14/03/2003

Last week Val, Darren and I got stuck into the issues of Internet censorship and public access to pornography, with a focus on how they affect children. At the end of my 'blog I invited comments, expecting mostly short responses. My assumption was correct: many of the emails I received were very short, along the lines of 'censorship sucks'. But two responses from PCA readers, J. Crockett and M. O'Connell, pondered the issue at length, and I've reprinted their emails here, with their permission:

J. Crockett said:
'I agree 100 percent with what you are saying. I think the issue is more to do with parents and legislators not coming to terms with what age we live in. Nasties are going to be around regardless -- where there is a will there is a way. Kids will be kids. The more knowledge we arm them with the better off they will be.

Of course, there are things they shouldn't do: ie. drugs and excessive drinking, because they harms their development. But drug abuse is another issue in itself.

The fact of the matter is that kids will find ways too look at 'porn' because they think they are missing out on something. Kids should be more educated on relationships, love and friendship. Yes they need guidance but we should let them work and deal things for themselves.

In my honest opinion censorship will make things worse. People are so caught up in the little things they forget the big picture and how we are all affected. The Government is ineffective and so are the ancient laws that we have in this country.

So what if a teenager finds a porn clip off the Net? He/she has probably done it to answer their own questions that they couldn't ask their parents for fear of being yelled at.

Regardless we all need to start from square one again.'

M. O'Connell said:
Like you, I do not like real porn and it would not be so bad on the Net if the entry pages were not so explicit and they did not constantly open more and more pages.

I am against censorship and, as almost all porn sites appear to require payment, if we could get rid of the shocking graphics on the intro pages then most of the problem would be solved (hopefully). Adults could pay and enter if they wish - but I would not waste a cent.

I don't know what effect is has on kids. Most will show a little interest and some will hunt it down. I see small kids go directly to that section in the newsagents and stand there giggling. The magazines at the newsagent aren't as bad as the porn sites but... I sometimes think that in the 'good old days' when I was a kid, it may have been worse having absolutely no sex education at all.

I knew nothing about it and my first foray into the unknown was many years before I was ready. Maybe they are better off now, although it may be some of the reason that women are not treated with the same respect that we did.

The only other thing that I can see that would help is a real tightening of access at the home PC, such as a parental administrator's account and a total filtering of all but specified mail addresses. It could be the same as in Hotmail, but only allow the administrator to set the parameters -- with no ability to override.'

P.S: I believe informative and positive education is the key -- not the old-school message of 'here's how babies are made, now wait until you're older'.

By 'old-school', I mean my old school in the 1980s, where 'sex ed' was a token one hour lesson in year 9 about how babies are made -- with no mention of safe sex, gender equality, the varieties of sexualities or any insight into how to enjoy a positive and sexually-interesting relationship.

But I still don't think our children should turn to porn for their sex education.