The Sun’s Big Debate : Should the UK Follow Iceland and Ban Porn?

Professional child abuse victims/campaigners/hags Shy Keenan and Sara Payne demand that the UK stops internet porn corrupting our innocents :

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4805478/Stop-porn-on-the-net-corrupting-adolescents-idea-of-sex.htm

VIOLENT online porn is set to be banned in Iceland – and some say Britain should follow its lead.

Iceland’s move – a first for a Western democracy – is designed to stop children seeing brutal or “hateful” porn images.

But here Sun Justice campaigners Dr Sara Payne and Shy Keenan argue a full ban on all web users is not needed for Britain.

What IS necessary, they say, is that our laws are changed so that our children are protected from the vile material that is all too easily available.

IF you want to access adult services in the real world – whether its cigarettes, alcohol, or pornography – the law says you must provide valid proof of age.

Why on earth are the same child protection laws not universally applied in the virtual world of the internet?

Our innocent but naturally curious and computer-smart children are paying the price.

The NSPCC say the average child now has access to five internet gadgets, so a parental lock on the family PC is no longer enough.

And research shows that exposing children to pornography is emotionally corrosive and can cause serious emotional health and developmental problems.

We’re not talking about seeing nipples, which we don’t have a problem with.

We are talking about seeing male and female sexual organs, intercourse and violent or dehumanising sex.

Notice that the 'campaigners' are careful to point out that 'nipples' are o.k., given that the Sun still makes money from printing pictures of topless 'page 3 girls' (and only a few years ago many of them were 16).

Notice also that the hags do not mention anything about violence per se, just 'sexual violence'. Kids watching other kids being bullied and beaten half to death, or getting a daily thrill out of watching men having their heads sawn off by jihadists, this is all good clean innocent fun. Not to mention paedocrite rags like The Sun shoved into children's faces with lurid headlines every day such as 'Hang the Pedos' or 'Savile had sex with dead children'.

7 thoughts on “The Sun’s Big Debate : Should the UK Follow Iceland and Ban Porn?

  1. It is not the responsibility of the State to protect your children; it is the responsibility of parents to protect their children. Transferring parental duties to the State will result in...heck, you already know. I find myself working harder and harder to protect my children from the State...
    Personally, I'm a big fan of content labeling: publish anything you want - anything at all - but label those contents accurately so I can decide whether or not to consume it.

  2. Southern Man I couldn't say it any better. In addition, I can't imagine how this is even possible on a societal level. Porn makes too much money, and there are numerous ways to bypass ISP filters already.

  3. Alan Vaughn

    @Southern Man

    It is not the responsibility of the State to protect your children; it is the responsibility of parents to protect their children. Transferring parental duties to the State will result in…heck, you already know.

    Thanks for commenting on our blog, we hope you will again.
    You're dead right, we need to get the feminist state out of our private lives, our bedrooms our THOUGHTS - which they are even policing (by watching what people do online)...
    Feminism has literally erased what was once a fundamental human right: the right to a private life.

  4. Interesting. When I read this a sympathized a bit with the plight of the parents that want to keep their children's internet gadgets under control. Even I needed the AntiFeminist's reminder that there is real violence, violent immigrant children and the occasional anti-social hooligan kid who threatens violence, unchecked. Quite likely fatherless, of having parents that are up to no good.

    it is interesting how there is a consensus, even here, that parents ought to have the right to keep their children off certain content on the internet.

    So it would be interesting to think of alternatives. Government could subsidize filters, that ought to have OPTIONS as to what to filter.

    Unfortunately, the filters ought to have the options that parents demand. That might include a Muslim filter, for example.

    Now I see various problems:

    there always will be one kid that has no filters. Be it because dad is a Libertarian, be it because mom is an antisocial that does not care. She, or more likely, he will have access to all the forbidden goodies. All the others will want to access his iPhone, or worse, get his downloads transferred via Bluetooth.

    That looks like a problem. It will be aggravated by laws that seriously criminalize the kid as a porn distributor.

    That leads us to the question: maybe legalized corporal punishment, spanking, is more humane then putting such a kid on a sex offender list. And such spanking might be the only means to control violence prone antisocial bullies in general.

    Instead, in most of the Western world, spanking even by the parents, is being criminalized.

    We see the result: truant, violent, antisocial children. The terror of the other good, decent, well behaved children.

    This is the real problem. Much more important then even the worst photos.

    Now, add into this equation the fact that some kids would prefer to see nudity and sexuality of kids THEIR OWN AGE (which is encouraged by Romeo and Juliet exemptions). Now these kids maybe can bang children their own age. But God beware they keep photos of it. Producers, distributors, and possessors of child porn. Terrible.

    I always wonder: how can you explain to a kid: each time you look into the bath room mirror, you see heinous child porn (your own nudity), the worst crime in the world. How will s/he understand that? If you actually masturbate, then the mirror will show the worst of the worst, the most heinous crime, true child porn engaging in true sexual activity.

    I wish society worried about true non-consensual bullying violence, instead about harmless doctor plays or self pictures.

  5. "Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words (and pictures) can never hurt me"

    The forgotten truth, the forgotten wisdom of the past.

    Libertarians think that the only obligation government has is to protect you from violent bullies that are stronger then you. This is being forgotten, instead there is this ridiculous fear of sexuality.

  6. Deano

    Did I really read:

    "And research shows that exposing children to pornography is emotionally corrosive and can cause serious emotional health and developmental problems."???

    This would undoubtedly be peer reviewed research carried out in controlled conditions. Our feminist friends wouldn't just make up results to suit their opinions surely. So why aren't those researchers in jail getting boiling water poured over them as they deserve? They knowingly exposed children to pornography.

    There is just one specific case where I will agree with them - innocent kids should NEVER be exposed to images of these repulsive hags in the nude. Now that would leave you psychologically damaged.

  7. theantifeminist

    Post author

    “And research shows that exposing children to pornography is emotionally corrosive and can cause serious emotional health and developmental problems.”???

    This would undoubtedly be peer reviewed research carried out in controlled conditions. Our feminist friends wouldn’t just make up results to suit their opinions surely. So why aren’t those researchers in jail getting boiling water poured over them as they deserve? They knowingly exposed children to pornography.

    Absolutely right Deano. I think I recall posting something about such a 'study' a year or two ago, the methodolgy of which was so ridiculous it beggered belief. If I remember rightly it involved sending out questionnaires to parents of the Christian Mother's Union or such like.

    Even the slightly more 'scientific' feminist studies that supposedly have found porn to be damaging to children rest entirely upon dubious evaluative judgements as to what constitutes harm, usually involving the misleading use of language. For example, they often claim that it has been shown that porn damages such things as the 'self-esteem' of a child, and then if you look more closely at the actual 'research' findings, you see that they have defined lowered self-esteem in such ridiculous ways as 'often thinking about how sexually attractive you are to the opposite sex'.

    Complete and utter junk science.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>