Children and porn

[McKenna]

I think I'd still agree with the man, its not terribly easy to surf porn for free as a teenager. Finding this or that isn't too bad, but searching in a major search engine? Short of specific site names, all one gets back is garbled router sites and thumbnails and advertisements.

This sounds dangerously close to a whining-because-he-can't-find-free-porn teenager, Joe. Careful.

*tease,tease*

 

[R. Richard]

Children are rarely interested in porn. Teenagers are interested in porn, though, and they will get to it, whether their parents want it or not.

Well said Lauren! Teenagers will get porn. The harder that parents try to keep porn from them, the harder they will try to get the porn.

IMHO allowing a teenager to have access to a LIMITED (and screened) amount of porn is the way to go. That way, when the teenager sees porn from other sources it is no big deal.

 

[TheEarl]

This sounds dangerously close to a whining-because-he-can't-find-free-porn teenager, Joe. Careful.

*tease,tease*

Having only just turned 20, I still have vivid memories of the search for porn. Yes, you can find the occasional preview, but on dial-up and with no credit card, the only sites I could find as a young man were a place called "Sexy Sue's" and Lit. Hence why I'm here.

Never heard of the GorillaLinks place and, unless it's new, that must mean it doesn't Google/Altavista/MSN Search/Lycos/Yahoo well. Not that I searched most of the internet in my youth or anything. Ahem.

The Earl

 

[Weird Harold]

Having only just turned 20, I still have vivid memories of the search for porn. Yes, you can find the occasional preview, but on dial-up and with no credit card, the only sites I could find as a young man were a place called "Sexy Sue's" and Lit. Hence why I'm here.

I agree that finding and gaining access to a complete site is difficult -- not just for teens, but for dirty old men on a tight budget.

However, I'm much more concerned about the content of some of those free previews, free movies, and most importantly, Pop-Up Hell that the search for a free site leads people into.

I've seen more offensive (and potentially traumatizing to young minds) Porn by accident than I ever have on purpose.

 

[McKenna]

I've seen more offensive (and potentially traumatizing to young minds) Porn by accident than I ever have on purpose.

This is so very true. I can honestly say I've run across some very disturbing images/videos; the sad thing is, I can never seem to forget them either.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

I'm not sure if I know what "offensive and potentially traumatizing to young minds" porn is. Also, I was a teenager until a year and a half ago and never thought that it was that difficult to find it online for free.

But difficult or not, as I said, teenagers will always find it. Personally, I think it's wrong to try to limit or control their access in any way, just as I think it's wrong to facilitate or encourage it. That way, kids will find what they need when they need it (and not before or after they're ready for it.)

Boys (and girls) will be boys (and girls) and that's just fine. People just need to relax and let nature take its course.

 

[TheEarl]

To be honest, I've never seen anything hugely disturbing on the net. I know for a fact that it's out there, but somehow it seems to have missed me. Strange considering all the sites I've been to in the past.

The Earl

 

[TheEarl]

I'm not sure if I know what "offensive and potentially traumatizing to young minds" porn is. Also, I was a teenager until a year and a half ago and never thought that it was that difficult to find it online for free.

But difficult or not, as I said, teenagers will always find it. Personally, I think it's wrong to try to limit or control their access in any way, just as I think it's wrong to facilitate or encourage it. That way, kids will find what they need when they need it (and not before or after they're ready for it.)

Boys (and girls) will be boys (and girls) and that's just fine. People just need to relax and let nature take its course.

Well said.

The Earl

 

[Weird Harold]

I'm not sure if I know what "offensive and potentially traumatizing to young minds" porn is.

What? You've never stumbled into a pop-up with a full-screen advert for a self-mutilation site with a graphic sample of the content?

You've never run into anything that provoked an immediate "Ewww Gross!" reaction or made you want to throw up?

Some of the stuff that pop-up hell has thrown at me is bad enough when I see it -- It's enough to inspire nightmares; especially in children.

Not every child will encounter somthing like that, and not every child who does will be traumatized by it -- but more than a few WILL be traumatized by having an unsolicited picture of something like somone's bloody testicles and the bleeding wound where they were ripped from filling their computer screen without warning.

That image is an extreme example, but one that is taken a General Board Thread with an innocuous title.

You have either been very lucky or are very callous not to understand the concept of "offensive and potentially traumatic" to young minds."

 

[tolyk]

I didn't catch up on every post made, but I read through a lot of them, and all I have to reply with is a story.

I saw my first porn movie when I was 12 years old (god bless older brothers ) and regularly saw movie and magazines from then on. I wasn't turned into some sex craving teenager, I still had my morals and innocence (hell, I still feel innocent in some ways). I never discussed any of it with my parents, or older brothers, I knew very much what was going on in the video the first time I saw it, and had known about such stuff prior to that (can't remember what time I became 'aware')... Yet, I still waited to have sex. I waited until I was with the woman who I knew I was going to marry (I had always said marriage first, but I kind of lost my conviction after I proposed.. whoops)

Now, what I gather from my own experience is that having access to porn did not turn me into a pervert. Hell, I didn't need porn for that, I was already a sick, twisted freak before that Now, do I think I'd give my son access to porn? Sure, why the hell not? If he can go through the trouble of finding my stash in the first place, and is interested in it, he can have at it. But he better put it all back *grin*

(Then again, my son is only 4 right now, and doesn't live with me.. hmmm.. finding that stash might be a wee bit difficult from 2000 miles away.... But then again, I'm of the mind that he will choose to come live with me when he turns of age to make that choice.. just because I'm a kick ass dad.. heh)

 

[Lauren Hynde]

What? You've never stumbled into a pop-up with a full-screen advert for a self-mutilation site with a graphic sample of the content?

You've never run into anything that provoked an immediate "Ewww Gross!" reaction or made you want to throw up?

Some of the stuff that pop-up hell has thrown at me is bad enough when I see it -- It's enough to inspire nightmares; especially in children.

Not every child will encounter somthing like that, and not every child who does will be traumatized by it -- but more than a few WILL be traumatized by having an unsolicited picture of something like somone's bloody testicles and the bleeding wound where they were ripped from filling their computer screen without warning.

That image is an extreme example, but one that is taken a General Board Thread with an innocuous title.

You have either been very lucky or are very callous not to understand the concept of "offensive and potentially traumatic" to young minds."

Maybe you have forgotten what it is to be a teenager.

I remember some (the majority) of my colleagues in biology class, jumping at the opportunity to see an autopsy in loco.

Throw-up gross images are just that: gross. If you don't find them sexually arousing, they're not sexual. If you're a teenager looking for porn and stumble upon it, you're more likely to just dismiss it quickly and continue your never-ending quest. In any case, they're hardly traumatising material.

You keep referring to children. Yes, children are probably more susceptible to traumatising pictures and videos. But children don't look for porn.

Relax.

 

[Weird Harold]

You keep referring to children. Yes, children are probably more susceptible to traumatising pictures and videos. But children don't look for porn.

Yes, I keep referring to "children" because i'm not talking about the porn that underage persons go looking for, I'm talking about the unsolicited pop-ups that can be forced on an otherwise innocent search of the web.

It's bad enough that adults with a very low "squick tolerance" are subjected to such intrusions. When children are bombarded with images that did NOT seek and aren't emotionally prepared for the results can range from "oops" to devastating.

AmoralAuthor provided an anecdote of a 12-year-old girl subjected to the potential trauma of pop-up hell AND the probable trauma of thinking she'd trashed her grandmother's computer.

Unsupervised, unrestricted access to the internet is a bad idea for "offspring of less than the age of majority" (since you object to "children") But totally sheltering them from reality is almost as bad.

Parents should find a balance between keeping their offspring away from unsolicited images -- whether simply naked bodies or maximum gross-out fators. The BEST way to do that, IMHO, is to Help them satisfy their curiosity by steering them to technologically safe sites and away from the malicious sites in pop-up hell -- and then being open to, if not actively encouraging of, discussion about questions the sites raise.

If Parents tke steps to satisfy curiosity as soon as it manifests -- usually in childhood -- the search for porn and/or gross-out sites after childhood is pretty much a non-issue; the teenager/young adult will at least know how to find what they're looking for and what to think of it when they find it.

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

That brings about the question... what is punishment in such a situation?

 

[Weird Harold]

That brings about the question... what is punishment in such a situation?

The quote button would help us understand which "situation" you're referring to.

An unsupervised 12 year-old caught in pop-up hell probably doesn't need any specific punishment other than being caught in pop-up hell and locking up grandma's computer -- it's not a situation any reasonably intelligent 12-year-old is going to let happen twice.

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Originally posted by Weird Harold
The quote button would help us understand which "situation" you're referring to.

How polite. *rolls eyes*

Teenagers looking up particularly bad porn. Mutilations, abuse of women, etc. Its not like a bad act, more like the actualization of bad thoughts... hard to nail down what is punishable.

 

[SeaCat]

[I think how you define "porn" is important to the definition of what is permissible, though.
[/B]

There you go my friend. This, I think, is the most important aspect of the whole argument/discusion. What is porn?

Is it the naked body? In that case lets ban National Geographic and othr highly educational magazines. Is it Necrophilia, S&M, Rape, etc.? Shall we ban music?

The whole thing boils down to education. Mainly from the parents on what they believe is acceptable. (I can remember seeing Playboy when I was ten and being bored by it. I had seen much better at the local swimming hole. I also remember seeing other magazines and wondering at why they would show things like bondage. It all depends on what you are taught while growing up.)

Unfortunately in American society, (here limited to the United States,) parents are limited by law as to what they can teach their children. If they teach their children that nudity is acceptable in certain situations, and the child tells other the parents can be charged. (Much the same with disciplining their children. They can only do so within socialy acceptable guidline which have been proven not to wor. However the parents can be held accountable if these guidlines don't work.) In the United States of America if you allow your children under the age of 18 to view nudity, you can be charged with either Child Pornography, or contributing to the delinquency(sp) of a Minor. All it takes is a slip of the tongue on the part of the child. It doesn't matter that the child will see and hear worse from the open airwaves longbefore they are 18. (Maybe ths is why we have so many kids having kids?)

Unfortunately trying t change these laws is not a good idea. If you attempt it you will be branded a child pornographer or a Pedophile. (Try explaining that one.)

Is there a cure for this? Yes there is, but I fear it will never happen. It would take the common person waking up, and politicians not worrying about getting voted back into office.

Cat

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Originally posted by SeaCat
Shall we ban music?

Sure. I don't care for it, and if it makes everyone else uncomfortable, that means I'm closer to winning.

Heh.

 

[GingerV]

It strikes me that half the arguments against teens surfing for porn here could as easily just be arguments against pop up ads in general.

If you get rid of those (and as a completely naive person about programming of all sorts, I can blythely offer that solution), do you get rid of part of the problem? And if so, are the popups accidently exposing kids to something they didn't search for and/or freezing the computer actually tangential to the issue? Alternataively, wouldn't actually providing Playboys (or whatever) prevent some kids going on a random search for stuff and entering popup hell?

Random thoughts on an early morning. Destroy them at will, I'm not attached to any of them.

G

 

[Weird Harold]

How polite. *rolls eyes*

Would yu have preferred I was rude and abusive?

Teenagers looking up particularly bad porn. Mutilations, abuse of women, etc. Its not like a bad act, more like the actualization of bad thoughts... hard to nail down what is punishable.

Punishment would depend on what parental rules they violated in their search for gross-out porn.

If a parent gives their offspring unrestricted access without rules, then there's nothing "punishable" going on from a parental standpoint about looking for or at anything -- barring the download of illegal content that would cause a legal problem for either the parent of child; i.e. leaving child porn on the computer so it gets confiscated.

If it done against specific restrictions, like being on the computer without permission or supervision, then the violation of restrictions is what should be punished.

My major concern would be finding out WHY that particular type of content was being sought and "punishment" tends to be counter-productive to that end.

 

[Weird Harold]

It strikes me that half the arguments against teens surfing for porn here could as easily just be arguments against pop up ads in general.

If you get rid of those (and as a completely naive person about programming of all sorts, I can blythely offer that solution), do you get rid of part of the problem?

I'd dearly love to ban pop-up completely from the Internet, but it's not really likely to happen any time soon.

For me, pop-up hell is just a highly visible argument for supervised surfing -- or at least clearly defined restrictions. That part of porn-surfing is hazardous to computers as well as to curious minds.

And if so, are the popups accidently exposing kids to something they didn't search for and/or freezing the computer actually tangential to the issue? Alternataively, wouldn't actually providing Playboys (or whatever) prevent some kids going on a random search for stuff and entering popup hell?

They're tangental to a the issue of a deliberate search for porn -- a bit like teaching your kid where the hidden rocks and undertows are in the local swimming hole and teaching them how to avoid them and/or deal with them if they get into them anyway.

They're not so tangental to the issue of controlling what your children see on the web. I've encountered sexually explicit pop-ups while looking for relatively innocuous things -- most recently while trying to find a picture of Serena Williams controversial "tennis boots." It was a case of having "safe search" turned off in google (which is fairly easy to do for anyone who has access to google.)

Parents need to know enough about their offsprings' surfing to know whether they surf with "safe search off" and whether they should permit it or not. Of course, that pretty much requires that parents pay attention to their children and what their children are doing.

A subscription to Playboy (or a password to Playboy.com) is, IMHO, a good way to derail the desire to get around restrictions on surfing -- at least those based on simple curiosity.

 

[sweetnpetite]

The way I was raised was: if I'm old enough to want to know more about something, if I'm resourceful enough to get to it, I'm old enough to know it. Trying to stop me is counterproductive and a waste of time.

I agree with this.

Growing up, there were few limits placed on what we could read or watch on TV (and we had HBO!!!) what we where too young to handle generally went right over our heads.

Rather than trying to be a childs buddy, I would allow him/her to descreetly procure his own porn without over-reating or embarrasing him/her and direct said child to some truly educational sites, such as Planned Parenthood or other health and/or relationships sites. I will admit that I would be more than willing to take advantage of there purient interest to get them there. (look, naked people!)

Let them find what they find, without to much fuss, but direct them to some other stuff to ballance out the fantasy with the reality. Both are healthy and necessary in the proper amounts.

 

[Marsipanne]

I didn't know how to have sex until sex-ed in school. We did a big project on sex and pregnancy etc. when we were 12, I think. The funniest video I watched was when some guy (probably very broke) had a teensy camera inserted INSIDE his penis and we watched the passage of the sperm inside the penis. Light at the end of the tunnel, indeed. Also saw the inside of a woman's vagina.

I was, and still am, the person most interested in porn, amongst my friends. I knew more than people who had actually had sex. I think the how-tos on lit can be pretty useful, actually. Those are educational. Visual pornography isn't, but written pornography may be in some cases.

 

[Erlikkhan]

When I was six I told my mother the joke about "Johnny Fuck Her Faster" that I had heard from my older brother. I had no idea what is was about but laughed out loud with his friends when he told it. I never could understand why he beat the crap out of me the next day. At age 11 one of my friends told me babies were made when a guy fucked a woman in the ass and their piss mixed with her shit. I didn't even know they had cunts so I believed it until I was 12 and was given some pocket comics showing women getting fucked and performing blow jobs. My mother quickly confiscated these, convinced that I was abnormal. At thirteen I found some fuck magazines in a neighbor's trash and used these for years to masturbate. At 15 my brother invited me to see an 8mm black and white porn movie in his friend's basement. Later that year I got my first stinky finger from the girl across the street and didn't wash it for three days.

Bottom line... porn is bad for kids. Look at what I have become!

 

[phar]

Hey marsipanne.... hows it goin, long time no see. btw, i'm up for that game of chess on msn if you fancy it anytime

i think porn is a part of most people's lives, be it in pictures or writing (is written material concidered pornagraphic? I suppose it could be argued that in a lot of ways it could actually be more explicit than pictures... i don't know)
I think almost everyone would at the very least be curious about pornagraphic material, i'm a guy and not that i discuss this much but i don't know a single friend who is a guy who denies that he masturbates.... and i think we can agree that porn helps.
The only thing i can think of that would cause prople to abstain from this would be his/her faith, which personally i think is ...STUPID. And the notion that kids(or anyone) should be punshed for accessing this material is absurd. I used to live in a third world country and i'm sure you guys have heard that there are some nations where the punishment for viewing pornography is to blind you.

 

[cantdog]

I mentioned the "Visible Body" model kits from the 1950's in my last post. I went to google to see if I could find and image and.or link for the younger generation to explain what I was talking about.
<>
but it seems that they're not even collectibles amenable to an easy search key.

I have seen "Vintage Toys" catalogs wherein Visible Man and Visible Woman are indeed collectibles. Add "Vintage toys" or Antique Toys to your searches in a couple of permutations.

cantdog