You are reading a single comment by @hoefla and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
London Fixed Gear and Single-Speed is a community of predominantly fixed gear and single-speed cyclists in and around London, UK.
This site is supported almost exclusively by donations. Please consider donating a small amount regularly.
@hoefla
^^^ I admit to not following what politicians have actually been saying, but I assumed the porn filter was not to do with direct abuse of children (which is widely known to be in the vast majority of cases carried out by relatives and friends of the family - despite the tabloids pretending otherwise - and certainly all politicians should know this). but that it was a fear that children are damaged through viewing porn. every so often someone gets their knickers in a twist about the over-sexualisation of children. I share some of these concerns. however I do not think legislation is an appropriate way of dealing with a complex social issue. and if we are talking about the over-sexualisation of children, I do not think that viewing porn is the biggest problem. If that's the line of thinking, then to me it's obvious that next down that slope is limiting sex education. or making it hugely moralising. I'm not talking about the collateral damage or the logistics of filtering etc, I'm simply thinking about the intention "to protect children from on-line porn". I think it's fucking fantastic the resources that are available to teenagers and young people, online, about sex and sexuality. this naturally includes porn. I find many commercial adverts far more problematic.