Porn Crackdown

[Paulr]

DSTV has an electronic parental guidance function.

And it works. Considering the long face my 13 year old had last week he was clearly not trying to watch cartoon network that late at night.....

 

[icyrus]

Just wondering how much parenting experience you have...
Parental guidance... he he
We do all we can, but have a hard time when the freedom of speechers use the media to force their pov down everyone's (including the kids) throats.

How is anyone forcing their POV down your and your kids throats?

 

[icyrus]

Always amazes me when a crack-down on child porn is interpreted by some as being evil. Child porn must be actively prevented - the only aspect worth debating is what are the most effective ways of achieving this goal...

I don't think anyone is saying that the crack down on child porn is evil. Its just the means to do it... and that they will not only be used to stop child porn.

 

[Syndyre]

Always amazes me when a crack-down on child porn is interpreted by some as being evil. Child porn must be actively prevented - the only aspect worth debating is what are the most effective ways of achieving this goal...

True, but often its a smokescreen for other vested interests.

 

[pupa]

would you have it any other way???


Parental Guidance

Parental guidance????? there is nudity and sex rated at 12 and violence rated at 18, So how do you think this would help. We have low intellects, that as ethnic culture marry 12 year olds, making these decisions! If I have to put the parental control on 12 then I can just as well chuck the TV out! Anyway my kids have principles and free choice, thus I do not have much of a problem as protecting the kids at home but at school they see and get porn and get taught to have protected sex at 12. So you teach them they can get what they want elsewhere while if you teach them morals then they make their own, hopefully good, choices!

 

[pupa]

True, but often its a smokescreen for other vested interests.

There is a difference with child porn producers, criminals, and users! The fact that raw porn is on TV does not help either! So they just create the next generation of porn lovers by creating the interest on TV.

 

[supersunbird]

Always amazes me when a crack-down on child porn is interpreted by some as being evil. Child porn must be actively prevented - the only aspect worth debating is what are the most effective ways of achieving this goal...

Who said a crackdown on childporn was evil? Come on, just 1 quote please...

Anycase, they also want to censor adult porn and remove it for all of us so that kids cant find it. The point we pro-porners are making is that parents are responsable for their childrens online habits, and they shouldn't ban porn ,because of irresponsible parents.

They must ban all cars too, children get killed in car accidents, get run over by cars. No one has died (adult or child) has died from looking at a bit of porn...

 

[Syndyre]

There is a difference with child porn producers, criminals, and users!

True but if they were to eg enact a law allowing them to monitor all internet traffic and block sites deemed "undesirable" what's to stop them using it against political dissidents or other people that agree with them?

 

[lilDeath]

Parental guidance????? there is nudity and sex rated at 12 and violence rated at 18, So how do you think this would help. We have low intellects, that as ethnic culture marry 12 year olds, making these decisions! If I have to put the parental control on 12 then I can just as well chuck the TV out! Anyway my kids have principles and free choice, thus I do not have much of a problem as protecting the kids at home but at school they see and get porn and get taught to have protected sex at 12. So you teach them they can get what they want elsewhere while if you teach them morals then they make their own, hopefully good, choices!

Agreed. Exactly the point I wanted to make.

 

[noxibox]

Why should there be any age restriction on children seeing nudity? Have you somehow convinced them that everyone was born with clothes? Is seeing naked bodies going to short circuit their little brains? Or is it more about embarassed adults?

Puberty starts at 12. Earlier in many children. If you don't like it lodge your complaints with nature. Demand a recall. Or you can bury your head in the sand and convince yourself that they won't have sex as long as they don't hear about contraception and receive sex education. Better keep them away from the public library too (or perhaps only teach them to read when they're 18).

The only real issue with them seeing sex is that it is basically a ridiculous activity that is totally impossible to explain to a child. There is no evidence that it is at all harmful.

There isn't even any reliable evidence that watching violent movies or playing violent games makes children violent.

All these things should be left to the discretion of the parent. Games. movies, music, etc. should merely show an indication of the content and the parents should decide what is appropriate for their children.

Stopping people who are abusing children is a separate issue.

 

[lilDeath]

There is a limit / balance for everything.

If you expose children to graphic material, whether it be of violence or sex / porn / adult of nature, it will affect them, no matter how you look at it. Affect may be that they take it for granted, not respect it, etc.
Anything can happen.

It is what is happening in our society today, society is disintegrating, everyone is blunted off because of the crime, people don't even flinch anymore when they hear about violent crime.
Just this morning a colleague of mine shared about how his son got attacked yesterday, with a screwdriver to steal his cell phone, in broad daylight, 3 houses away from his home.
This was conversation around the breakfast / coffeetable. We accept it as a part of life.
It is not acceptable.

12 IMO is too young. Way too young. How must you respect yourself if you cannot respect others?
Find the balance. It is not 12.

 

[mancombseepgood]

Crikey noxibox

Why should there be any age restriction on children seeing nudity? Have you somehow convinced them that everyone was born with clothes? Is seeing naked bodies going to short circuit their little brains? Or is it more about embarassed adults?

I want to know why you want to expose children to nudity...
and wake up man, porn is not nudity.
Think a little before you type.
And hey... I managed to stay a virgin until I got married - just cos you can't be bothered, doesn't mean that everyone's kids won't bother. It boils down to how you are taught along with how you manage peer pressure... I know not everyone who doesn't get married a virgin is messed up, but it's not as hard as you might make out.
Who made you the expert on everyone else's kids anyhow?

Also... just a fact... puberty doesn't qualify a child to be mature or sexually active either - some kids start as young as 9.

If there's anyone sticking their head in the sand, I would suggest it's you. Look around you and look at the world of our predecessors - it's not the same place. As lilDeath said - society is disintegrating... there are reasons for that and not the least the media.

And um... sex is not harmful you say... I guess you will be teaching your toddlers one day to use a condom to avoid moral and social issues that come from being sexually active and having multiple partners.

 

[pupa]

Why should there be any age restriction on children seeing nudity? Have you somehow convinced them that everyone was born with clothes? Is seeing naked bodies going to short circuit their little brains? Or is it more about embarassed adults?

Puberty starts at 12. Earlier in many children. If you don't like it lodge your complaints with nature. Demand a recall. Or you can bury your head in the sand and convince yourself that they won't have sex as long as they don't hear about contraception and receive sex education. Better keep them away from the public library too (or perhaps only teach them to read when they're 18).

The only real issue with them seeing sex is that it is basically a ridiculous activity that is totally impossible to explain to a child. There is no evidence that it is at all harmful.

There isn't even any reliable evidence that watching violent movies or playing violent games makes children violent.

All these things should be left to the discretion of the parent. Games. movies, music, etc. should merely show an indication of the content and the parents should decide what is appropriate for their children.

Stopping people who are abusing children is a separate issue.

Saya ethnic cultured individual: Spoken through the wrong hole china! From your post it seems you will prolly condone sex orgy's with 12 year old puberty experiencing kids in an kitchen? Stopping people abusing children is the crux of the matter here but if sick individuals see all the cr@p on TV to awaken his lust and then may expose a kid to it to create the channel of influence as it is made so easy now by GVT and legislation, only to make ethnic abuse legal (See the Zuma saga) by putting the cr@p on TV for easy access!
Hell! At 12 no kid can decide for himself and need guidance and minimal or no exposure to cr@p. So You say nudity, and thus sex and porn, as well as violence is oK for kids on TV as long as the parents agree to it. So is the parents there 100% of the time?

With comments like that no wonder ZAR is the closest to Sodom and Gomorrah since the written of the scriptures!

 

[supersunbird]

In all my terabytes/years of porn surfing I have never once come across childporn (not even just plain naked children), the closest I have seen is some anime lolita stuff.

It is not just there on the internet to download. I gather from news investigations that peadophile rings hide their activities very carefully and they are very secretive and suspicious. They have sophisticated PC programs and also password protected newsgroups.

 

[mancombseepgood]

Here's an interesting read

Here's an interesting one to read: http://www.crimelibrary.com/serial_killers/predators/dutroux/evil_1.html
This guy apparently had some gvt officials on his list of clients at one point.
South Africa: http://www.carteblanche.co.za/story/cbl_story_monumental_childporn.asp

Patrick gave his information to the local police, where head of the Child Protection Unit, Captain Ebrahiem Cloete, took up the investigation. Again they seized discs and videotapes from the suspect's offices, but their well-prepared case was thrown out of court. Not only did the man walk free but in an extraordinary show of bravado, he continued running his website. He merely changed its name, sanitised it slightly, and put up his subscription fee to $5 a month. According to the police this man had over 5000 subscribers world-wide, which meant he was earning somewhere in the region of R125,000 a month.

As for Noxibox's "Your kids aren't harmed by it"... http://cooltech.iafrica.com/technews/890367.htm

I have also noticed the surge in requests for child pornography, as many people come to Cooltech looking for child porn every month, and the number is increasing all the time.

They are out there...

 

[noxibox]

Think a little before you type

I suggest you do.

I managed to stay a virgin until I got married It boils down to how you are taught along with how you manage peer pressure... I know not everyone who doesn't get married a virgin is messed up

society is disintegrating... there are reasons for that and not the least the media.

And um... sex is not harmful you say...

And you believe that sex is harmful?

There are many people who freak out about their children seeing nudity, at the beach, in movies, etc. This implies that they think it harmful to their children (which is a pretty warped view).

Waiting for marriage is irrelevant. If that's what someone wants to do, then that's their choice. It says nothing about a person whether they wait or not.

You can continue to pretend that hiding information from your children will keep them from having sex. Many parents who ended up with a pregnant teenager had the same belief. You may manage to keep children in the dark and dodge the bullet, or you may not.

Society is not disintegrating. It's the same story every generation. Oh woe, the youth of today. The sky is falling.

If you expose children to graphic material, whether it be of violence or sex / porn / adult of nature, it will affect them, no matter how you look at it. Affect may be that they take it for granted, not respect it, etc.

Only in a vaccum. Children learn violence from their parents and their immediate surroundings. Media exposure comes in a very distant third and relies on the children having already learned violence from their parents (spousal abuse, beatings as punishment, etc.). Conversely if a child has been raised with an appropriate attitude to sex and violence no amount of violent or sexual media is going to overwhelm that. The media does make a convenient scapegoat though doesn't it? There was a time when the theatre was accused of corrupting the youth. Seems silly today, but at the time they were very serious in their belief that the theatre was going to be the downfall of society.

12 IMO is too young. Way too young. How must you respect yourself if you cannot respect others?

What does that have to do with educating children or the age at which they are given specific information?

No age is too young. The education system seeks to have a blanket age at which they give children information. More correctly information should be given when the child starts asking. That does, however, assume a family in which the child feels able to ask. If not, then they may get their information from dubious sources. In general teachers would love to hand off sex education to parents, but experience has shown that parents can't or won't do it. And many teenagers are going to feel more comfortable asking a guidance counsellor, if they're willing to ask an adult at all; especially true if they know their parents are going to disapprove, blow a gasket and lock them in the dungeon.

It is what is happening in our society today, society is disintegrating, everyone is blunted off because of the crime, people don't even flinch anymore when they hear about violent crime.

You appear to be alleging that violence portrayed in the media has blunted our response to real violence. Just the opposite it is due to violence in the real world, which is not caused by the media.

As for Noxibox's "Your kids aren't harmed by it"...

Said no such thing. Of course children were harmed by It.

Darn psycho clown monster thing!

 

[noxibox]

South Africa: http://www.carteblanche.co.za/story/cbl_story_monumental_childporn.asp

And they apparently failed to pursue the source of the material.

In all my terabytes/years of porn surfing I have never once come across childporn (not even just plain naked children), the closest I have seen is some anime lolita stuff.

It is not just there on the internet to download. I gather from news investigations that peadophile rings hide their activities very carefully and they are very secretive and suspicious. They have sophisticated PC programs and also password protected newsgroups.

That appears to be the way they typically operated in the past and probably how they generally operate now. There have been some instances where deficiencies in the law have resulted in perpetrators acting more openly. It could also probably be put down to laziness and stupidity.

Of course the anti-child porn frenzy has also snagged innocent families who did nothing other than take photographs of their children playing on the beach. Fortunately most of them fared better than the numerous people falsely accused of child abuse in the day care scandals.

 

[lilDeath]

There are many people who freak out about their children seeing nudity, at the beach, in movies, etc. This implies that they think it harmful to their children (which is a pretty warped view).

This is but your opinion, and from what I've read so far from your posts, not a very good one at that. Are you a professional judge of character now, or just making assumptions?

You can continue to pretend that hiding information from your children will keep them from having sex. Many parents who ended up with a pregnant teenager had the same belief. You may manage to keep children in the dark and dodge the bullet, or you may not.

Nobody has disagreed with this. You have gone off on a completely different tangent. Nobody has made the point of hiding information from children.
If you hide something, children will know (they are smart) and find out by other means, undoubtedly.
These conversations in your head are very entertaining, btw.

Society is not disintegrating. It's the same story every generation. Oh woe, the youth of today. The sky is falling.

Do you even read the daily news headlines? Do you hear the radio news bulletins? Do you hear the crime statistics? The figures of rape and murder? The figures of child / infant abuse?
Almost every one of us on this forum knows someone closely or directly that has been exposed to crime, even violent crime. It is not that far removed. So, is my statement so hard to believe?
Some violent crimes are at record highs, affording us 1st and 2nd places, which is NOT admirable

Only in a vaccum. Children learn violence from their parents and their immediate surroundings. Media exposure comes in a very distant third and relies on the children having already learned violence from their parents (spousal abuse, beatings as punishment, etc.). Conversely if a child has been raised with an appropriate attitude to sex and violence no amount of violent or sexual media is going to overwhelm that. The media does make a convenient scapegoat though doesn't it? There was a time when the theatre was accused of corrupting the youth. Seems silly today, but at the time they were very serious in their belief that the theatre was going to be the downfall of society.

Once again your own tangent and reasoning with yourself. Don't know where you got this from or going on about the media, but I'll bite...
Only in a vacuum? Where does this fit in with the discussion? Who lives in a vacuum these days? It is inevitable that children will be exposed to the public. Immediate surroundings depends on where you want to draw the border.
And here you start mentioning the media....
You are making some real gross assumptions here, as far as I am concerned. I would actually like to see some reports about this "learn violence from their parents and immediate surroundings"-business.
You make it sound like every home has spousal abuse going on...

What does that have to do with educating children or the age at which they are given specific information?
No age is too young. The education system seeks to have a blanket age at which they give children information. More correctly information should be given when the child starts asking. That does, however, assume a family in which the child feels able to ask. If not, then they may get their information from dubious sources. In general teachers would love to hand off sex education to parents, but experience has shown that parents can't or won't do it. And many teenagers are going to feel more comfortable asking a guidance counsellor, if they're willing to ask an adult at all; especially true if they know their parents are going to disapprove, blow a gasket and lock them in the dungeon.

Your arguing on a completely different topic now. No one has mentioned sex education or argued against it. In fact I have even posted earlier about Parental Guidance.
Children must be educated when THEY are ready to know and start asking on their own, not because their friend's daddy was watching a maturely rated movie with violence and sex in it. It invariably happens that kids start asking questions about the birds and the bees because of something they have heard and seen somewhere else, (even something as arb as seeing a baby in a pram for the first time in the mall: "Mommy/Daddy what is that? Where did it come from?"). Problems can occur when education does not happen in the home.

You appear to be alleging that violence portrayed in the media has blunted our response to real violence. Just the opposite it is due to violence in the real world, which is not caused by the media.

I alleged no such thing!! Did I mention media? I think not. You are the one that started bringing up the media card. I was referring to people's personal experiences or immediate surroundings.

Said no such thing. Of course children were harmed by It. Darn psycho clown monster thing!

and here you turn yourself around.... you were implying that children were not being harmed tho

I seriously hope all these comments are coming from a youngster which still has something to learn in life and not from a supposedly mature individual.....

 

[icyrus]

All this back and forth about porn... personally I believe current orgranized religions to be much more harmful to children then porn. So if given a choice between banning porn and banning religion I would choose banning religion in a second.

 

[pupa]

All this back and forth about porn... personally I believe current orgranized religions to be much more harmful to children then porn. So if given a choice between banning porn and banning religion I would choose banning religion in a second.

Says an anti christian with lack of morals.