Reply to post:

UK's lords want more details on adult website check plans

tr1ck5t3r
Trollface

What can of worms this subject is.

So suppose someone passes the age verification process to watch some porn online, some websites have extreme content.

Secondly as pointed out by someone above, most teenagers will always get access to porn, in my day it was nicking porn magazines that sold in the school playground but these were always your newsagent soft porn content and now a days any kid staying up late to watch Channel 4 can see similar using the online players on their smart phone or watching it on their tv in their bedroom. The tech savvy will also be using VPN's to bypass any censorship, and could fuel a rise in hacking in order to view said explicit material.

So would it be more sensible to have perhaps a two tier approach to porn, like soft porn that's in line with the age of consent, and then the more extreme porn accessible from a later age, like maybe 21 or 25? The softporn aspect could be a way to educate kids better on whats acceptable sexual activity.

Currently the age of consent does seem somewhat hypocritical considering sexting teens in a "loving" relationship can end up on the sex offenders register as well. Loving is quoted merely because some adults typically parents will denigrate a teenagers claim to being "in love"

If the Cannabis medical data is correct, the human brain doesn't stop developing until around the age of 25, so perhaps it would make sense to have extreme/hard core porn banned until this age, so that its not burnt into the retina and brain cells of future sexual deviants?

Of course, another point to this whole debate about viewing pixels depicting sexual activity is that, does having access to fapping material make someone less likely to commit a sex crime by not being so sexually frustrated? And considering the parental controls already provided by ISP's, anyone can go on Reddit.com, search for NSFW, and then end up on gyfcat.com and imgur.com for porn ranging from soft to hardcore verging on extreme. There's no age check for gyfcat.com or imgur.com, less than 10 seconds to gain access to this sort of material.

Do you think kids wont tell each other how to access these sites bypassing the current ISP parental controls in place?

On the main page of imgur.com a bestiality image involving the British constabulary, I couldn't make this up if I tried.

Warning NSFW, but you could test your companies censorship systems out and report your findings to the IT dept and your line manager if you so wanted.

http://imgur.com/t/nsfw/ON8sa2U

Besides the BBC do often provide their own primetime documentaries depicting animals having sex as well.

I dont think blanket bans are a good approach especially considering the oversight GCHQ have on the computer networks, and in your home accessing your motion detector for your games consoles, your smart phone camera's & mic's and any cctv/webcams you might have on your computer or laptop.

In a way its no different to kids drinking alcohol under age they will always do this if they really want to, whilst ignoring the fact that peer pressure can also exploit the naïve kids into actions they don't want to do, just like taking drugs.

In another way, I suppose it boils down to viewing your kids as personal possessions until you disregard them because some mythical age limit has been reached even though intelligence is more than just IQ results measuring spatial intelligence when considering emotional intelligence as well.

Besides, if the viewing of sex is so bad by virtue of these mandatory control mechanisms, should kids be making decisions of what sex they want to transgender into whilst still at primary school, or does having a GP & others involved in this decision making suddenly make it all right?

A highly emotive can a worms this topic be!

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019