OFF - and multiply!

[Maxine Wesley]

> Paul Mather writes:
>
> > Mike Holmes wrote:
> >
> > which is this: why should the Internet be allowed special, unlimited
> > access to certain types of material when the same is not true of this same
> > material outside of it?

Because the concept of censorship has been abused on by a small
fanatical minority in power to the detriment of the healthy development
of the human race... and it's about time the balance was redressed?!

> My argument is less that the Internet should be free of the usual laws
> on pornography etc than that these laws should not exist *at all*

Here here!  I think that mystifying sex (which is what censorship
achieves - wether desired or not) causes far more problems than having a
well informed and more liberal society with no censorship. (also let's
face it, sex and it's peripheral associations are about one of the only
enjoyable things left for us! (Apart from good food, music etc.. )

> nation seems kinda silly. Will you obey the Iranian religious
> restriction laws when they apply them to the Internet?

I will if they're lurking outside with there electronic batons!!


> > It seems to me that the "free the Internet"
> > advocates are talking out of both corners of their mouths; on the one hand
> > they say they Internet should be treated no differently from other media,
> > yet on the other they demand unlimited, unfettered access to material that
> > is legally restricted outside of it.  Unless I am missing something...

I think you are missing the point that not everybody is happy with the
way the World is run (if indeed we can say that it is 'run' at all) and
that some people are pig sick of being dictated/restricted by laws to
which they don't subscribe. (Yes; ban drugs, sex.. music will be next
(it's far too subversive!) - and what you are left with is work, cricket and
gardening... super if you like the latter 3 ... but enough to drive
anyone 'normal(!) into and back out of a mental home to comit
some perverse crime, to a sheep, whilst listening to Iron Maiden.

> >  "normal adults" are offended by pornography or extreme violence.  Not
> > everyone likes to see pictures of cigarettes being stubbed out on dicks,
> > bound people having objects forcibly inserted into them,

Yes, but don't forget that *some* do - and they're not people that you'd
classify as abnormal, infact you vote for most of them!


> > people eating shit, scenes of torture and
> > execution, and similar aesthetic delicacies.

I would suggest that censorship has created these scenarios in the first
place - what if these people had been able to develop a healthy sexual
outlook instead of believing that satisfying sex was taboo and probably
something to do with rubber gloves!


> requiring parents to do the damn job they signed up for when they had
> sex resulting in progeny.

Hurrah - vote for Mike!!! ;)


> > And before you say it, no, nobody insisted the
> > newsgroups the images came from be banned or removed.  Just that they not
> > be allowed to be displayed in the laboratory.

Sounds like a good idea to me - I mean not only are we funding the
little p****s through University but providing free entertainment when they
should be working. I'm all for 'localised' restricted access - case
dependant.. but likewise restrict access to Doom and other non
productive activitiese.


> > Arguments about the degrading effects upon society aside, the fact remains
> > that children lack the emotional maturity to process extreme material,
> > especially where it is presented in an unusual context.  It is of benefit
> > to everyone, therefore, if we try and keep material deemed legally obscene
> > away from minors, and direct it towards those that enjoy it.


Then.. as FoFP suggests it is a case of the parents and institutions who
deal with children to restrict access...

> > Or, as is
> > common with many specialist services, the user should pay to access it,
> > and such payment would carry the burden of proper authentication.

Go on Tax it!!!!! :(

> How about anonymous digital cash? That's almost here already.

No Mike, you shouldn't agree with this - the only reason you'd have to
pay for it, is if it's 'censored' - perhaps (like going ex-directory)
those who don't want to receive it should 'opt' out and pay the cost?!

- as with all other forms of communication, information, education etc on
the Internet there should be no censorship. But I guess we've finally hit
the reoot of all this debate - it's purely because there is a buck to be
made!

> Nevertheless, clicking on a link causes your machine to download
> information from another machine. In that sense, pornography as well as
> pizza is *requested* by the user. The solution to the "unknown link"
> problem is to require labelling of controversial material

Sound feasible/ not unreasonable

> Then the CDA should advocate prosecution when something controversial is
> clearly mislabelled.

Sounds simple and easy to adhere to, seconded!

> I figure that anyone requesting "Bianca's Smut Shack" knows exactly what
> they want.
>
> > > > Indeed, the retail outlets
> > > > for such merchandise are prohibited to those under the age of majority,
> > > > yet we are supposed to lift any and all barriers to access on the
> > > > Internet?
> > >
> > > Should the Internet be something that is safe for kids? If so then why
> > > shouldn't roads? Make an 8mph speed limit everywhere?

Yeh - and no more guns or knives shown on television (at all, ever, so neh!)

> > Actually, a lot of local authorities are now recognising that it is more
> > cost-effective to society to slow down (or even remove entirely) cars in
> > suburban areas and around schools.

Which is a taking a complete liberty over childless couples who not
only live in the area but are burdened by the ridiculous cost of
installing these monstrosities, those sleeping policemen are ruining my
suspension! It seems to me that responsible people (ie those that avoid
children!) are always paying the cost of others desire to propagate their
own seeds in a bizarre attempt at immortality!

> > accidents involving children, which, in turn, places less strain on our
> > medical facilities to patch up the damage such car accidents inflict.  I
> > think they're observing the old-fashioned maxim "an ounce of prevention is
> > worth a pound of cure..."

So take the pill!!!!

> >
> > I don't understand.  Have you actually *seen* the cover of an adult video?
> > They're hardly discreet.

And likewise they're hardly OTT offensive, unless your mum brought you up
really badly with a grimly narrow mind and your eyes firmly welded shut.

> > Besides, I think the reason for the separate room is as much to avoid
> > embarrassment to the punters browsing that section than to bar minors. ;-)
>
> Indeed.

..and exactly *why* do the punters feel embarressed? CENSORSHIP!

> > I'm probably being grossly ignorant here so forgive me, but I believe
> > congress doesn't "make" the law; it's left up to "local standards of
> > decency" to define what is or is not obscene or prohibited.

..and these are set by the aforementioned narrow minded, ignorant,
fanatical minority previously mentioned.

> > that is how I remember it being explained to me.)  It is for this reason
> > that oral sex, for example, is illegal in certain states (or areas) in the
> > U.S.A. but not in others.

What a stupid law - these people are asseholes of the first degree and
should be bound up and whipped (..and I bet most of them are agreeing to
that statement - you *know* you're a red neck!>

> Giving them the right to ban pornographers on the Net means that after
> that we exist only by permission. If they get the right to ban anyone,
> they get the right to ban us.

And that, sadly is that!

I sometimes wonder if I landed on the right planet at all, (yeh Cloud
Cuckoo land would suit me loads - at least I wouldn't have to put up
with all these drivelly humanoids) but I must have been misplaced
during the last spaceship outing...... whatever, we were Born to go!

:(  :(    :(

Maxine


  The night shall be filled with music
  And the cares that infest the day            mxw at dmu.ac.uk
  Shall fold their tents like the Arabs        http://www.dmu.ac.uk/~mxw/
  And as silently steal away.                  Honda CB250 RS
                    H.W. Longfellow