Your thoughts on the porn day youtube attack.

Post Reply New Topic

So your saying it's not damaging for children to see rape fantasies, scat, or the new porn trend in some countries where the guy shoves the girl's (or guy's) head into a toilet bowl full of excrement and urine while anally violating them? A quick flash of breasts and penetration with some moaning is one thing, it's a whole other thing for a child to see a crying Japanese girl gagged, bound with rope, and bleeding from the giant rubber phallus being lodged up her back-end.

<post deleted>

Last edited by ViperaAspis on 04 Jun 2009, 2:56 am, edited 1 time in total.

I noticed this turned quickly into one of those 'save the children' threads. Can't anyone discuss online issues these days without someone's unsupervised child being the main topic. I was well looked after online as a kid, and to be honest if there are parents out there using the PC as a babysitter, then I don't really care. We're so quick to be anti nanny state, but this attitude plays straight into the hands of those who would like to see the web filtered & watered down. The web is just that, a web of many joys and dangers.

I'm sure youtube's main priority was the music audio content of these porn day vids, and not the porn! lol. It wouldn't supprise me if some haven't been muted and left up.

<post deleted>

Last edited by ViperaAspis on 04 Jun 2009, 2:57 am, edited 2 times in total.

In response to the attack, rather immature. I mean your attacking because of an issue with Youtube's policy on copyrighted music videos, is it that hard to make the attack have some relation to that. And no, the boom chicka bowow soundtrack does not count. Want a change in the Music Video policy? Decide to show that with an attack? Then have the attack have something to do with Music Videos!! !! !! !! !! !!

How is flagging porn as something else in any way going to help the cause? How would you like if instead of your favorite TV show, the channel decided to air 2 girls 1 cup, but never told anyone. As far as anyone knows its your favorite show. Or someone gives you a book about fishing and instead its a transcript of granny on granny action?

Might be interesting to see 4chan "hacked" with a bunch of content seemingly appropriate to the site only to find out its a key by key guide on how to play "Victory at Sea" By Richard Rogers. on the piano.

As to the directing of the attack to kids, even more immature. I mean really, if your trying to get something changed, Why target kids? I mean for the most part kids can't change much. All they did in targeting kids is agitate the parents. Alienating yourself really isn't the best strategy.

As for the porn and kids, IMO as long as things are explained ( and not ignored because of parental discomfort with the subject) porn is fine. Yes some aspects ( the fetishes mainly) will really need to be explained. That being said, its also my belief that exposure without explanation can have rather damaging effects. Mainly it comes down to the parents ( or who ever is raising the child) to explain the topic and not avoid it because they aren't comfortable talking to Little Billy about what that man is doing to that girl.

Also let it be known that I do not have kids of my own ( hey I'm 22), but i do work with kids on a regular basis.

Also, Viper, nice borderline personal attack. I mean you never really come out and call him a pedophile, but boy are you close.

Your ability to ignore entire arguments and take a few words out of context is impressive. I would rebut your argument but it is obvious you would take perhaps four or five words of it and ignore the rest, thus it would be a waste of my time and effort. Instead I direct you to read ViperaAspis's post, who elaborates on what I was saying in that paragraph. Perhaps your attention span will allow you to respond to that post intelligently; there are only two paragraphs in that post.



But you're missing the point. Not a single person in the thread has been talking about unsupervised children being the problem here. Supervised or not, it's not going to have made a difference.

How is a parent going to stop a child from seeing porn in a Youtube video that is thirty seconds into an innocent music video even if they are standing right next to them at the computer? Are they supposed to make the kid leave the room for a few minutes while they screen the entire video content of the link, before letting the kid back in? If a child watched a TV show, would you expect the parent to record it first so they could watch the show in its entirety before letting the child watch it?

Last edited by Enigmatic_Oddity on 03 Jun 2009, 8:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.

All you have to do to learn that is watch the news.

ViperaAspis, sexting is a well known slang phrase, given widespread coverage on all major news outlets, offline and online.

Understood. Posts retracted.

Instead of going on here and risking some kind of thread blow-up with a moderator (which I would inevitably lose), I will instead try hard to do what I see the wisest ones do when someone on a thread posts something so outrageous it gets their dander up. I will leave. But as I go, Ed, I would like you to think about this:

There are several innocent denizens of this board. They may lurk or they may post, but they are impressionable by their very open and trusting nature. They will be especially trusting of someone who is a moderator, an authority figure -- a particular weakness for those with AS. I hope that none of them follow the philosophy you are spewing about it being "harmless" to show any and all porn to any and all ages of children. They may decide to show off some truly vile "simulated rape photos" they downloaded in order to "help" one of their eight-, twelve-, or fifteen-year-old friends so they won't have problems as adults ... and promptly get him/herself arrested.

I am now leaving this thread. Outrageous, sir. Out-rageous.

Good day to you.

Okay let's talk about the issue at hand shall we and completely ignore the children. The attack on youtube is basically saying "Because you refuse to break the law, so we can have better access to music video's, we are going to ruin your service." I think the attack is both childish and cowardly, the best course of action would be to make their own service with copyrighted video's and then deal with the courts and being sued themselves instead of expecting another company to.

I guess I missed some posts attacking me for my comments... how quaint

I never said that parents should show pornography to their kids. I never said I thought those attacks on utube were either good or justified. What I did suggest is that viewing pornography is not as harmful to children as people believe.

You are trying to rebut me by talking about extreme cases, man screwing goat etc. Try rebutting me by talking about mainstream pornography. You may find that it is harder than you think.

YouTube has sucked since they got taken over by Google. They've gotten pretty fascist.

Oh I agree with you, ed, "regular" mainstream pornography honestly isn't going to be harmful to your average child (especially in comparison to the trauma of a child walking in on their parents). It just sounded a bit like you thought these attacks were harmless (my bad), and given the nature of the attacks and the people involved, it would be safe to assume that the uploading of this messed up stuff wouldn't be so much as a minority of the uploads.

Studies show porn really just leads to more porn. I'm just glad I'm not into porn; I'd never leave my house, or my computer.

Are you talking about actual hardcore pornographic videos? Those kinds of videos are not permitted on YouTube. Now videos that may deal with adult or mature subject matter yes. But a sexually explicit video of you and your girlfriend/boyfriend? Nope. It will be taken off and you may risk being banned from YouTube.

YouTube has a minimum age requirement of 13 years in order to surf its website.