More on COPA
Some more on the recent judicial overturning of the Child Online Protection Act (COPA)--this comes to us from the lovely folks at Playfuls.com:
Is Your Child Searching for Online Porn?
One thing I've noticed about Playfuls.com is that they never seem to pass up the opportunity for an inflamatory headline. Nevertheless, their articles are usually pretty interesting.
In this case, I wanted to focus in on two specific things.
1) Backers of COPA are going to push for an appeal of this decision. Personally, I wish these people would all grow a brain and shut the fuck up, but I'm not holding my breath. Quoting from the article:
The Hughes quote is also interesting to me because it's the first time I've ever heard of this organization "Enough is Enough." Under what moss-encrusted rock did Playfuls find them, anyway? Or did I miss out on them simply because I don't watch television? Does this nation really need another whackjob right-wing front organization?
2) Here's another quote that I find particularly amusing:
Allow me to explain something: The very first thing that would have to happen in order for kids to answer a question like that truthfully is that they would have to admit to themselves what they were doing. Are they going to do that? And, if so, how exactly are researchers going to find that out? Has someone invented telepathy and not told me? Has someone forgotten the absolutely immense capacity for self-deception that human beings possess?
Of course, this leads to the obvious question of why kids would deceive themselves about this issue in the first place. Well, that's simple. When kids get the idea to take a peek at something they know they shouldn't be looking at, one thing that goes through their minds is, "what if I get caught?" They know full well that if they get caught, they're going to have to lie about it. And what's the best way to lie about something? Make up your story, make it convincing, and then believe it yourself, if you can.
That is why I find the contention that 66% of these kids came across porn accidentally and in an unwanted way laughable.
One thing I've noticed about Playfuls.com is that they never seem to pass up the opportunity for an inflamatory headline. Nevertheless, their articles are usually pretty interesting.
In this case, I wanted to focus in on two specific things.
1) Backers of COPA are going to push for an appeal of this decision. Personally, I wish these people would all grow a brain and shut the fuck up, but I'm not holding my breath. Quoting from the article:
"It doesn’t matter if the Republicans are in the majority or the Democrats. This issue is something both sides of the aisle feel strongly about," said Donna Rice Hughes of Enough Is Enough, an Internet pornography watchdog group, cited by Reuters.Notice how prudes almost always presume to speak for everyone? This is no exception. Hughes uses a clever but fairly transparent rhetorical dodge, putting the burden of dissent on the opposition--if we don't say anything, we are assumed to agree, a strategy used most effectively in situations where disagreement will result in maximum embarrassment to the dissenting side. Hughes even goes one better by failing to explicitly mention the position she's assuming for both sides, which implies it is so obviously correct that she doesn't even need to mention it. Well, screw that. While she is correct in assuming strong feelings about the issue, the truth is, I feel myself strongly in disagreement with her implied postion. Laws like COPA should not only be expunged from the books, but the dipshit legislators who foist them upon us should be voted out of office entirely.
The Hughes quote is also interesting to me because it's the first time I've ever heard of this organization "Enough is Enough." Under what moss-encrusted rock did Playfuls find them, anyway? Or did I miss out on them simply because I don't watch television? Does this nation really need another whackjob right-wing front organization?
2) Here's another quote that I find particularly amusing:
The exposure to porn occurs while simply browsing the Web and usually in an accidental manner, the study revealed. Among those questioned in the study, 42% have confessed that they have seen pornographic content (images or even short movies) in the last year. 66% of those who responded that exposure to porn occurred while they were Web-browsing have declared that they did not intentionally search for pornographic content and did not want it.Uh huh. All I can say is that a good chunk of those 66% percent were probably lying their little asses off. Seriously--how in the world can any legitimate researcher claim to know that kids aren't going to lie on a questionnaire like that? Kids know full well they're not supposed to look at porn online, so are they then going to admit that they went looking for it? Seriously? Who are these people kidding?
Allow me to explain something: The very first thing that would have to happen in order for kids to answer a question like that truthfully is that they would have to admit to themselves what they were doing. Are they going to do that? And, if so, how exactly are researchers going to find that out? Has someone invented telepathy and not told me? Has someone forgotten the absolutely immense capacity for self-deception that human beings possess?
Of course, this leads to the obvious question of why kids would deceive themselves about this issue in the first place. Well, that's simple. When kids get the idea to take a peek at something they know they shouldn't be looking at, one thing that goes through their minds is, "what if I get caught?" They know full well that if they get caught, they're going to have to lie about it. And what's the best way to lie about something? Make up your story, make it convincing, and then believe it yourself, if you can.
That is why I find the contention that 66% of these kids came across porn accidentally and in an unwanted way laughable.
posted by cke at 1:09 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home