cryptoanarchy.wiki

Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!

1997-07-30 - Re: Yet another self-labeling system (do you remember -L18?)

Header Data

From: Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 76396f62b4452370c8f429da7c8a7ef4b782a0ecaf4fa9a9258029eba7eebdad
Message ID: <19970730142759.44396@bywater.songbird.com>
Reply To: <33DF81CF.1662D004@cptech.org>
UTC Datetime: 1997-07-30 21:53:10 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 31 Jul 1997 05:53:10 +0800

Raw message

From: Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 1997 05:53:10 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Yet another self-labeling system (do you remember -L18?)
In-Reply-To: <33DF81CF.1662D004@cptech.org>
Message-ID: <19970730142759.44396@bywater.songbird.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



On Wed, Jul 30, 1997 at 12:05:07PM -0700, Alan wrote:
[...]
> This makes an assumption that sexual material harms children.  Do you have
> any data or studies that actually shows that to be true?

[...]
> The idea that children are somehow scarred and harmed by sexually explicit
> material is without any foundation or evidence.  (Assuming they are able
> to get real unfiltered information to make a correct descision and are not
> getting guilt tripped for wanting that information.)

You have to define "harm", of course.  It's realitively easy to
describe physical harm, but psychological harm is far more complex. 
You are far better off avoiding that tack entirely, and rather think
in terms of behavior you want to promote or not promote.  So, for
example, are children who are exposed to sexually explicit material at
an early age more likely to go to jail in later years? I suspect we
both believe that there is zero correlation. 

> Note, I am not talking about sexual contact or any of the other boogie
> men that the moralists and control freaks try to bring up.  Adolecence is
> supposed to be a time to prepare for adulthood.  They are going to form
> some sort of opinion one way or another.  If they get no information or
> support before they are 18/21, they are going to wind up pretty screwed
> up.

A more interesting case can be made for exposure to violence, of
course.  There is (perhaps controversial) evidence that early exposure
to violent imagery increases the likelihood that a child will be a 
violent adult.

Anyway, those who say that parents should just more closely supervise 
their children must either not be parents, or have defective kids.  
It is a difficult job.  

The topology of the physical world makes it relatively easy to keep
your child away from adult bookstores, if that is your desire, but
cyberspace has a different topology that doesn't support a natural
segregation of neighborhoods. 

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent@songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html

Thread