Our Bodies, Ourselves, if it doesn’t have a big black “J” on the spine, and if you didn’t give permission for her to have it, the computer will beep and she won’t be allowed to check it out.

Needless to say, all three of my kids have permission to check out both Fodor AND Our Bodies, Ourselves, not to mention a biography of the Marquis de Sade, or the Kama Sutra, or Huck Finn, or whatever else they think they need to read.

54

Jess, you rock. You are doing * precisely * what I think all parents should do. Hats off to you!

stoid

55

I think you have overall a very smart attitude, Xeno. But you aren’t suggesting that my business needs to be handcuffed to make your job “easier”, are you? (Not that my business is about all that extra-scary stuff).

I’m feeling lazy this morning, I didn’t go back and check on any earlier posts from you…

stoid

56

sure to curdle someone’s cream around here…

Regarding all the, shall we call them, “alternative” sexual behaviors…perhaps there is good in being able to find so much of it on the net. eh?

By this I mean…all those fetishes have always existed. They are created by situations that have nothing to do with pornography, whether it’s B&D, S&M, poop-slurping, shoe-worshipping, whatever. They all were “pre-existing” conditions of the human psyche, dating back hundreds, maybe thousands of years. (I know, this is what I do, remember?) But prior to the Internet, people who were into this stuff felt isolated and freakish, leading to self-loathing and all the lovely psychological issues that come with it.

Now…well, they can find each other and not feel so alone. (Granted, this means that pedophiles can ALSO find each other, but as with most things in life, you gotta take the bad with the good) Remember, however distasteful most of us may find many of these alternative sexual practices, they are generally harmless. Better people should find each other, learn to express these needs in a healthy way, and get on with their lives, eh?

stoid

57

Please do check my earlier post. I don’t think the content of websites should be controlled. I do think reasonable accomodations should be made by site owners/operators so that it is more difficult for children to gain access to “adult content.” Whether something like a .xxx domain is a “reasonable accomodation” is debatable, but I don’t think the idea necessarily handcuffs business operators, and I think it’s not unreasonable to expect that they (you) take some part in developing the appropriate accomodations.

RTFirefly poses the question “what makes the Internet special” in this regard. If we (society) feel that it’s inappropriate to sell X rated material over the counter to minors, is it wrong to feel the same about X rated material purveyed over the Web? And if not, is it merely the technical inconveniences such restrictions pose that makes them unpopular, or is “freedom of expression” that much more important when applied to the cyberverse? I think I’ve made it clear that I’m in the “no fundamental difference” camp here, but I may not have made clear that I do not favor any “feel good” legislative measures to deal with the problem. Any solution we come up with must respect the rights of the operators, but must also reasonably accomodate the mores of our society.

Fair enough?

58

STOIDELA:

Nonsense. The average eleven-year-old is not in a position to see women having sex with ponies. The average eleven-year-old of bygone years got his or her information of sex from National Geographic and their dad’s Playboys, peeked at on the sly. Today’s eleven-year-old may get her information from the Internet. But the quantity and quality of the information she receives can and should be monitored by her parents. There is a vast difference between “locking your child in a cage” and protecting him or her from viewing hard-core pornography.

Like so much else in life, there is a huge gray area between the extremes of papering your walls with pornographic glossies and locking your kids in cages. Hard-core pornography, IMO, should not be easily accessible to children. And if my children are in the position to , then IMO that does not fall in the category of “shit happens” but rather in the category of irresponsible parenting.

Except that I never said this. I do not think all children who see pornography grow up to be pornographers. I think no eleven-year-old should be viewing explicit pictures of bestiality. The censure is not in what you have chosen to do with your life as an adult, but what your parents allowed you to see as a child. And I am never, ever, under any circumstances going to think that letting an eleven-year-old view explicit bestiality is okay. If you take that as a personal affront to you or your family, then that is unfortunate, but it doesn’t change my mind.

I have never taken issue, in this thread or any other, with you running a porn site. I just don’t think said site should be easily accessible by kids. But since I didn’t attack it, your defense of it is misplaced.

Except I did not “make that leap.” Though surely you would agree that a child not exposed to hard-core pornography at an early age, and not raised to think it was okay, would probably be less likely to choose that profession than you were.

My point, insofar as your last post but one was concerned, is that it appears inconsistent for you to say “parents should police their own kids” and in the same breath say “I saw graphic porn as a child.” That would appear to argue that some parents are not adequately policing their kids, which in turn would argue that someone else should do it. Kind of like saying “I think parents should keep their kids away from hard drugs. When I was a kid, I smoked crack with my dad.” The juxtaposition just makes me go “Huh?”

I have no problem with people sharing their fantasies and desires with like-minded individuals, provided no one else is being hurt. I have a real problem with my (hypothetical) children being exposed to graphic sexuality of any kind without my knowledge and permission. I have a problem with such materials being easily accessible by kids. This is not an advocation of censorship; it’s an advocation of limiting access to adults only.

59

A. Rape and pedophilia aren’t generally harmless. Even if they are only depictions in the case of rape, they could tend to mess up a young mind unable to fully comprehend and process what its seeing. Particularly if that young mind sees it repeatedly as it develops.

B. Children growing up with a healthy sexuality, to me, means they learn about “basic” sexuality as I outlined above; then, when they are mature enough, they can further explore into the realm of the alternative as they see fit.

60

This might have to be a case where people agree to disagree…I’m just not understanding the concern here. If the pony’s happy, and the woman’s happy, and the viewer’s happy, what’s wrong with it? :smiley: Y’all want to shelter your kids, okay, that’s your prerogative, but why? And even ignoring that, why should that desire to shelter override the desires of other parents -not- to? (even if there was a hypothetical way to prevent from sheltering adults at the same time)