DavCam's War on Porn

I got all fired up about this on Monday and was all "I'm so going to blog about this", then ended up in a bit of a pointless debate going round in circles and have consequently lost a lot of momentum.

Bottom line is, for me anyway, this is the thin end of a wedge. Once the government starts dictating what we can and can't access on the internet without giving our express permission, its just a slippery slope before they are using those powers to 'shield' us from political dissent and anti government sentiment. It's admittedly a pretty theoretical risk, but I bet you that people in other countries where it has actually happened thought that too.

I don't really want to invoke Godwin's Law, but there has never really been a time when I have felt more like doing so.

But I'll stick with just c+p the arguments I wrote out earlier. More or less anyway. I'll stick them in a better order.

The prevalence of porn is not the problem, it is the lack of a rounded education for teens teaching them about the different types of relationship and sex. You can already set up network wide restrictions that are password protected so that adults can access the sites that are banned with most ISPs. It IS that simple. If you don't know how to do it already, call your ISP and get them to help you. If you have to put individual restrictions on every single device then so be it.

I'm not anti porn myself, I have serious issues with the majority of the industry as it currently exists, but I am not against the existence of porn. I actually think it is a good thing when done well, as it can provide a safe space to play out fantasies and explore the depths of sexuality.

I am absolutely horrified at the nanny statism of this latest move. Restricting what people can view on the net in this way is the first step towards state censorship in the manner of China/N.Korea et Al.

Forget about the morality debate around porn for a moment. Forget that we're even talking about porn, and just think about what DavCam is actually proposing here. Which is that the government can impose a blanket restriction on what we can and can't look at on the internet.

That's what I'm most concerned about. That the government feels it has a right to dictate what we can and cannot access (I say we, I really mean you, UK readers, because I live in a country that experienced this first hand nearly 80 years ago and still bears the scars, so wouldn't even dream of this kind of restriction on thought).

Restricting access to illegal material is one thing, but using morality as a framework for regulation? Absolutely despicable and I hope it gets shot down in flames.

Now I understand that there are some parents in the UK who don't police their children on the internet, either because they don't care enough, or they don't understand enough to set up the controls. Parents in the former category probably also aren't going to do much to stop their kids drinking, smoking or anything else that is harmful. Parents in the latter category need to ask their ISPs for help.

There are a few organisations organising a counter attach, such as Sex and Censorship, Backlash and The Open Rights Group. Check out the petition too!