Sunday, 28 July 2013

The Guardian fights back


The statistics are shocking. According to the Mail, "four out of five 16-year-old boys and girls regularly view pornography." People who are only just old enough to consent to actual sex are allowed to watch it on screen. Parents are helpless to prevent their children viewing pornography on the computers they allow them to keep in their bedrooms at night. It's the kind of massive and complex problem that only a newspaper campaign can tackle.

He makes some good points.

5 comments:

  1. This was also quite good:
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/the-truth-about-pornography-its-time-for-a-rude-awakening-8735043.html

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'm 50 now and when I was at a secondary "boys only" school, 5 out of 5 boys regularly experienced pornography. Granted it's easier now and more wide-spread but it's not a modern situation. Aged 16 one of the boy's older brothers had been to Amsterdam and brought in a magazine showing a dinner party getting naked and indulging in Coprophagia. I'm still disgusted by the memory of it. At the time I doubt anybody thought this was normal behaviour.

    I still think that if you make something inaccessible to developing minds (ie Alcohol, Porn etc) you make it much larger in importance in the child's mind. I hope I have educated my kids to think for themselves and tried where possible to make things like alcohol a normal part of life, as in all things in moderation.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Parents are helpless to prevent their children viewing pornography on the computers they allow them to keep in their bedrooms at night

    they allow them to keep in their bedrooms at night

    allow to keep in their bedrooms

    allow in their bedrooms

    ... anyone else see the problem as being right there and not the porn? Would you allow the kids to keep hunting knives in their bedrooms at night?

    ReplyDelete
  4. I wonder if there's any hope that the government's crazy porn filters will block everyone's access to the Daily Fail's website, afterall there's enough smut on there :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Indeed - if blocking legal web sites is to be allowed, I see no reason for an ISP forced to offer a filtering option not to include the Daily Mail web site within the block list. It would surely be up to the ISP to decide what goes in the block list.

      Delete