Posts by Emma Hart

Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First

  • Up Front: Young and Sort of Free,

    Actually, on the subject of rating tags and their occasional absurdity, people may find this mildly amusing.

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4651 posts Report

  • Up Front: Young and Sort of Free,

    The stuff with a yellow label is at my discretion

    I'm a lot more cautious with other people's children than my own. With our kids, discretion is blue - M15+. If we chose not to show our pre-teens M rated stuff, they'd miss the LOTR and every Harry Potter movie from Goblet onwards. That HP should carry the same rating as Serenity seems utterly bugshit to me.

    We showed them Blink, but during the day with the curtains open and we warned them it was scary. With Silence in the Library we forewarned them. Because it's stuff we've pre-watched, we're able to do that. We pre-warn them that some Buffy episodes might be upsetting, but in the main they've coped just fine.

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4651 posts Report

  • Hard News: Need to Know,

    Emma, don't you dare!

    It's alright, Paul, all you have to do is put your name on the 'yes I'd like some kiddieporn' list.

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4651 posts Report

  • Up Front: Young and Sort of Free,

    Mine are eleven and twelve-and-eleven-twelfths. They've been around computers their whole lives. We don't have filtering, and the most censorship they're subject to is that their computers have google safe search turned on.

    They've only recently got email addresses, though, because I was really concerned about the hugely offensive spam they might be subject to. And I've been a bit more hovery in the last year as we've let them use MMORPGs and chat programs. Because I'm worried about bullying, not porn. And I'd hope if they were being bullied on line that they'd talk to me about it, just as if they were being bullied in RL.

    All the sexual material on our hard drives belongs to me anyway.

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4651 posts Report

  • Up Front: Young and Sort of Free,

    It's not that long ago that Watchdog was blocking non-porn sites that might be offensive to the delicate sensibilities of the fundamentalist Christians whose bigotry was being parodied

    It's a sad truth that the people most eager to control what my children can access are the very people I'd least trust to do it.

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4651 posts Report

  • Hard News: Need to Know,

    For a modest fee, I'll lower the tone of absolutely anything -- Weddings. Funerals. Select Committee Hearings. :)

    I have a secret plan to get PA blocked in Australia. Craig doesn't know he's a Cylon yet.

    for the sake of Winston Bloody Peters.

    Those claiming to be 'over' all this may prefer to discuss the imminent return of Hayden Bloody Peters.

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4651 posts Report

  • Up Front: Young and Sort of Free,

    (Then again, I'd have to stretch a point to describe it as pornographic, because it's hard to imagine anyone getting aroused by Lawrence's clotted prose, let along achieving any kind of orgasm.)

    My copy of The Rainbow actually got eaten by a bookworm. I didn't ask it how much it enjoyed the experience, I was just surprised it could digest the prose.

    Which is problematic in much the same way

    Yep. It's subjective, which is the essence of the problem. It's a gray area, which is surely why we should let people make their own decisions about what's 'offensive' as much as possible.

    Even censors seem confused about what censorship is.

    (Disclaimer: god-awful job, wouldn't want to do it)

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4651 posts Report

  • Up Front: Young and Sort of Free,

    the Potter Stewart test appears to be the best we can come up with

    Just to clarify, after "I know it when I see it", Potter said, "and the motion picture involved in this case is not that." And he wasn't defining 'obscenity' but 'hardcore pornography', which he believed was the only thing the First Amendment permitted to be censored. It's since been replaced by the Miller Test.

    The thing is 'I know it when I see it' can't be used as a legal basis, because it requires that everybody see the same thing.

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4651 posts Report

  • Up Front: Young and Sort of Free,

    In fact it looks rather sweet and innocent. Some people seem to have trouble separating nudity and sexuality, methinks.

    To be sort of fair on Rudd, this came straight after the furore over the Bill Henson photographs. (That link has NSFW pics in the sidebar, but it's a good discussion of the issues.)

    I'm finding the Art Monthly cover very useful, though, for showing people who are absolutely sure they can define porn. You can't ban or filter it, after all, if you can't define it to start with.

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4651 posts Report

  • Up Front: Young and Sort of Free,

    Opt-out is absurd.
    And can't you just see the spin now "Oh yeah, well our records show <<insert-generic-enemy-here>> opted-out of internet filtering. Guy loves his child porn obviously"

    F'n'ay.

    However, if your objective is to get people to 'voluntarily' do something they don't want to do, opt-out is perfect. Like religious instruction in schools.

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4651 posts Report

Last ←Newer Page 1 375 376 377 378 379 465 Older→ First