New at Reason
Kerry Howley looks at the ACLU's challenge to the Child Online Protection Act, and concludes that no matter who wins the actual trial, Internet porn will remain accessible and abundant.
Comments to "New at Reason":
Where the hell are the children supposed to learn about DP if not the Internet?
And even if they get rid of all the boobs and bonerz websites, they still can't control peer to peer filesharing.
FinFangFoom | November 3, 2006, 1:15pm | #
I swear to God, I hate for-the-childrenism more than any other paternalistic grounds. I can't stand those people. Have you ever challenged their opinions on any kind of for-the-children issue?Me: (Basically) Why don't you be responsible for your own kids?
Them: Pained look that says: "What the fuck, you expect me to raise my children? I don't want to be held responsible for my life!"
Ron Hardin | November 3, 2006, 1:31pm | #
A minor data point, when I worked for a large and nationally known telephone company, and the first color monitor was attached to somebody's VAX computer, it wasn't a week before there were babes on it.This was before the internet.
All it takes is males.
The Wine Commonsewer | November 3, 2006, 1:41pm | #
My kids accidentally stumbled onto a porn site once. I wasn't happy about it but it didn't ruin their lives. Seems like I had to change the Googles settings and that was it.Actually it was kind of funny because they were so grossed out they were screaming Auuuuggghhhhhh, ohhhhhhhh, yuckkkkkkkkk at the top of their lungs which is what got our attention in the first place.
Point is that little kids who shouldn't view porn aren't looking for it either.
Teen Age boys camped at the mailbox hoping for the latest Victoria's Secret catlogue are who the law is probably aimed at. Okay, it's the new millenium, maybe teen age girls too.
I'm not as cavalier about porn, sex, and teens as some libertarians but I'm not sure it's the end of the world when your teen finds the billions of free porn photos that are all over the internet either.
Biologically, teens are adults and in my world they would be treated as such.
Sure, teens aren't as smart as they one day will be. But TWC wasn't as savvy at 25 as I am now either. I guess the only thing that proves is your Bullshit Meter gets better as you age.
Chuck | November 3, 2006, 1:54pm | #
FTA:"It's important not to become emotionally detached from the issue.”
Seriously? Do lawyers really say things like that in arguments to Supreme Court justices? Are you kidding me?
gaijin | November 3, 2006, 1:55pm | #
Biologically, teens are adults and in my world they would be treated as such.Um, I'm sure you meant to state this in a somewhat less NAMBLA-like way, right?
GILMORE | November 3, 2006, 2:12pm | #
no matter who wins the actual trial, Internet porn will remain accessible and abundantGod, you had me worried there for a second
PiGuy | November 3, 2006, 2:15pm | #
When I was a kid, the whole neighborhood knew which dads had a stack of Playboys hidden away somewhere. We saw nekkid women in the treehouse, on campouts, or in the garage pretty much anytime we wanted. It wasn't as easy as Googling asian midget tranny but I suspect that it generated the same sense of satisfaction.It's not clear to me why this is so much more damaging. And the hair on my palms eventually fell out.
Chuck | November 3, 2006, 2:17pm | #
PiGuy--I just Googled "asian midget tranny." I think I'm going to have nightmares tonight.
Aresen | November 3, 2006, 2:21pm | #
"And the hair on my palms eventually fell out."Yeah, but my eyesight is still bad.
steveintheknow | November 3, 2006, 2:28pm | #
When I get home I am googling 'naked drug use' first thing...Nancy Pelosi | November 3, 2006, 3:04pm | #
As a mother and a grandmother...I keep wondering how something as popular as porn can "violate community standards." Aren't the folks loggng on part of the community?
Crippled Vulture | November 3, 2006, 3:29pm | #
Sometimes I wish we could just have two countries. One for "the children" and one for freedom. I feel like the government could get away with more in the name of the children than the war on terror.David | November 3, 2006, 3:43pm | #
Teen Age boys camped at the mailbox hoping for the latest Victoria's Secret catlogue are who the law is probably aimed at.I'd like a poll asking how many people saw either their father's or friend's father's porn growing up(say between 12and 15 years old), and if yes, whether they feel that the suffered any ill effects from it. I'd guess that it will be 90% yes on the former, and 99.99% no on the latter.Then again, I'd also guess that a good percentage of those same people will agree that porn is harmful when viewed by kids.
jb | November 3, 2006, 3:52pm | #
Now I'm imagining Trekkie from Avenue Q singing "Internet Porn" by Da Vinci's Notebook.*whistles* Geriatric german grandmas spanking spanish men!
Number 6 | November 3, 2006, 4:26pm | #
This is what happens when ignoramuses write laws and try to defend them.The little girl who got slammed with pornographic pop-ups after typing in her dogs name was seeing the result of malware. Malware that probably got there after someone else was not only surfing for porn, but doing so stupidly.
Even the most noobish user on the planet should have been able figure that one out.
biologist | November 3, 2006, 8:05pm | #
Number 6:please explain the correct, intelligent way to surf for porn :)
gaijin:
nothing NAMBLA-like about TWC's comment: NAMBLA's motto is "sex before eight, or else it's too late"
they're not interested in teens
Robert Goodman | November 3, 2006, 10:21pm | #
I keep wondering how something as popular as porn can "violate community standards." Aren't the folks loggng on part of the community?Yes, but only in private, so it doesn't count. I'm serious. To be counted as affecting community standards, they'd have to parade their porn in public.
This is why there's a ratchet effect in community standards