So, Wait, Is .xxx Good Or Bad For Kids?

from the you've-got-us-all-mixed-up-now dept

It would appear that we now have two different groups of politicians, both of whom are trying to appear more "protective of our children" tossing around a political football concerning the .xxx top-level domain. Back in December, the US administration stepped in and pressured ICANN not to approve .xxx for adult sites, after conservative and religious groups protested such a red-light district online as "legitimizing" such content -- and, of course, this was bad for the cause of "protecting our children." Meanwhile, earlier this month, some US Senators started pushing a bill that would force the creation of such a domain and require all adult content sites to reside there. Again, this was put forth as a way of "protecting our children." So, for those of you who expect the government to parent your children for you, .xxx is either the best thing or the worst thing for protecting your kids. Meanwhile, ICANN, who is supposed to be making this decision on its own and who is also supposed to be separate from the US government, had planned to meet on this again this week, with approval of .xxx expected. Except... US officials have again stepped in to force ICANN to hold off, thus showing that ICANN doesn't seem to have quite the independence it claims to have. As the discussion on this continues, expect to hear over and over again the importance of protecting our children -- but who protects our children from ridiculous political battles?

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  1. identicon
    susan stone, 29 Mar 2006 @ 1:57pm

    Who draws the line?

    And what happens when they judge YOUR site to be porn?

    XXX by choice is dandy.
    XXX by fiat is censorship.

    I do art. Is is Art or Xart? Who gets to decide?

    We have a nation in which we can practically show a disembowelment to children. I avoid violence in my eyes. It hardens me. It might make me think that seeing violence does not matter.

    It might make me think that some other nations have a point in seeing us as not sensitive to family or moral issues. (PS I see the Xtians as a major player in bringing violence to children's minds and lives.)

    I remember what "porn" was in 1950 or so. Remember the Playboy centerfolds then? Pink wasnt even thought of let alone tying up a person to make them unable to leave you when you get obnoxious.

    But PISS CHRIST... now the "powers that be" would call that PORN. But HOLY ELEPHANT DUNG used in context on a picture? That was judged porn. Now a painting of Harold Washington with black skin and white bra and panties. That was removed from the halls of the Art Institute of Chicago student gallery.

    BEWARE.

    (please repeat that for each of the 8 x 2**8 chinese.)

    Thanks for listening to my rant!
    from LA right now

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Special Affiliate Offer

Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.