My twenty-five cents (that's 12.3 pence)
So. LJ Apocalypse Two has begun. And it's over the same thing as last time, what a surprise. Reality check, livejournal users: YOU DO NOT OWN LIVEJOURNAL. LIVEJOURNAL DOES NOT GIVE A SHIT WHAT YOU THINK, IT IS A COMPANY TRYING TO MAKE A PROFIT.
Anyway.
Guys, it's the same thing over and over again: the law is not able to keep up with technology. We're seen it time and time again where the internet draws dangerously close to the edge, and every once in a while someone draws the line. No big surprise. Of course, this is not the underlying issue, which is that law will never be able to keep up. And, what's more, because the internet is mostly a visual/textual medium, it constantly toes the line with Freedom of Speech (guaranteed by the American First Amendment and the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights). And it's only going to get worse. Suppose a future in which virtual reality is commonplace. Now suppose there is a group of people who like to roleplay virtually. Now suppose they want to take it to the next level, to virtual murder or rape. Is this hurting anyone? No, of course not; regardless of appearances, the activity is between two consensual adults. But someone somewhere brings out the inevitable "harming the children" argument, and the internet, tail tucked firmly between its legs, trying not to make a scene. And the activity goes away for a while, or goes underground. Has anything changed? No. Are the overprotective soccer moms happy? For a time. But it doesn't get at the issue, and it's a big one.
The internet is not real.
It's the job of parents to decide what is and is not appropriate for their children, and to protect them. It is not my job to make sure the neighbour kid isn't rummaging through my mail for this month's skin mag, and it is not my job to make sure he isn't reading my slash fanfic on LJ. It's the parents' responsibility to raise their child.
I sincerely doubt that anyone would argue with the idea that laws are for the protection of the people. So what's different online? Is anyone getting hurt when I view ponderosa121's arguably underage snarry? No, because the characters involved aren't real. No one is getting hurt by a picture of Hermione (arguably) getting "raped" by a werewolf (Fenrir), because they aren't real. As an adult, I am fully able to make the distinction between reality and fiction, and so it is not hurting me or anything else to view these images. So what's the deal, you ask? Overprotective mothers who think their kids can view this material. They argue that kids are unable to distinguish the fantasy of the picture from real life and might get "the wrong idea" from it. (Show me a kid who can't tell the difference between a snarry image and real life and I'll show you the next focus of The Simple Life) But regardless, it is not my job as an adult to make sure that other people's kids can't view the material. It's simply not. It's the parents' job. Period. Not to make too broad of a statement, but the mothers who are worried that their children have access to porn are naïve and, to put it plainly, bad mothers. Note to these mothers: YOUR CHILDREN WILL EVENTUALLY NEED TO LEARN ABOUT SEX. IT'S A VITAL PROCESS OF THE WAY IN WHICH WE CONTINUE AS A SPECIES. IF YOU CAN'T HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT WHAT IS HAPPENING IN A PARTICULAR IMAGE AND WHY, YOU SHOULD NOT BE A PARENT. Period. If you don't want your kids to see hardcore porn, put a block on your computer. Do not punish thousands of innocent adults simply because you are not a good enough parent to be able to prevent these things and, in the event of the inevitable leak, talk about them. It's not fair to us. Just because some kid somewhere is allergic to peanuts, I shouldn't be prevented from eating peanut butter in the privacy of my own home. It doesn't make sense.
Back to one of my original points: the internet is not real life. This is inherently obvious. So why do we treat it like it is? Why do real-life laws affect the internet? No, I'm not talking about laws that govern how the internet interacts with real life, like the distribution of child pornographic videos or images. Those are real people engaging in real life activity. Or Nigerian 419 scams, those are real people losing real money. I'm talking about the purely virtual-- things like fanfic on LJ and sex in Second Life. The thing is-- the parties involved are not real. So why do we treat them as if they were? Murder is illegal. But following internet legislation logic, an illustration of someone killing someone else (for instance a decapitation in Frank Miller's 300) would be illegal-- and, what's more, the person doing the drawing would be held liable! Now, that's ridiculous, of course. But the same should be true of any virtual activity. Whether it's an underage, virtual Harry having sex with a virtual Snape or Hermione's clothes being ripped off non-consentually by an (obviously fictional) werewolf or even (consensual) rape in Second Life, the simple fact is that there are not real people involved in the actual activity, and so they should not have to follow real life laws.
Now, I know this isn't going to happen overnight. So what do we do for right now? We go somewhere else. The Livejournal code is available freely at livejournal.org. Let's take it somewhere else. It'll look the same, feel the same, act the same-- but we can write our own ToS. Worried about minors? Write in "I swear that I am at least the age of majority in my country of residence." There, problem solved. Someone finds snarry and is worried about the children? "Our community is made up entirely of consenting adults with a reasonable expectation of privacy. To use the Service while a minor is a violation of the Terms of Service." There. And to beat off the government: "I agree not to post representations of real people engaging in illegal activity." There. Find real child porn? They're kicked off and reported to the authorities. But fictional "illegal" activity is protected as it should be. The point is, we're free to make our own rules.
STOP BITCHING AND START A REVOLUTION!
EDIT: It begins. fandom_flies Come my brethren, let us cross the river Jordan! (thanks to saralogan)
~A
Anyway.
Guys, it's the same thing over and over again: the law is not able to keep up with technology. We're seen it time and time again where the internet draws dangerously close to the edge, and every once in a while someone draws the line. No big surprise. Of course, this is not the underlying issue, which is that law will never be able to keep up. And, what's more, because the internet is mostly a visual/textual medium, it constantly toes the line with Freedom of Speech (guaranteed by the American First Amendment and the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights). And it's only going to get worse. Suppose a future in which virtual reality is commonplace. Now suppose there is a group of people who like to roleplay virtually. Now suppose they want to take it to the next level, to virtual murder or rape. Is this hurting anyone? No, of course not; regardless of appearances, the activity is between two consensual adults. But someone somewhere brings out the inevitable "harming the children" argument, and the internet, tail tucked firmly between its legs, trying not to make a scene. And the activity goes away for a while, or goes underground. Has anything changed? No. Are the overprotective soccer moms happy? For a time. But it doesn't get at the issue, and it's a big one.
The internet is not real.
It's the job of parents to decide what is and is not appropriate for their children, and to protect them. It is not my job to make sure the neighbour kid isn't rummaging through my mail for this month's skin mag, and it is not my job to make sure he isn't reading my slash fanfic on LJ. It's the parents' responsibility to raise their child.
I sincerely doubt that anyone would argue with the idea that laws are for the protection of the people. So what's different online? Is anyone getting hurt when I view ponderosa121's arguably underage snarry? No, because the characters involved aren't real. No one is getting hurt by a picture of Hermione (arguably) getting "raped" by a werewolf (Fenrir), because they aren't real. As an adult, I am fully able to make the distinction between reality and fiction, and so it is not hurting me or anything else to view these images. So what's the deal, you ask? Overprotective mothers who think their kids can view this material. They argue that kids are unable to distinguish the fantasy of the picture from real life and might get "the wrong idea" from it. (Show me a kid who can't tell the difference between a snarry image and real life and I'll show you the next focus of The Simple Life) But regardless, it is not my job as an adult to make sure that other people's kids can't view the material. It's simply not. It's the parents' job. Period. Not to make too broad of a statement, but the mothers who are worried that their children have access to porn are naïve and, to put it plainly, bad mothers. Note to these mothers: YOUR CHILDREN WILL EVENTUALLY NEED TO LEARN ABOUT SEX. IT'S A VITAL PROCESS OF THE WAY IN WHICH WE CONTINUE AS A SPECIES. IF YOU CAN'T HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT WHAT IS HAPPENING IN A PARTICULAR IMAGE AND WHY, YOU SHOULD NOT BE A PARENT. Period. If you don't want your kids to see hardcore porn, put a block on your computer. Do not punish thousands of innocent adults simply because you are not a good enough parent to be able to prevent these things and, in the event of the inevitable leak, talk about them. It's not fair to us. Just because some kid somewhere is allergic to peanuts, I shouldn't be prevented from eating peanut butter in the privacy of my own home. It doesn't make sense.
Back to one of my original points: the internet is not real life. This is inherently obvious. So why do we treat it like it is? Why do real-life laws affect the internet? No, I'm not talking about laws that govern how the internet interacts with real life, like the distribution of child pornographic videos or images. Those are real people engaging in real life activity. Or Nigerian 419 scams, those are real people losing real money. I'm talking about the purely virtual-- things like fanfic on LJ and sex in Second Life. The thing is-- the parties involved are not real. So why do we treat them as if they were? Murder is illegal. But following internet legislation logic, an illustration of someone killing someone else (for instance a decapitation in Frank Miller's 300) would be illegal-- and, what's more, the person doing the drawing would be held liable! Now, that's ridiculous, of course. But the same should be true of any virtual activity. Whether it's an underage, virtual Harry having sex with a virtual Snape or Hermione's clothes being ripped off non-consentually by an (obviously fictional) werewolf or even (consensual) rape in Second Life, the simple fact is that there are not real people involved in the actual activity, and so they should not have to follow real life laws.
Now, I know this isn't going to happen overnight. So what do we do for right now? We go somewhere else. The Livejournal code is available freely at livejournal.org. Let's take it somewhere else. It'll look the same, feel the same, act the same-- but we can write our own ToS. Worried about minors? Write in "I swear that I am at least the age of majority in my country of residence." There, problem solved. Someone finds snarry and is worried about the children? "Our community is made up entirely of consenting adults with a reasonable expectation of privacy. To use the Service while a minor is a violation of the Terms of Service." There. And to beat off the government: "I agree not to post representations of real people engaging in illegal activity." There. Find real child porn? They're kicked off and reported to the authorities. But fictional "illegal" activity is protected as it should be. The point is, we're free to make our own rules.
STOP BITCHING AND START A REVOLUTION!
EDIT: It begins. fandom_flies Come my brethren, let us cross the river Jordan! (thanks to saralogan)
~A