Iceland plans on blocking internet porn

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnew...y-ban.html

The government is considering introducing internet filters, such as those used to block China off form the worldwide web, in order to stop Icelanders downloading or viewing pornography on the internet.

The unprecedented censorship is justified by fears about damaging effects of the internet on children and women.

Ogmundur Jonasson, Iceland's interior minister, is drafting legislation to stop the access of online pornographic images and videos by young people through computers, games consoles and smartphones.

"We have to be able to discuss a ban on violent pornography, which we all agree has a very harmful effects on young people and can have a clear link to incidences of violent crime," he said.

Methods under consideration include blocking access to pornographic website addresses and making it illegal to use Icelandic credit cards to access pay-per-view pornography.

A law forbidding the printing and distribution of pornography is already in force in Iceland but it has yet to be updated to cover the internet.

The proposals are expected to become law this year despite a general election in April.

"There is a strong consensus building in Iceland. We have so many experts from educationalists to the police and those who work with children behind this, that this has become much broader than party politics," Halla Gunnarsdottir, a political adviser to Mr Jonasson told the Daily Mail.

"At the moment, we are looking at the best technical ways to achieve this. But surely if we can send a man to the moon, we must be able to tackle porn on the internet."

The proposed control over online access, that mirrors attempt in dictatorships such as China to restrict the internet, is justified as a defence of vulnerable women and children.

"Iceland is taking a very progressive approach that no other democratic country has tried," said Professor Gail Dines, an expert on pornography and speaker at a recent conference at Reykjavik University. "It is looking a pornography from a new position - from the perspective of the harm it does to the women who appear in it and as a violation of their civil rights."

Western world is slowly adapting the Chinese model. I wonder if they realize that simple IP restrictions on sites, whether it's torrents or porn are piece of cake to get around.

I'm also expecting a move from a certain group of hacktivists if this goes through.

The unprecedented censorship is justified by fears about damaging effects of the internet on children and women.

I... what? Adult women are damaged by watching pornography?

I... what? Adult women are damaged by watching pornography?

Some kinds of pornography are violent and/or show abuse towards women. That could give people a skewed view of social norms/what is acceptable or what they should expect from relationships.

Some kinds of pornography are violent and/or show abuse towards women. That could give dumbasses a skewed view of social norms/what is acceptable or what they should expect from relationships.

fixed. and my opinion on the matter.

Some kinds of pornography are violent and/or show abuse towards women. That could give people a skewed view of social norms/what is acceptable or what they should expect from relationships.

Sure, some kinds of pornography is crazy, but women imply adult women who should be, you know, grown up. If it can damage women by giving them a skewed view of social norms and so on, then why wouldn't it also damage men?

And as above has stated, if you are an adult and you can't seperate fiction and real life, it is that person that has a problem, not the fiction.

And saying violent pornography = violent crimes is just like saying violent movies = violent crimes, and last time i checked there was no proven connection that watching violent media makes you more violent.

pineapple the world, can't everyone just leave the internet alone? Nobody can block anything on the net, they should just stop trying.

Iceland has internet?

The whole isolated rock with volcanoes and pomegranate sounds too awesome, we need to remove porn to make it a less desirable place to live/visit!

^^ I'm pretty sure no one with a thought of living there will consider porn as a factor to move or not.

I see no issue with this. Most children that should not be watching porn wont be able to, and most teenagers and adults which don't matter will just get around it with proxies.

^^ I'm pretty sure no one with a thought of living there will consider porn as a factor to move or not.

I see no issue with this. Most children that should not be watching porn wont be able to, and most teenagers and adults which don't matter will just get around it with proxies.

That was my point. No one DOES have a thought of living there. This is just kicking the decades old skeleton of the horse. By the way, I can't say much on your second point without starting a landslide into thread locked, so I'll just say, you don't take something away from people for reasons like that. Children shouldn't drink alcohol, should we ban alcohol? Drugs that can help some people can kill others, should we ban all medication and let the former die just to save the latter? Alcohol is not made to be consumed by minors, and neither is porn, but they still get to both regardless. Why on earth would you want to make things pointlessly frustrating?

Sure, some kinds of pornography is crazy, but women imply adult women who should be, you know, grown up. If it can damage women by giving them a skewed view of social norms and so on, then why wouldn't it also damage men?

And as above has stated, if you are an adult and you can't seperate fiction and real life, it is that person that has a problem, not the fiction.

And saying violent pornography = violent crimes is just like saying violent movies = violent crimes, and last time i checked there was no proven connection that watching violent media makes you more violent.

You are misunderstanding my point. Pornography is not necessarily damaging to women because it gives women a skewed view of social norms or what is acceptable, it is damaging to women because it gives men a skewed view of what they should expect from relationships or what is acceptable by society's standards. (Note: I am not saying here that only men watch porn, because it has been proven that people of both sexes watch pornography).

Your statement that "women" should be adults seems to imply that viewers of pornography are also adults. This is not always the case because whether illegally or not, adolescents do watch pornography. Much of this can have violent or aggressive scenes which can affect how they perceive women. Pornography also tends to objectify women by primarily focusing on their body parts, which also detaches a personality from those parts. It almost dehumanizes women, where they seem to be more parts than person.

Whether or not you feel that only "dumbasses" take this seriously, violent pornography does convey certain messages to the viewer and those can have harmful affects on both the viewer and on their sexual partners in the future. Adolescents and even some adults can be very impressonable and oblivious to subliminal messaging and can be harmed if they take these messages seriously.

Btw, I am not trying to advocate the removal of pornography from the internet. I am simply trying to bring awareness to the fact that the integration of pornography into our society can have harmful affects on both women and men.

but but..
[video=youtube_share;Gv6QIHiL33k]http://youtu.be/Gv6QIHiL33k[/video]

Alcohol is not made to be consumed by minors, and neither is porn, but they still get to both regardless. Why on earth would you want to make things pointlessly frustrating?

Here is where my point lays, Ban =/= restricting. As you said alcohol is not meant to be taken by children but some get around it and do it, however do you imagine how would it be if alcohol wasn't restricted as it is?. It is the same here, they are not deleting porn or killing free-porn sites, they are restricting it. I am pretty sure they are aware of the easy ways people can use to get around this kind of blocking but go on with using it because they know it will only stop those with little knowledge on the internet, which makes of this only a restriction.

As for your first point, I got it but you make it sound like someone thinking of living in Iceland would ever turn down his decision because porn is blocked there. If you wanna move there, you must have strong reasons which I doubt can be shaked by porn.

You are misunderstanding my point. Pornography is not necessarily damaging to women because it gives women a skewed view of social norms or what is acceptable, it is damaging to women because it gives men a skewed view of what they should expect from relationships or what is acceptable by society's standards. (Note: I am not saying here that only men watch porn, because it has been proven that people of both sexes watch pornography).

Your statement that "women" should be adults seems to imply that viewers of pornography are also adults. This is not always the case because whether illegally or not, adolescents do watch pornography. Much of this can have violent or aggressive scenes which can affect how they perceive women. Pornography also tends to objectify women by primarily focusing on their body parts, which also detaches a personality from those parts. It almost dehumanizes women, where they seem to be more parts than person.

Whether or not you feel that only "dumbasses" take this seriously, violent pornography does convey certain messages to the viewer and those can have harmful affects on both the viewer and on their sexual partners in the future. Adolescents and even some adults can be very impressonable and oblivious to subliminal messaging and can be harmed if they take these messages seriously.

Btw, I am not trying to advocate the removal of pornography from the internet. I am simply trying to bring awareness to the fact that the integration of pornography into our society can have harmful affects on both women and men.

Personal responsibility and common sense play a large role in this situation. Also to note, if they're removing pornographic material, who says that they won't go any further? They have no right. They need to back down. Many negative elements in the media can leave lasting impressions on people. That doesn't mean that they (The objectionable contents) should be taken away. If a person cannot control him/herself, then they deserve the consequences.

Personal responsibility and common sense play a large role in this situation. Also to note, if they're removing pornographic material, who says that they won't go any further? They have no right. They need to back down. Many negative elements in the media can leave lasting impressions on people. That doesn't mean that they (The objectionable contents) should be taken away.

Actually they do have the right. It is their country and as the elected government of Iceland, it would seem they have every right to determine what they want to restrict or ban as a country.

The argument that this is just another "negative element in the media" doesn't really apply here. I do not consider pornography to be a form of media. I instead classify it as a form of entertainment (through sexual arousal). Showing violent porn is very different from say, reporting on a shooting or other violent crime.

If a person cannot control him/herself, then they deserve the consequences.

Ok, I can understand that for some things, but what about when the consequences do not only affect them? If someone has a fetish for violent porn and then goes out and rapes another person, then the consequences are not contained. One person's lack of control very much affected the well-being of another.

By "Media", I refer to all popular forms of video, audio, and print communications in the form of consumable content, this including movies, television, and in this case, pornography.

I have a fundamental distaste for government censorship or control, and so that is why I don't agree with your argument, though solid otherwise. I believe that a person acts upon his own accord at his own risk, being well aware of the impact on those around him or her. I don't believe the government can effectively stop the pornography from reaching the demographic it intends to censor from (In this case, younger audiences), and I believe that they are foolish to try.

If a person wants something... no matter how vile, corrupted, or harmful to them (or to others), they will obtain it somehow. This is why black markets exist. Because there is a natural and feverishly strong desire for sexual content (especially by the males who could, by your argument, assault women), it will be gotten, no matter the means.

It's ok Iceland, I still forgive you because Sigür Rós

More strange Icelandic laws...

It's ok Iceland, I still forgive you because Sigür Rós

Don't forget Nightwish.

By "Media", I refer to all popular forms of video, audio, and print communications in the form of consumable content, this including movies, television, and in this case, pornography.

I have a fundamental distaste for government censorship or control, and so that is why I don't agree with your argument, though solid otherwise. I believe that a person acts upon his own accord at his own risk, being well aware of the impact on those around him or her. I don't believe the government can effectively stop the pornography from reaching the demographic it intends to censor from (In this case, younger audiences), and I believe that they are foolish to try.

If a person wants something... no matter how vile, corrupted, or harmful to them (or to others), they will obtain it somehow. This is why black markets exist. Because there is a natural and feverishly strong desire for sexual content (especially by the males who could, by your argument, assault women), it will be gotten, no matter the means.

Ah ok, I see what you're saying and I can agree with that. Like I said in an earlier post, I don't think the government should try to censor porn and as it has clearly been proven before (ex: U.S. alcohol prohibition), people will find ways to get what they want whether or not it is illegal. I was merely discussing some of the problems with pornography and why some people and countries feel it should be censored or banned because it seemed that some people that posted in here missed what I was talking about.

I do want to briefly mention that bolded part. I was not trying to single out men in my posts. Although I believe that more men than women watch porn, I am also aware that both men and women have the capability to abuse other people of both sexes. I wasn't trying to single out a certain sex as much as I was trying to discuss the problems that come with violent pornography.

Actually they do have the right. It is their country and as the elected government of Iceland, it would seem they have every right to determine what they want to restrict or ban as a country.

Politically, they have the right, as politicians have the "right" to do anything they please if there are no laws forbidding them, but if they do it, they must also admit that they are not a part of the free world. The key point on every issue of censorship is this; if lines are allowed to be drawn on rights, those rights have already been lost; every person has a different moral compass, and the most outspoken and powerful are outliers compared to the general populace. It's easy to take rights away, but it's VERY hard for people to give those rights back. By doing that, they are admitting that they were wrong, and there's nothing a powerful person hates to do more than admit that he/she was wrong.

Politically, they have the right, as politicians have the "right" to do anything they please if there are no laws forbidding them, but if they do it, they must also admit that they are not a part of the free world. The key point on every issue of censorship is this; if lines are allowed to be drawn on rights, those rights have already been lost; every person has a different moral compass, and the most outspoken and powerful are outliers compared to the general populace. It's easy to take rights away, but it's VERY hard for people to give those rights back. By doing that, they are admitting that they were wrong, and there's nothing a powerful person hates to do more than admit that he/she was wrong.

While that may be true, at times powerful governments or people do admit they were wrong and things change. Clearly alcohol prohibiton completely failed, much like the prohibition of marijuana is failing today. Regardless, I disagree with your statement that if they ban porn, they must "admit that they are not a part of the free world." What classifies a country as being part of the "free world?" If simply banning something that others want to have the freedom to enjoy makes a country leave this classification, then most of the world is not free considering marijuana is banned in many places. What about prostitution? That is an agreement between consenting adults to have sex and yet it is banned. Are those countries also not free?

I am not sure how Freedom of Speech or Press applies to pornography, but if a society freely chooses to remove something that they feel is harming their citizens, I still would classify them as part of the free world.