Friday, December 08, 2006

Censoring Seductive Child Behaviour


"Covert pedophilia in the Victorian society". Is that a good line, or is that a good line? Censorship as a matter of viewpoint - as of recently Globe and Mail want you to purchase the article without realizing the click-through rates for both, Doubleclick serving the ads at their site and them, if it were distributing it for free, but anyway guess they should have told Google either :

"The Legards' central thesis is that the debate over children and sexual imagery has been dominated and distorted by two opposing myths: one is "the quasi-religious conception of childhood innocence," which involves "the irrational denial of childhood sexuality"; the other is "the ideology" of the artist as someone "possessing mystical abilities and unique rights" that should not be constrained by the state."

After thoughtcrime and intention-crime policing, it's about time behaviour-policing starts taking place, now wouldn't that be truly outrageous? Something no one is again going to do anything about, thinking he's either the only one seeing it, or perhaps prefers to keep playing in his own corner?

Anyway, discussions like these should only happen after the real problem, with real child porn online gets solved. And that wouldn't happen by fighting the distribution channels as they're too many to control and police, but by making sure the production stage never happens at the first place.

Another article on the topic "Clothed Child Porn Online?". By the way, are you finally seduced now? A rocket scientist doesn't seem to be, throughout the "decade of dedicating downloading". Such a collection can now definitely acts as a new digitally fingerprinted database to keep track of.