Wednesday, March 16, 2005

Enough Already

Jeff Jarvis, whom I respect and read regularly, has been crusading against censorship a lot lately, except it's not really censorship when all people want is to keep from exposing kids to the worst humanity can provide, and to spare themselves from having to see or hear things they'd rather avoid. I had to comment:

Is a porn-free area of the internet such a scary thing? I still don't get the hysteria about this stuff. No one is going to take your cuss words and porn away. It's like defending partial-birth abortion to the death on the basis that it will help your larger mission to protect Roe v. Wade: it won't. Frankly it makes your case weaker if you won't acknowledge that problems exist on both sides of the argument.

This is a how question, not a why question. You can retain access to all the deviance and prurience you want, but those who wish to avoid it should be able to do so without being told. We've changed from a world where you had to make an effort to expose yourself to porn and profanity to one where you have to make an effort not to. Is that a victory for anyone? We'll all have to learn to live with some sort of compromise in the end, but all I read here is "Shut up and deal with it." It's like the Daily Kos on the war.

This guy Stevens is a ninny, but he can't, and won't, outlaw obscenity. He and the others like him are really talking about limiting underage access and providing for those who wish to avoid certain things. I'm not a prude, and I'm as supportive of free speech as anyone here, but by being so absolutist you've effectively put me on the defensive for respecting the desires of those who don't want what you want. Labelling CDs didn't hurt free speech, and neither will the kinds of things that have any chance of actually happening to TV and the internet.

Relax. No matter what happens, you'll still get to see naked people and hear cursing. Forever.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

I'm surfing porn just for that...Thanks Jeff you faggot.