Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Internet Porn and Minors!

124»

Comments

  • #152
    Sonics2k
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,253 ✭✭✭Sonics2k


    mariaalice wrote: »
    Its amazing the number of people who only see ban porn and not the nuanced subtle nature of the issue. its almost comes across as entitlement, how dare , society interferes with my fun my entitlement to watch porn. A ban would not work as teenagers would get arond it, but it could certainly be made the norm the children and young teens do not have access smartphone.

    It is not a moral panice porn did not make those boys do what they did but it certainly influenced one of them and formed a cultuer that Ana was an object to be used.

    There are lots of things that are good for society that interfere with individuals wish to do what they like. An individual cant drink and drive they can't legally drink till 18.

    Societies right to protect its self always trumps an individual right to do as one wants.

    But it is a moral panic. What happened to Ana is a massive, massive tragedy and it can't be said enough.

    However, the true influence on these kids rests on the shoulders of their parents. Porn is not suitable for these kids, obviously, but it's on the their parents to properly educate and teach their children how to behave.

    Awful, brutal things have happened for the entire span of human existence, and it makes no sense to suddenly ban the easy access to pornography. The Columbine massacre happened before kids had such easy access to internet porn (though it did obviously exist). At the time video games and metal was blamed.

    The porn 'ban' or restriction is a scapegoat, a way to fob off the blame from a society that refuses to actually look in on itself as the source of a problem, whether it's through bad parenting, a culture of 'boys will be boys' and no real punishment
    There are lots of things that are good for society that interfere with individuals wish to do what they like. An individual cant drink and drive they can't legally drink till 18.

    Quite right, we do restrict alcohol to minors. But let's be honest, how well does it really work?

    Ireland has essentially promoted a culture of getting pissed drunk, bragging about how many pints you downed. In order to fight off this culture, as parents we have to be responsible for our kids actions and what we teach them.


  • #153
    mariaalice
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,630 ✭✭✭✭mariaalice


    OneOfThem Stumbled wrote: »
    Maybe.

    And maybe the fact that he disliked homework influenced him in some way (MacNamee, 2019). Some say that those who dislike homework are more likely to come from less well-disciplined homes and may be more susceptible to a lack of self-control.

    If your immediate reaction is "well, what 13 year old doesn't hate homework? What does that tell me, exactly?" that would be a correct reaction. However, it is the same reaction that could be had to your assertion.

    The thing is while all 13 years old don't like homework, however, one 13 yearold will come from a home where there are boundaries and they know homework has to be done they want to do higher level maths, has a long-term goal and has a realistic and mature view of schoolwork, has friends and is sporty and popular. Dose not mean they like school or homework.

    Another dose not like homework but has parents who want the best for them but the parents do no have the skills or ability to help the child.

    Another come from a background where the parent are inconsistent or couldnot care less about homework.

    They all dislike homework but will have different outcomes.


  • #154
    GarIT
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,671 ✭✭✭GarIT


    Discodog wrote: »
    You can get around this by simply using a browser that filters traffic to save bandwidth.

    That's why the most important step in any solution is not allowing children have the admin account on computers and use parental controls on phones to prevent them installing anything without permission.

    Porn can be blocked but only by the parents.


  • #155
    cgcsb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,761 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    mariaalice wrote: »
    Are you realy comparing an internet hoax to a 12 year old child with 12000 Porn images on his smartphone?

    I'm comparing the moral panic of both.


  • #156
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    Pretty much every teenager of the 2000s grew up watching porn and the vast majority of us are now in our late twenties and turned out ok. It's been around long enough that we'd know by now if it was f*cking people up to the extent that this moral panic suggests that it is.


  • Advertisement
  • #157
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,653 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    Pretty much every teenager of the 2000s grew up watching porn and the vast majority of us are now in our late twenties and turned out ok. It's been around long enough that we'd know by now if it was f*cking people up to the extent that this moral panic suggests that it is.

    I grew up in the 80's and had ready access to porn thanks to an older brother having a decent stash of VHS tapes.


  • #158
    Darranj85
    Registered Users Posts: 16 ✭Darranj85


    I worked for a mobile phone provider once. When the sim was registered if would block ''adult content'' if the person was under 18. Only on the network end. So The home wifi is the parents reponsibility.

    But all of it is in my opinion. if you give your child a smartphone you need to be keeping an eye on what they are at.


  • #159
    Hal3000
    Closed Accounts Posts: 818 ✭✭✭Hal3000


    Darranj85 wrote: »
    I worked for a mobile phone provider once. When the sim was registered if would block ''adult content'' if the person was under 18. Only on the network end. So The home wifi is the parents reponsibility.

    But all of it is in my opinion. if you give your child a smartphone you need to be keeping an eye on what they are at.

    I mentioned this before and was told the technology to block sims for u18 was not possible. I know it won't fully stop it but it would deter. Making access more difficult will achieve something. People will get around it, but we can learn and improve as we go on. We cannot leave it as it is.


  • #160
    Ubbquittious
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,259 ✭✭✭Ubbquittious


    A lot of the hullabuloo about kids watching porn now is to divert attention away from the fact that some kids like the ones convicted the other day are just pure evil


  • #161
    cgcsb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,761 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    Ubbquittious wrote: »
    A lot of the hullabuloo about kids watching porn now is to divert attention away from the fact that some kids like the ones convicted the other day are just pure evil

    You could also blame a dysfunctional home environment, which seems a more likely cause than pornography, but people seem adverse to that. The masses want to blame something nebulous and far reaching


  • Advertisement
  • #162
    seamus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Hal3000 wrote: »
    I mentioned this before and was told the technology to block sims for u18 was not possible. I know it won't fully stop it but it would deter. Making access more difficult will achieve something. People will get around it, but we can learn and improve as we go on. We cannot leave it as it is.
    Making access more difficult arguably makes it more appealing. Instead of turning teenagers off porn, instead you make it something even more exciting.

    This is in effect very similar to alcohol. When we ban it until 18 and speak of it in hush-hush tones while also making it clear that it's really awesome and "grown up" to drink, then you encourage adolescent drinking.

    When it's more normalised, less taboo and less glamorous to drink, then adolescents are less likely to go nuts. Give your kids a glass of wine at 13/14, make no big deal of it, and they will have a far healthier attitude to it.

    I'm not saying hand your kids porn at 12. But accept the fact that they're going to start masturbating and there's nothing you can do about it. And to assist in that, they will seek out material. And you can guide the nature of how, when and where they seek out that material.

    Make it clear that they are works of fiction. Just like the X-Men use special effects to make lasers shoot out of people's eyes, porn makers use SFX and editing to make it appear like some guy spurts out a litre of cum every time and the actors pretend that they are enjoying what's going on.

    If you pretend it doesn't exist, then kids are going to try and figure it out for themselves.

    Just like my two year old thinks that a magic wand can actually do magic because she doesn't know it's fantasy on the screen, a 16-year-old is going to get frustrated that his magic wand can't do the magic he's seeing on screen - because his parents haven't explained to him that it's not real.

    On the topic of the 12,000 porn images on the phone, I'd be interested to know the actual nature of these. Messaging apps download pictures that you've been sent whether you want them to or not. I'd easily have been sent at least a thousand images that could be classed as "porn" over WhatsApp. Two guys in one of my chats are that kind of person that just forwards on everything they receive.
    So if someone were to find it you could say I had thousands of pornographic images on my phone*. I can only imagine how much **** goes around a teenager's network.


    *I actually make a point of clearing down my phone semi-regularly, but you get the idea


  • #163
    Hammer89
    Registered Users Posts: 3,003 ✭✭✭Hammer89


    I don't know whether it needs banning or not, but there definitely should be some safeguards in place to protect teenagers from the mental aspect of it. Even for fully-grown adults, who can distinguish between reality and fantasy, porn can be a breeding ground for insecurity, which means it could quite easily devastate a young one or young fella's self-esteem.

    This is where a Sex Ed class may come in handy, a forum where teenagers of both are sex are given antidotes to use when the fantasy of porn threatens to corrupt them. If they watch porn knowing the context then maybe it's alright. Without the context, some of them are being ruined mentally before puberty has even ended.


  • #164
    stateofflux
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,563 ✭✭✭stateofflux


    bluewolf wrote: »
    i would wonder about this also. i think it's easy to point at something like porn and say this must have been it, this is the problem to solve. i can only imagine there was more going on and it was all more nuanced. but i don't really know... hence why i wonder this as well

    it's hard to know what to do about children and mobiles. say no altogether? educate them? both?

    when i see parents giving their 7 year olds a smart phone to shut them up without any child filters or restrictions programmed i cringe.

    accessibility is a parental responsibility.


  • #165
    FFred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 772 ✭✭✭FFred


    IMO internet porn should be as inaccessible as possible to children. Suggesting that it would be a waste of time to try restrict it because VPNs and TOR etc is not good enough.

    Yes , young teens will masturbate of course. We all did. But to compare the available fap material of the past to what is now accessible at the swipe of a screen is laughable.

    We need to try at least.

    Disclosure: I am a man in his mid forties. I have 5 children ranging from age 5 through to teens up to early 20s.


  • #166
    10000maniacs
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,023 ✭✭✭10000maniacs


    FFred wrote: »
    IMO internet porn should be as inaccessible as possible to children. Suggesting that it would be a waste of time to try restrict it because VPNs and TOR etc is not good enough.

    Yes , young teens will masturbate of course. We all did. But to compare the available fap material of the past to what is now accessible at the swipe of a screen is laughable.

    We need to try at least.

    Disclosure: I am a man in his mid forties. I have 5 children ranging from age 5 through to teens up to early 20s.
    Blaming the Internet is like blaming the paper pulp manufacturers for kids viewing porn magazines in the 70's .
    The Internet is an easy scapegoat for morons.


  • #167
    Blaizes
    Closed Accounts Posts: 809 ✭✭✭Blaizes


    mariaalice wrote: »
    What do you do about other parents who are not monitoring their child phone or who ambiguous about doing it.

    That is why there has to be a cultural change.

    That’s it there has to be a cultural change. Phone obsession in this country, we’ve adapted to technology on paper at least with a very high rate of phone ownership but there is a downside


  • #168
    Seanachai
    Registered Users Posts: 2,544 ✭✭✭Seanachai


    Blaizes wrote: »
    That’s it there has to be a cultural change. Phone obsession in this country, we’ve adapted to technology on paper at least with a very high rate of phone ownership but there is a downside

    The phone obsession is ugly, I think it will peak and fizzle out though, there's some that would go for an implant that projects a hologram in front of their face if they got the chance. It's mad seeing people engrossed in a black slab the size of a butter dish.


  • #169
    Infini
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,573 ✭✭✭Infini


    Look when it come's down to it, Smartphones aren't suitable for anyone under 16 and porn blocks aren't worth jack **** because anyone with even an ounce of sense knows the internet by design was built to be reroutable around any said block.

    People need to just give their kids a basic phone only and keep their access limited to the internet till they're old enough to handle it.


  • #170
    Franz Von Peppercorn II
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,398 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn II


    10000maniacs wrote: »
    Blaming the Internet is like blaming the paper pulp manufacturers for kids viewing porn magazines in the 70's .
    The Internet is an easy scapegoat for morons.

    This argument isn’t the best. People are blaming easy access to pornsites for children, which would be the same as blaming retailers who sold or gave away porn to under aged children in the 70s. Not the same as blaming the pulp manufacturers. That equivalent would be blaming fibre or copper wire manufacturers.

    I doubt AH is reflecting general opinion.


  • #171
    FFred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 772 ✭✭✭FFred


    10000maniacs wrote: »
    Blaming the Internet is like blaming the paper pulp manufacturers for kids viewing porn magazines in the 70's .
    The Internet is an easy scapegoat for morons.
    Silly and naive comparison.


  • Advertisement
  • #172
    10000maniacs
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,023 ✭✭✭10000maniacs


    Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »
    10000maniacs wrote: »
    Blaming the Internet is like blaming the paper pulp manufacturers for kids viewing porn magazines in the 70's .
    The Internet is an easy scapegoat for morons.

    This argument isn’t the best. People are blaming easy access to pornsites for children, which would be the same as blaming retailers who sold or gave away porn to under aged children in the 70s. Not the same as blaming the pulp manufacturers. That equivalent would be blaming fibre or copper wire manufacturers.

    I doubt AH is reflecting general opinion.
    the internet is the blank canvas on which everything good or bad is done, like paper is, so my analogy is perfect. People
    who are not tech savvy and naive and who need scapegoats and should look a little closer to home maybe. Freedom of the Internet is something that should be valued. Left wing interference of the internet is going to destroy it eventually.


  • #173
    10000maniacs
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,023 ✭✭✭10000maniacs


    FFred wrote: »
    10000maniacs wrote: »
    Blaming the Internet is like blaming the paper pulp manufacturers for kids viewing porn magazines in the 70's .
    The Internet is an easy scapegoat for morons.
    Silly and naive comparison.
    You think people are going to agree to give their DOB and other details to 3rd party porn companies or external agencies? Now that's silly and naive.


  • #174
    Franz Von Peppercorn II
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,398 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn II


    10000maniacs wrote: »
    the internet is the blank canvas on which everything good or bad is done, like paper is, so my analogy is perfect.

    It’s not. Pulped paper has to be written on to be a book. The content is what causes the offence, if any. Here it’s the pornsites. Not the internet as a whole.
    People
    who are not tech savvy and naive and who need scapegoats and should look a little closer to home maybe.

    For what exactly?
    Freedom of the Internet is something that should be valued. Left wing interference of the internet is going to destroy it eventually.

    No freedom is absolute and certainly not for children. It’s also moving goalposts to suggest that curtails on porn for children should automatically lead to political censorship for adults.


  • #175
    FFred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 772 ✭✭✭FFred


    10000maniacs wrote: »
    You think people are going to agree to give their DOB and other details to 3rd party porn companies or external agencies? Now that's silly and naive.
    You don’t have children , am I right?


  • #176
    10000maniacs
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,023 ✭✭✭10000maniacs


    Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »
    It’s not. Pulped paper has to be written on to be a book. The content is what causes the offence, if any. Here it’s the pornsites. Not the internet as a whole.



    For what exactly?



    No freedom is absolute and certainly not for children. It’s also moving goalposts to suggest that curtails on porn for children should automatically lead to political censorship for adults.

    The Internet is only useful because billions of servers are all hooked up together. It started out as an experiment connecting 2 servers in Robert E. Kahn and Vint Cerf's lab in the 70's. They developed the ultimate blank canvas for people to share ideas and information.
    So it is the digital version of paper.
    They tried banning and censoring books on many occasions down through the years. Nearly every attempt ended in failure.
    Bottom line is the parents and teachers should do a better job of educating their children and take a little bit of responsibility for what they are getting up to.
    I am not saying it would have saved that poor girls life. But doing what Varadkar is proposing certainly would not have done so.


  • #177
    Hal3000
    Closed Accounts Posts: 818 ✭✭✭Hal3000


    It's not just porn, what about other extreme material and horrible clips floating about? Adults can barely handle it never mind kids. I agree with above basic Nokia for all kids up until after 16. If you complain and then give your kid a smartphone with unrestricted access, don't blame society when you end up with a ferral malajusted wierdo...


  • #178
    Franz Von Peppercorn II
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,398 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn II


    10000maniacs wrote: »
    The Internet is only useful because billions of servers are all hooked up together. It started out as an experiment connecting 2 servers in Robert E. Kahn and Vint Cerf's lab in the 70's. They developed the ultimate blank canvas for people to share ideas and information.
    So it is the digital version of paper.

    Nobody’s banning the entire internet.
    They tried banning and censoring books on many occasions down through the years. Nearly every attempt ended in failure.

    Actually it often worked. But you keep moving the goalposts from children to adults.
    Bottom line is the parents and teachers should do a better job of educating their children and take a little bit of responsibility for what they are getting up to.
    I am not saying it would have saved that poor girls life. But doing what Varadkar is proposing certainly would not have done so.

    The state should also lend a hand.


  • #179
    freshpopcorn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,840 ✭✭✭✭freshpopcorn


    As somebody who grew up with the phones-> camera phones-> smart phones in school and social media sites.
    One thing I have notices those who were doing silly things as teenagers are still doing the same now when they are nearly thirty and no matter how you talk to them. They don't listen but they aren't happy when things go wrong. They are also bright enough individuals.


  • #180
    Calhoun
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,447 ✭✭✭Calhoun


    Looks like it's delayed indefinitely and with a general election around the corner can see it falling off the map.


  • Advertisement
  • #181
    10000maniacs
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,023 ✭✭✭10000maniacs


    The only reason we now take the internet for granted in 2019 is because there was an early decision to not regulate it at a nework or transport level. See how government interference at network and transport level is destroying the internet in China and Russia. Do we want to follow that slippery slope in Ireland too?


  • #182
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 2,078 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    denis1501 wrote: »
    Install Opendns on a password protected router/modem.

    Then they go to their friends house who haven't a clue what DNS is.


  • #183
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 2,078 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    It's like the "Right to be forgotten" EU law which has been mainly used by hardened criminals and scam artists to hide their pasts. Every time I see "some results may have been removed" in Google I want to throw up.

    All censorship laws are quickly used to cover up crime and abuse. We need look no further than our recent past. Abuse records here were recently sealed for 75 years under the pretext of GDPR.

    https://www.rte.ie/amp/1033488/

    I think we have to accept this is the world we live in and teach our kids accordingly.

    To suggest Boy A and B would have never done any of this were it not for Internet porn is utterly nonsensical. I'll say it again - horror and satanic films featured far more prominently in their narrative than porn.

    A world with censorship is far more dangerous to children than one where porn is available.

    Violent or abusive porn should be banned, I agree. I keep coming back to 50 shades though as its basically a rape fantasy aimed at women. Pretty disgusting stuff.


  • #184
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 92,550 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    The UK has been trying to introduce an age verification system since 2017.

    It's been delayed yet again. :rolleyes:

    The plan is to charge you £4.99 per device to use the system.

    Or you can bypass with a VPN.

    Or the website can bypass it by creating a sister site with lots of cat videos as it's only sites where content is more than a third porn that are blocked.





    And that pales when compared to this power grab attempt by the BAI
    Yes the same ,IMHO useless ****wits,
    - that force you to PAY to watch TG4 in HD ,
    - that delayed digital here for years trying to get Boxter and other Pay TV options going in a saturated market
    - that take 7% of the TV licence to fund stuff the Sound and Vision scheme that can require a Subscription to see.

    And they now want to control this ? :rolleyes:


  • #185
    take everything
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,807 ✭✭✭take everything


    FFred wrote: »
    IMO internet porn should be as inaccessible as possible to children. Suggesting that it would be a waste of time to try restrict it because VPNs and TOR etc is not good enough.

    Yes , young teens will masturbate of course. We all did. But to compare the available fap material of the past to what is now accessible at the swipe of a screen is laughable.

    We need to try at least.

    Disclosure: I am a man in his mid forties. I have 5 children ranging from age 5 through to teens up to early 20s.

    The unpopular truth is most guys are attached to their porn too much to give a **** about kids' welfare. And you get the familiar "ah that'll never work" canard.

    Surely, regulating it will actually significantly reduce the number of kids growing up thinking increasingly weird/violent porn is OK.

    And that is a good thing.
    Adults love of porn should be a secondary concern.

    Together with good parenting of course, we mightn't have a timebomb of screwed up kids in the future.


  • #186
    take everything
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,807 ✭✭✭take everything


    Force Carrier wrote: »
    You have no idea what influenced the boys.
    The only people who may be able to speak on that are qualified professionals who meet them and diagnose or treat them.

    There is no evidence to support your statement above. Correlation is not causation.

    .

    Are you joking me.
    The journal article detailed what he searched and what was on his phone.
    Let's see:

    Russian teen.
    Images of women in school uniform (iirc) tied to a post while someone else watched.
    Almost the exact scenario that lead to this girl's death

    People are in serious denial about this stuff.


  • Advertisement
  • #187
    Force Carrier
    Closed Accounts Posts: 594 ✭✭✭Force Carrier


    take everything wrote: »
    Are you joking me.
    The journal article detailed what he searched and what was on his phone.
    Let's see:

    Russian teen.
    Images of women in school uniform (iirc) tied to a post while someone else watched.
    Almost the exact scenario that lead to this girl's death

    People are in serious denial about this stuff.

    You're inventing a scenario that he was normal to begin with. Then he looked up whatever russian s hoolgirl sh1te you're on about. Then he became a deranged killer.

    You're assumption without any evidence he was normal to begin with.

    If he was already predisposed to violence and sexual violence to begin with then what else would he look up online? What else would he fantasize about? What else would he do but try and kill someone.


  • #188
    take everything
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,807 ✭✭✭take everything


    Force Carrier wrote: »
    You're inventing a scenario that he was normal to begin with. Then he looked up whatever russian s hoolgirl sh1te you're on about. Then he became a deranged killer.

    You're assumption without any evidence he was normal to begin with.

    If he was already predisposed to violence and sexual violence to begin with then what else would he look up online? What else would he fantasize about? What else would he do but try and kill someone.

    Wow.
    Any reasonable person would find it very hard to believe what he watched had no influence on his subsequent behaviour.


  • #189
    Force Carrier
    Closed Accounts Posts: 594 ✭✭✭Force Carrier


    take everything wrote: »
    Wow.
    Any reasonable person would find it very hard to believe what he watched had no influence on his subsequent behaviour.


    Any reasonable person would engage with simple logic.

    Correlation is not causation.


Advertisement