tobicatPremium
join:2005-04-18
Tombstone, AZ | reply to whocares0
Re: WARNING, parents:your child @ school & porn sites And so what! If they do not see it there they are going down the street to some friends house and look there. And probably at the public library also. If they want to look they are gonna look and you ain't gonna stop it. A little one on one discussion on morals would be far better use of time.
--
7000s, satmex5, 1270, dlink wireless |
|
davePremium,MVM
join:2000-05-04
not in ohio
kudos:7 | Oh, that's just crap. I'm not a parent, but I'd say there's plenty of stuff on the Internet that I don't think the average primary school student needs to see. And I'm not talking about simple pictures of people fucking. |
|
 fatnesssubtleJanitor
join:2000-11-17
fishing
kudos:13
Bright House Netwo..
Earthlink DSL
TekSavvy
Forum Feature Requ..
Need Site Help
| The article is about 1 libraray computer operated by 1 librarian with an image filter that could be turned off. The supporting information is 2 girls interviewed in Kroger.
From these snippets, a news station is able to whip up parental concern about porn, and morals, and threats to children, in order to increase/maintain viewership.
This happens thousands of times across the country each year, and people just fall in line asking for more censorship on the basis of little or no information.
There's not nearly enough information in the article to tell if there's even a problem with that one school. Perhaps there is, perhaps there isn't. More information is certainly needed. Now that they're vilified in the press for being inadequate parents, I'd imagine the school is checking.
Meanwhile the censorship train is loading up again. All aboard. Gotta save the children.
--
Sure, that'll work.. |
|
| reply to tobicat
said by tobicat:And so what! If they do not see it there they are going down the street to some friends house and look there. And probably at the public library also. If they want to look they are gonna look and you ain't gonna stop it. A little one on one discussion on morals would be far better use of time. not to get into any arguments, but maybe IF some parents raised their children RIGHTtheir children would not even be thinking of porn in the 1st place,
But also believe that any public school, library,ect SHOULD block any type of porn,games,music,links that are offesive in language,image's or words[/b[ & and PARENTS HAVE A RIGHT to expect this type of protection for their children,you can call it CENSORSHIP,or freedom of speech or whatever, but when you,([B]NOT YOU PERSONALLY but a public school,library,ect) where my son or daughter is concerned, then you have no freedom speech around my loved one
--
TO learn is to ask questions,IF you ask a question,then YOU want to learn |
|
1 edit | reply to fatness
said by fatness:The article is about 1 libraray computer operated by 1 librarian with an image filter that could be turned off. The supporting information is 2 girls interviewed in Kroger. suggest you read the article again it is about a whole city,(and other cities)School districtsnot ONLY about 2 girls being interviewed at a krogers store
An Humble mother was concerned kids at her daughter's middle school could access porn sites on campus.
have a nice day, jazzy
ps. its not about ""a news station is able to whip up parental concern about porn,and morals"',
thats because SOME PARENTS,have no moral upbringing or concerns when it comes to "adult having babies" & parent having CHILDREN
--
TO learn is to ask questions,IF you ask a question,then YOU want to learn |
|
 SteveI know your IP addressConsultant
join:2001-03-10
Yorba Linda, CA
kudos:5 | reply to whocares0
said by whocares0: not to get into any arguments, but maybe IF some parents raised their children RIGHTtheir children would not even be thinking of porn in the 1st place, It goes beyond fantasy to think that anything but castration will keep teenaged boys from thinking about naked women.
Steve
--
Stephen J. Friedl • Unix Wizard • Microsoft Security MVP • Tustin, California USA • my web site |
|
davePremium,MVM
join:2000-05-04
not in ohio
kudos:7 Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to fatness
I agree that this is a very poorly researched and written article and it's whipping up the usual oh-my-god-a-nipple hysteria. (By the way, I wonder whether the 'image search' and the 'filter on/off option' was simply the usual Google search page; but the writer was too uninformed to be able to tell us).
But I don't think that the response of "so what, they'll see it anyway" is an appropriate position to take either, and that's the part I was replying to. Actually, that's pretty much off-topic and I probably shouldn't have bothered replying to tobicat  . |
|
| reply to Steve
It goes beyond fantasy to think that anything but castration will keep teenaged boys from thinking about naked women.
we are not talking about "fantasies",
(heck i'am still scraping mustard & egg yokes off the ceiling fan from last party-say WHAAAA,)
but seriously
we are talking about a public school/library allowing children access to pron sites
--
TO learn is to ask questions,IF you ask a question,then YOU want to learn |
|
|
|
SteveI know your IP addressConsultant
join:2001-03-10
Yorba Linda, CA
kudos:5 | said by whocares0: we are talking about a public school/library allowing children access to pron sites Yes, but you made the claim that the mere desire for porn was reflective of parenting, and I think that undermines much of the rest of your argument.
--
Stephen J. Friedl • Unix Wizard • Microsoft Security MVP • Tustin, California USA • my web site |
|
| no the article is about a parent TRYING to protect her daughter& i am & many parents are in agreement on that.
not about
but you made the claim that the mere desire for porn was reflective of parenting,quit trying to put something into a reply that is not written
--
TO learn is to ask questions,IF you ask a question,then YOU want to learn |
|
SteveI know your IP addressConsultant
join:2001-03-10
Yorba Linda, CA
kudos:5 | said by whocares0:quit trying to put something into a reply that is not written said by you, earlier :
not to get into any arguments, but maybe IF some parents raised their children RIGHT their children would not even be thinking of porn in the 1st place Perhaps I misunderstood your argument.
--
Stephen J. Friedl • Unix Wizard • Microsoft Security MVP • Tustin, California USA • my web site |
|
| i give up
IF you don't UNDERSTAND the problem,then you cannot possibly understand how to solve it,or protect our children
--
TO learn is to ask questions,IF you ask a question,then YOU want to learn |
|
SteveI know your IP addressConsultant
join:2001-03-10
Yorba Linda, CA
kudos:5 | said by whocares0:IF you don't UNDERSTAND the problem,then you cannot possibly understand how to solve it,or protect our children I understand the problem perfectly well.
I believe that keeping kids from harmful images is a fine idea. Schools need to do some level of filtering so that education is not a porn-filled day, but I don't take the position that seeing the occasional two people gettin' it on is really all that damaging for a teenager.
There is also only so much that one can do in a large school of 2,000 kids to keep them from doing things they should not, and overreacting to images of naked people sends the message to kids that adults have a poor sense of perspective when it comes to what's important and what's not.
It's in the same class as this "zero-tolerance" nonsense regarding drugs: it's a dangerous message to give children.
But you've said that if parents raised their kids right, the kids would not want porn in the first place, and I think this reflects upon your understanding of adolescents, and in that manner casts a pall over the rest of your assessment of the issue.
If you want to pretend you didn't say that, well, I guess that's your prerogative.
Steve
--
Stephen J. Friedl • Unix Wizard • Microsoft Security MVP • Tustin, California USA • my web site |
|
| reply to whocares0
said by whocares0:i give up IF you don't UNDERSTAND the problem,then you cannot possibly understand how to solve it,or protect our children No filter can be fully effective in blocking access to porn sites. People who expect schools and libraries to have 100% effective filters in place to do that are simply living in a fantasy world.
Also, what some people call "porn" varies considerably. Some people would call anything they find objectionable, including sex education materials, "porn" and go on crusades for censorship. In the end, nothing can take the place of having the kids themselves well adjusted enough to turn away from truly pornographic stuff when they stumble upon it. The stumbling upon that stuff is inevitable--it is how kids react to it that should be a realistic target for the efforts here, not an impossible sanitizing of the whole world in which they live. |
|
| claud,Also, what some people call "porn" varies considerably. Some people would call anything they find objectionable,including sex education materials,
understood as you saying good sound argument,,what some people call "porn" varies considerably,
and yes nothing will be done UNLESS parents who care about their child's education ban togeather & to force the pron out of the schools & libraries,
THERE is a time & place for everything but a public school & a library isn't the place for porn
--
TO learn is to ask questions,IF you ask a question,then YOU want to learn |
|
 PhoenixAZGet A MacPremium
join:2004-01-04
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:1
2 edits | said by whocares0:claud,Also, what some people call "porn" varies considerably. Some people would call anything they find objectionable,including sex education materials, understood as you saying good sound argument,,what some people call "porn" varies considerably, and yes nothing will be done UNLESS parents who care about their child's education ban togeather & to force the pron out of the schools & libraries, THERE is a time & place for everything but a public school & a library isn't the place for porn As in a coalition. You expect everything to be 100% perfect? Nothing is this perfect..and that includes internet filters.
And I think you are acting PARANOID about your children, not everyone who uses the school computers or the library just to look at porn. One image isn't going to damage a HIGH SCHOOL kid in any way, shape, or form.
Also, you can't say you were an angel child when you were in your teenage years either.
--
Josh| About Me |
|
 JeffreyWilpon please sell the MetsPremium
join:2002-12-24
Long Island
kudos:3
 ·Vonage
 ·Optimum Online
·magicjack.com
| reply to whocares0
I'm smelling a thread-lock here, but any school or parent can put as much computer-filtering applications they want, but kids will still find a way to access what they're looking for.
Lets forget about Internet porn for a second.
When I was in high school from 1989 till 1993, the Internet really wasn't what it is today. If y'all can remember back that far, you might remember such terminology as "BBS's", "PCBoard", "14,400", "USR Robotics Dual Standard", and so on. Sure, a few people (like myself and some friends) used our 14,400's to dial into a local BBS to download some porn. I also checked the weather, read news, and researched.
After my high school years, I went off to an accredited institution, earning a degree in Economics, hold two jobs right now, and have a wonderful girlfriend and great family life. I turned out just fine, and I'm proud of who I am.
The vast majority of kids when I went to high school didn't even have computers yet, much less were they on the Internet as it existed then. Yet kids still fooled around in the bathrooms, and , people still got pregnant at the ripe old age of 17! Who woulda thunk it?
It's a reasonable assumption to want to filter content in schools for all sorts of reasons, but filtering adult content to "protect the children" is a battle that will always be lost. The argument that "bad kids only look at porn" is something I have an issue with, both personally and professionally.
Use filtering to minimize abuse on school machines and hope for a civil outcome.
--
"When you get lost in your imaginatory vagueness, your foresight becomes a nimble vagrant."
[Ramblings] [RIP Millie 1993-2006]
|
|
quatrixPremium
join:2005-02-11
Davie, FL
kudos:2 | reply to whocares0
said by whocares0:not to get into any arguments, but maybe IF some parents raised their children RIGHT their children would not even be thinking of porn in the 1st place, Raise them right so they wouldn't even think of porn? Do you castrate your high school kids to cut off any sexual instincts? And what's the deal with all the bold tags? |
|
1 edit | reply to whocares0
said by whocares0:IF some parents raised their children RIGHT their children would not even be thinking of porn in the 1st place... What does it mean to "raise your children RIGHT"?
And what the hell has that to do with porn, anyways?
--
Si naciste pa' martillo del cielo te caen los clavos |
|
| reply to whocares0
said by whocares0:But also believe that any public school, library,ect SHOULD block any type of porn,games,music,links that are offesive in language,image's or words[/b[ & and PARENTS HAVE A RIGHT to expect this type of protection for their children,you can call it CENSORSHIP,or freedom of speech or whatever, but when you,([B]NOT YOU PERSONALLY but a public school,library,ect) where my son or daughter is concerned, then you have no freedom speech around my loved one So, are you the type that is in favor of banning classic books such as Huckleberry Finn and Catcher in the Rye because they may contain "offensive language?" And exactly who is in charge of deeming what is "offensive" and what isn't? Banning pornography from public school computers is one thing, but the rest of what you are asking for is downright scary and represents everything that is wrong with "parenting" in this country at present. |
|
