What are people's thoughts on the news report today that porn sites will be blocked from the get go, and you have to opt out of it to view them.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23401076
ive not read it yet but my thoughts are NO !!!
Surely though if your in a household where there are no issues around it there would be an option to turn the filter off no?
I think it's a good idea on paper but won't work in practise. The idea is to protect chidhood and though kids do need to be protected, quite often i think we underestimate them; they know what they don't want to see online and won't open a page if they think it's something they won't like. If parents are very worried they should set up parental protection to stop their children from viewing that sought of material. It will also probably have negative side effects; for instance, teenagers: 14 and 15 year old teenagers who are developing and gaining curiosity about sex won't be able to do anything about their curiosity and raging hormones in the same way they can now, which in my opinion is not harmful to them at all.
IndieGal wrote:
I think it's a good idea on paper but won't work in practise. The idea is to protect chidhood and though kids do need to be protected, quite often i think we underestimate them; they know what they don't want to see online and won't open a page if they think it's something they won't like. If parents are very worried they should set up parental protection to stop their children from viewing that sought of material. It will also probably have negative side effects; for instance, teenagers: 14 and 15 year old teenagers who are developing and gaining curiosity about sex won't be able to do anything about their curiosity and raging hormones in the same way they can now, which in my opinion is not harmful to them at all.
But before the internet teenagers managed fine :P
I don't think its a bad idea. if you want/don't mind the porn sites/or if you dont mind your kids looking at them, just opt in to them! And I'm sure 14-15 year olds will also be capable of undoing the filter...so maybe, from the other angle, its a redundant idea?
Rambling...im sure there was a point to what i was saying..
I do understand ur point and i think for more open families it won't be an issue, but for some families there isn't that same openness and tho younger teenagers could probably work out how to remove the filter, i think it might be a case of contacting the provider which could be very embarassing for a teenager. i know when i was 14 and 15, i never spoke to my friends or family about what i did on the internet (i still don't) and no one aver asked. and yes, before internet people did do just fine but for the generations which have never lived without internet, they probably have no clue what alternatives are out there, i know i didnt, until i discovered erotica for myself!
Yeah I used to look at loads of porn with my friends, for a laugh and for my own exploration. I don't see it as harmful or detrimental but I don't think it was helpful in my growing up either! I don't know if I agree with the filter really...am I stupid or is there not an opt out filter? Which is presumably easy enough. I don't know I'm on the fence lol :)
How about the days before the Internet? What was everyone reading then???
The Internet and its ubiquity obviously calls for some kind of measure to ensure responsible use but this may be going too far in the wrong direction.
Also is it going to be really annoying like when you search for something non pornographic it blocks it... Kinda like if you use Vodafone 3G it blocks you going onto pub/bars pages and so on until you go into the store and confirm your over 18. That would be annoying...
I can not see how the government will make this policy work.
1. Established mainstream 'adult entertainment' companies are sure to lobby this and object citing freedom of speech.
2. How will the policymakers define 'porn'? A heavy hand will block sites like LH whilst a lighter hand defeats the purpose of the bill.
I think this is a great election headline but in practice it will never work.
I am in two minds about this. I understand the desire to protect children from anything that may harm them. However, this form of censorship is is far too strict, and can be used to choke freedom of speech. There are other issues as well. For example..
what exactly constitutes pornography?
PI can acces this site from my phone using 3G (even there, I had to opt in) but not from any O2 wifi sites. They class lovehoney as "porn", or "adult" material. However, I can look at the sun's website, and stare at page 3 models till my hearts content. Because "the sun" is classed as a newspaper, not porn. And this brings me to another point.
In order to protect children from sexual imagery, will the government ban page 3? Or The Star? What about those "cheeky" end of the peer post cards? Or rap videos which show women in predominately subservint, and whorish roles? What about posters showing , or glorying guns? Movies and tv programmes that how that as the only solution? Should kids be banned from seeing that. Personally, I think the should. Shows like " the a-team" we're dreadfully. A bunch of mentally unsound vigilantes seek out a life of crime, and use violence asthe only answer to everything.
Simply banning or trying to ban porn is a fine notion, and deap down in. Uheart of hearts I can't really disagree with it. I see the advantage, and rasoning behind it. But to work, it must be all reaching, all encompassing. Like the control and authority that google and Facebook ad other firms so desperately want, and now have over us. Their reach into our life's, our minds, our very thoughts. The quest to wrap their spindly, fingers around very soles f to satisfy their blood lust of money and power. Total control. Total authority. And is is something that I wholeheartedly disagree with.
I think this is totally horrifying. This is the start of a censored internet.
The issue for me isn't particularly porn, it is the fact that other things could be added to the list - like self-harm. As someone who came across a friend who self-harms, I read loads online to try to find out what it all means. Without that resource, I would have been buggered.
Apparently, the BNP website is blocked by some mobile phone filters. Whilst the BNP is totally abhorrent in their views, they do in fact have a right to have those views and to discuss them. Will they be added to this list?
Blocking a few porn sites is unfortuately the start of a slippery slope. I hope this turns out to be yet another Tory promise that will have a u-turn in a few months.
Cat lady I'm the same, I don't mind. don't watch porn and have no children.
I think I just really don't want over-censorship as others have said other than that - it seems like its a box tick kind of scenario and the filter is only automatic if you don't tick any box.
about sex on tv - I do agree I feel awkward watching some of the more gratuitous scenes, particularly as it seems often the female slave and the roman master etc. well on what I've seen. It doesn't put me off a show and i enjoy it to an extenet. but I feel like its sometimes a bit much. Actually, sometimes there is so much I get bored with it!
Haha totally, I get really sick of the hoards of wenches!
yeah I do feel sorry for the governments though because we're living in a very complicated time and decisions must be hard to make to balance safety responsibility freedom and some other keywords that get thrown about. I'm not very politically minded though I just float along :) x
Sorry to-be thick, how will it effect the toy and over 18 legal stuff, are we to be stopped from accessing this site for example.
Bad news. The start of a slippery slope.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kV7ou6pl5wU
Bad news. The start of a slippery slope.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kV7ou6pl5wU
It really depends on how they catagorise porn, will porn be actual porn? Will it be pictures? Will it be anything to do with sex, in the likes of this forum we're all talking on, where we order our toys ect? I understand it's for protecting children however it does seem to be an extreme case of dictating to us what we can and can not watch. And it seems silly to have to phone up my internet to be opted in to having those viewing. If it's for keeping kids safe then why not call up to opt in to having it blocked by your ISP (Instead of you coming accross as a sex pest to opt out) I'm sure the details of all those opting out would more than likely be passed accross to someone for them to monitor your viewing 'keeping people safe' would be how they phrase the reason for the information being passed a long.
Or do what other people do like myself and block that kind of information being seen through the router on all the items the kids have access too.
Once they block this, then other things are bound to follow, for our protection. When really IMO it's just for the government to keep tabs on what everyone is viewing online.
brockleyfox wrote:
I am in two minds about this. I understand the desire to protect children from anything that may harm them. However, this form of censorship is is far too strict, and can be used to choke freedom of speech. There are other issues as well. For example..
what exactly constitutes pornography?
PI can acces this site from my phone using 3G (even there, I had to opt in) but not from any O2 wifi sites. They class lovehoney as "porn", or "adult" material. However, I can look at the sun's website, and stare at page 3 models till my hearts content. Because "the sun" is classed as a newspaper, not porn. And this brings me to another point.
In order to protect children from sexual imagery, will the government ban page 3? Or The Star? What about those "cheeky" end of the peer post cards? Or rap videos which show women in predominately subservint, and whorish roles? What about posters showing , or glorying guns? Movies and tv programmes that how that as the only solution? Should kids be banned from seeing that. Personally, I think the should. Shows like " the a-team" we're dreadfully. A bunch of mentally unsound vigilantes seek out a life of crime, and use violence asthe only answer to everything.
Simply banning or trying to ban porn is a fine notion, and deap down in. Uheart of hearts I can't really disagree with it. I see the advantage, and rasoning behind it. But to work, it must be all reaching, all encompassing. Like the control and authority that google and Facebook ad other firms so desperately want, and now have over us. Their reach into our life's, our minds, our very thoughts. The quest to wrap their spindly, fingers around very soles f to satisfy their blood lust of money and power. Total control. Total authority. And is is something that I wholeheartedly disagree with.
I agree that our kids should be protected, but we as parrents can do that on the pc's they have access to with the simple perental controls.
The question I am now thinking of is, what are they talking about and not telling us and using this as a smoke screen for, if you know what I mean... ;-)
Yeah sgt horny that's what I think, I don't see why people can't just opt out which is a really comparatively simpler process!
And I might be being thick but I don't know what you mean :( lol