More Anti Porn, Save the Children Efforts

Article Posted on AVN
Conservative Group wants men to avoid porn

I am curious to know what research, or what data suggests that porn exploits children. What is it they think the porn industry is doing to exploit children?

Are we targeting them with marketing? If so, how?

Are we targeting them with ads to appear in porn?

Are we trying to seduce them into the porn business?

And for fucks sake, when is anyone going to introduce legislation to put at least some of the responsibility for what children see on the internet in the laps of the parents! (of course that's a silly question.... porn is bad, a favorite political whipping boy.... parents are good, and are voters who need to be coddled....duh! what was i thinking?)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tombarr

Are we targeting them with marketing? If so, how?

---

Unfortunately, yes, some webmasters are targeting kids.. Indirectly.

Until recently, whitehouse.com was laden with porn related ads.

Quote:

---

And for fucks sake, when is anyone going to introduce legislation to put at least some of the responsibility for what children see on the internet in the laps of the parents!

---

Again, using whitehouse.com as my example, are the parents to blame is a child visits that site looking for information on.. The White House as part of their school project?

There are, only so many things that parents can do to protect their children online and, whilst i agree a lot more emphasis needs to be put on the parents monitoring their childrens activities online, the adult industry also needs to start sorting its shit out. Otherwise, we're all going to find our 'careers' cut short.

Lets not forget, the ONLY reason people want to legislate porn is because of a few bad apples that sully all of our names and, to Congress it appears that we dont police ourselves all that well so someone has to do it for us and, quite frankly, i dont blame them.

If i was looking on the adult industry from the outside, id more than likely think the exact same thing as a lot of these politicians seem to do, that we have no standards when it comes to what types of stuff we distribute for free, dont care who spends money or how, just so long as we make a dime.

Oh, wait a minute....

Regards,

Lee

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lee

Lets not forget, the ONLY reason people want to legislate porn is because of a few bad apples that sully all of our names and, to Congress it appears that we dont police ourselves all that well so someone has to do it for us and, quite frankly, i dont blame them.

---

I have to agree. When those senators were having that meeting on Cspan a few months ago and talked about how spam is getting into the senate building and reaching the senators email, which has to be the most protected emails on the planet, and how porn spyware has taken over their computers I cringed.

However I dont think we'll find out careers ever cut short.
I think the govt wants to go after the people who are asking for it.
The people with the email bombs and the spam and the spyware.

I think if youre just a small guy running a few small sites quietly and respectfully then youre fine.
Im not a lawyer, but I cant imagine the government outlawing porn on the internet.

The American public would fucking FLIP if they couldnt get their porn and have their rights to get porn taken away.
There'd be huge protests that would lead to marched on washington.

Even ultra conservative people like Sean Hannity will talk about explicit guys like Howard Stern and say if you dont like it, then turn change the channel.
Bill Oreilly says he doesnt mind strip clubs with "full contact" dancing, as long as its far away from residential homes.
Pretty resonable I think.
I dont see any conservatives with any power calling for a ban on anything. Just the Family people trying to drum up donations.

Many many judges have had pornographers in their court rooms and I think have almost always ruled in their favor. Its a freedom of speech issue.

And when Paul Cambria sat in front of all of those senators talking about adult content being protected speech none of the senators challenged it and they seemed pretty friendly with Cambria. They weren't hostile with him at all. Theyre just looking for ways to keep kids away.

Lee can you increase the editing time so we have more time to edit typos?
how embarassing my typos are, lol

We have nothing to worry about. This ad campaign is going to fall on deaf ears. These groups are operated and supported by most women and also men with a very low sex drive. Clearly not our target market.

Porn isn't the problem, it's the healthy male's desire for sex... but that's not really a problem, now is it? Even in the absence of a stimulant the natural desire comes first, then the porn just speeds things up when a real person isn't available.

What are they going to say in the commercials?.... "You can continue masturbating every night before bed, just don't watch porn!"

Again, this thread addresses what i mentioned in my original post.

We've suddenly gotten of the subject of the 1 thing we [the industry] can control and gotten to the 'it will never happen' mindset.

The fact is, these laws are inevitably going to start going through Congress, maybe not this year, maybe not next year but, eventually and when they do, we'll have nobody but ourselves to blame.

In this instance yes, we're talking about a conservative group but, lets not forget, we have a VERY conservative President and Attorney General in office right now the scary thing is, what this group is saying, is more than likely, the same thing that those in power are thinking and, working on.

So again, we need to start sorting out our own house before we start criticising others, while we may not agree with these people because we work in the adult industry, we also do need to disassociate ourselves from the mindset that we work in porn, take a look at the industry as a whole, from the outside looking in, is it something you would really like to see continue down its current path?

I know i would like to see things change and, id rather those changes happened from within the industry rather than from outside sources ultimately though, if we cant sort things out for ourselves, im all for the government taking out the trash on our behalf.

Just like they did with 2257.

Regards,

Lee

Interesting thread, and as an outsider so to speak, I think that american politics is so bent towards sex its almost laughable if it wasn't so dangerous. To believe that the industry is safe because these laws won't come into being, is at best, wishful thinking.

Look around, did you imagine 5 years ago even that the President could approve wire taps without a judge's consent? Did you think 10 years ago that the NSA would be recording everyone's phone calls? That the FAA would demand your banking information, medical history and records and religion? Did you ever think 10 years ago that you would need a passport to get home from Mexico and Canada? In 2007 and 2008 you will.

As for the, well its a republican thing, consider that it is a Democrat who proposed the segregation of the internet and tied it to new 2257 regulations, not to mention that both parties are together on the definition of what marraige is. Did you really think 5 years ago that the Chairmen of the Democratic Party would insist that marraige is between a man & a woman only?

So thinking that these laws won't happen, is as I say, wishful thinking. Its happening and while I'd agree, the industry needs to do it on its own, look around at some of the members of this industry? Take Sean, and his pushing it to the limits and arguements about what is and what isn't a twink. Consider these are the ones who daily put all of us at risk because they are unwilling to comprehend what is truly going on around them.

But hell, we got our own idiots in Ottawa to contend with, so good luck, we all are gonna need it I think. :coffee:

A good majority of the spam, of the bulk emailed unsolicited porn, of those promoting Lolitas, underage kids, etc., in my experience seem to originate outside of the USA. Not saying that ALL does, but a majority does.

So how is US legislation going to stop this?

As for sites using things like the whitehouse.com site to target children, I propose that the owners of that site did not use that domain
name to try to snare children as their motivation for registering the domain. I can't see whitehouse.com as a site that someone targeting children would register because it targets children. They did it for the type in value to get adults to their website. I am certainly not suggesting that children weren't caught by that and ended up on a porn site, but the children weren't "targeted" by porn companies anymore than children were targeted by porn for looking at daddy's porn collection they found in the closet when they went looking for a toy they lost. Sure they got exposed to porn, sure they weren't meant to see it, sure there were cursory attempts to hide it from them, but they still stumbled upon it. they weren't targeted. That is my primary point.

What's the benefit of "targeting" children with porn sites? They have no credit cards, they buy no products, they are far from a potential customer pool. So what do we accomplish by targeting children? Corrupting them?
Making them horny? Parents drink at home, beat their wives, lie, cheat, steal, abuse their kids, and they do all this without porn (but I think it would probably be blamed on porn too, and sometimes I am sure it is), so why is porn corrupting them? Making kids horny? They already are!

I am sorry, but porn companies do not target children. Sure there are those who try to solicit children for sex.. But the vast majority of these people have nothing to do with the porn industry. And these people, using porn images to get their targets horny enough to meet them, has absolutely nothing to do with the porn industry targeting children.

Sure content needs to be protected, sure we need to self regulate, sure we need to rate our content, but come on! I am sick of this all being put on the backs of kids! You say something enough and it becomes true. You repeat somethin often enough and it's the truth. You tell people porn targets children enough, it becomes fact.

Where is the supporting data that says US porn producers are targeting children? I say US porn producers because they are the only ones directly subject to US legislation.

It is time for legislators to start putting some of the burden on the parents of these kids. How about legislation that makes it a crime in a household where internet is accessible if you don't have child protection or child monitoring software on your home computers? No, it's easier to paint porn producers as degenerates, as scum, as evil porn peddling child molesting, child targeting monsters, than it is to tell parents they need to look to themselves to share part of the burden of protecting their children!

After all, if they were my children, I would do everything i could to protect them.

i've seen a surprising number of porn sites with keywords including videogames, pokemon, mickey mouse (and these weren't toon sites) and the rest. most of these sites - or maybe all - were non u.s. sites, so this law wouldn't stop the sites, but i always wondered what those webmasters could be thinking! aside from legal or ethical considerations that most of us have, kids have no credit cards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by basschick

i've seen a surprising number of porn sites with keywords including videogames, pokemon, mickey mouse (and these weren't toon sites) and the rest. most of these sites - or maybe all - were non u.s. sites, so this law wouldn't stop the sites, but i always wondered what those webmasters could be thinking! aside from legal or ethical considerations that most of us have, kids have no credit cards.

---

Ethical no, legal yes. I mean it is legal to have a porn site called Boys and Videogames since simulated child porn is legal. Using a trademark is illegal however.