children accessing porn; adults turning off filterware

[Brian Stone]

It sounds like your son is mature beyond his years. He does not sound
like a typical teenage or pre adolescent boy. When I was 13, I knew
everything. So did my friends and we were all preoccupied with sex.
There were barriers to pornography. It was not freely available in
public places. As someone said, you had to stare down the drug store
clerk. This was a very powerful deterrent.  I guess I did not realize my

constitutional rights were being violated.

Well, as it turns out, I didn't know everything. I needed that
protection.  I personally cannot think of a single positive benefit I
got from looking at pictures of naked women. I can think of a lot of
negative misconceptions I developed though.  I remember in the movies,
that if a woman did not want to kiss the male lead, he just kissed her
harder and eventually she submitted. I don't want my son growing up with

this idea. Pornography creates much more confusion in young minds than
old movies do.

Free speech is a basic constitutional right. Protecting our children is
our responsibility. We cannot relinquish that responsibility in the
interest of free speech. Kids need our protection. They are not capable
of making the same kind of rational decisions that we are.

This free speech argument sounds so much like the gun argument. Owning
guns is our right.  Guns are not dangerous, some people just misuse
guns. We need to learn to use guns safely and properly. Is there a safe
and proper use of pornography?

This stuff damages kids.  If your solution prevails and libraries offer
totally unrestricted access to the internet, then I want adults
monitoring what kids see.  My public library doesn't have the staff to
do that. The library will no longer a safe place for kids. I will not
allow my kids inside a library without an adult present.

Anyone who works in public libraries knows they are full of unsupervised

kids. Who looks out for those kids. Don't we all have a responsibility
for them?  Of course we do.  If we don't filter, then what?

One last comment. Filtering is pretty effective if it is implemented
responsibly.  Libraries have professional selectors that are well
equipped to make rational decisions about content. Any filtering policy
should have a review process where things can be added and subtracted
from the filters based on patron input and selector approval. Don't
purchase packages that don't allow  full customization of the filter
lists and don't rely on your filter vendor to make all the decisions for

you.

Brian




Shirl Kennedy wrote:

> Okay.  I'll bite.  In our house, we allow free and unfettered acess to

> the
> Net.  My teenage son has looked at porn on the Net.  If he were
> spending 12
> hours a day locked in his room gazing at the screen, I would concede
> that
> we have a problem.  I don't consider that satisfying his curiousity
> this
> way is a problem.  Yes, he found his way to http://www.farmsex.com.
> He
> also brought it to our attention, and we had a rather interesting
> discussion about people, their unusual sexual preferences, and the
> proclivity of folks to utilize "new" technology for sexual
> gratification --
> to wit, Polaroid cameras and camcorders.  We also talked about why
> "porn"
> sites are so popular -- because it allows those who are
> curious/interested
> to partake in the privacy of their own homes, without having to enter
> sleazy XXX-type establishments in less-than-desirable areas of town.
>
>