h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

1 thing that is related to this issue (child abuse) is the perception in this country (UK) that children will be pounced upon by deviants if the little darlings are left alone 4 a moment, whereas they r as safe if not safer than ever.

Last year there was a media overkill when a young girl was abducted and murdered, a savage and unforgivable crime demanding the harshest of punishments, but-

In the same week about 3 children were killed by their parents or close realtives, non-sexual but they are still dead, and in all probability they lead worse lives up 2 there deaths

and

The mob culture in this country then tried to hound out of their homes some suspected (often totally inoccent) paedophiles. Even if they were guilty they may harm a few children a year whilst elsewhere on these estates and even more well known are drug dealers and pimps who harm many more children in many more ways- of course the sad bloke living alone is a slightly easier target to the crack house dealers with semi-automatic guns and a gang of vicious thugs to call on.

So why the mis-belief that every corner hides a sex attacker, well it is my belief that we notice more. b4 the mid 20th century there was always children around who no-one would miss (still some in council homes as recent TV show highlighted). These days when a child is attacked by a stranger (and most are attacked by those they know) it is rare enough to make headline news.

Is this just a UK thing Frag? or is it like that where u r?

Kadu Flyer

1 thing that is related to this issue (child abuse) is the perception in this country (UK) that children will be pounced upon by deviants if the little darlings are left alone 4 a moment, whereas they r as safe if not safer than ever.

Last year there was a media overkill when a young girl was abducted and murdered, a savage and unforgivable crime demanding the harshest of punishments, but-

In the same week about 3 children were killed by their parents or close realtives, non-sexual but they are still dead, and in all probability they lead worse lives up 2 there deaths

and

The mob culture in this country then tried to hound out of their homes some suspected (often totally inoccent) paedophiles. Even if they were guilty they may harm a few children a year whilst elsewhere on these estates and even more well known are drug dealers and pimps who harm many more children in many more ways- of course the sad bloke living alone is a slightly easier target to the crack house dealers with semi-automatic guns and a gang of vicious thugs to call on.

So why the mis-belief that every corner hides a sex attacker, well it is my belief that we notice more. b4 the mid 20th century there was always children around who no-one would miss (still some in council homes as recent TV show highlighted). These days when a child is attacked by a stranger (and most are attacked by those they know) it is rare enough to make headline news.

Is this just a UK thing Frag? or is it like that where u r?

Kadu Flyer

There is not a word in the above, or indeed in the entry to disagree with, and I don't think Mina was objecting to the content, just the tone. That was certainly my concern. There was, to my sensitive soul anyway, something - perhaps the encouragement to deceit that Mina mentioned - that wasn't quite right/honest in the intent of the article. I would certainly defend the right of both authors to say what they want, but question the necessity of having this entry - as writen/edited - in the Guide. The nature/definition/use of porn is irrelevant. Indeed had that been the subject, by goosebumps would not have been raised!

Good points, well made (twice) Kadu.

I think one of the worst things about those paedophile demonstrations last year was that parents were involving their children in wandering around the streets, shouting obscenities and generally encouraging lynch mob mentality. Pretty poor parenting I say.

Kadu Flyer, the US is different from the UK when it comes to reporting paedophilia. In the US, the press is obligated to keep the identity of the child a secret. And for the most part, the press views the matter as a private one. You might see the occasional article about whether paedophilia is common or not, but usually the issue doesn't receive much press. In the US, the current media furor is about child-on-child violence, especially murders with guns taking place at school.

Pheroneous, you discussed how you felt 'the tone' of the entry was lacking. I'm still waiting for more specific criticism, so I can discuss it rationally. But if all I get is that 'the tone' is disturbing, I'm not sure how to respond to that. I could go into a 'Yes it is,' 'No it isn't' debate with you. But I don't see how that will make anyone feel better or improve the entry.

Well, I hesitate before taking you on, Frag, as I suspect I am to be soundly beaten, but I'll try.

Some points that raised my goosebumps.

The three 'typical' users mentioned: Married Man, Paedophile and teen. As a MM I resent being in the same sentence as the other two. Paedophiles are surely a minute minority anyway, hardly a 'market sector' equivalent to the other two. I would have guesssed that single men and married women at home were more important.

(aside: If you wish to portray MM as dissatisfied, then surely he will want to keep libido quiet, and not 'use' pornography which will exacerbate the situation. Besides most MM too busy/knackered to sit in front of PC at night)

(aside: I thought you were going to say that the internet widens availability of porn, and thus brings in hitherto uncatered for markets - particularly women)

The legal points paragraph includes three pieces of advice. The first is hectoring, the second and third both again raise the question of paedophilia (Yes, I realise there are definition questions).

The 'cleaning up' advice. Implies guilt, which in turn implies you have been 'doing wrong', which goes against your implied contention that porn, of itself, is 'normal'. (If not, why write the entry?)

Thank you Pheroneous for putting into words the feelings I had about this article. I was struggling to justify my instincts about this entry.

Okay. Just to clarify, Pheroneous and Mina, I don't want to give anyone a sound thrashing. I want to make you more comfortable with the entry, and I think we may be able to do that by improving it. But I'm not willing to take information out of the entry that is genuinely useful or which covers important social issues. I think that would be a disservice to our readers.

Okay. It seems the huge majority of the problem with this entry comes in two places. First, this paragraph:

'Internet pornography has become so popular partly because it offers a level of anonymity never available before. While most people simply enjoy keeping their personal thoughts and interests private, others use this factor as a shield for dubious activities. A married man can reasonably keep his wife from discovering his dissatisfaction with their sex life; a paedophile can conceal his interest from family members and co-workers; and a teen can learn a great deal about the facts of life without his/her parents' knowledge simply by clicking a link saying s/he is older than s/he really is. What impact this ultimately has on society is a question for debate.'

Please remember the context of this paragraph. We are detailing problematic issues, not giving a rough idea of the constituency of viewers. In fact, there is no way to estimate constinuency because most viewing is done anonymously. Is there any way you would rephrase the paragraph above that would be better for you?

And second, we have the section at the bottom: Cleaning Up and Protecting Others. So far I can't tell whether it is the existence of this section, or whether it is something particular, like the way it is titled. Or this sentence maybe:

'If you take heed of the advice given here you should be able to find sites that meet your needs in relative safety with minimum cost and risk.'

Could you clarify exactly what is troublesome in this section?

Also, is there anything missing that might make you feel better? Would it help, for instance, to include information of a more positive nature about the psychological benefits of this stuff for single people?

In view of the subject matter, and Mina's predilictions, I was rather looking forward to a sound thrashing. The thought of Frag dressed in...

Unfortunately you've now rather put me on a spot, put up or shut up time!

'Internet pornography has become so popular partly because it offers a level of anonymity never available before. While most people simply enjoy keeping their personal thoughts and interests private, others use this anonymity as a shield for dubious activities. Young or old, married or single, deviant or just curious the solitary surfer has the opportunity to explore a vice in secret. What impact this ultimately has on society is a question for debate.'

I would change your second 'advice' to something like:-

If you find material that is offensive to you, you can report it to ..... Be aware, of course, that one persons family snaps may be anothers source of concern, as demonstrated at The Saatchi Gallery recently.

In introducing the last section, I might have something a little lighter, e.g.

It may be that you wish to keep your surfing habits private, or not to allow other users of your PC to see what you have seen. If that is the case, then here are some ways to wipe the trail.

As a sweeping generalisation, I would have liked a little humour here and there, a smile or a giggle always helps!, and one or two less mentions of paedophiles/children/teens. Also a mention of written prose/poetry porn which is widely available and, I am led to believe, quite popular among those who would only read 'Romantic Fiction' in public!

And now, you've made feel that I'm telling you what/how to write and that wasn't the intention at all. Its more important that you are able to write what you want, how you want, than whether you offend or perturb sensitive souls such as Mina and myself (So long as we remain free to comment!)

Whilst not wanting 2 sound negative in anyway, and I am sure your suggestions are valid, the entry was in the Peer Review forum 4 a long time (the thread has yet to b returned post downtime) and many suggestions, including Frag's almost total re-write of the start and many additions throughout were made.

i am sure that if there was 2 b a method of updating entries then your suggestions would be valuble, but at the present they are just a little late

On the subject of "cleaning up" my view is that if all users were more open about their usage - and I know many people who indulge - then the need will not b so great, until that time then there will still be a negative view taken of users and therefore a need to know how to clean up.

On a psitve point to end on - recently someone posted a link to some child porn on a forum I view, not only were they flamed to peices before the moderators got there, but the sites listed were reported and as much info about the sender was as well. The reaction was total and made it clear where users of that forum drew the line.

Kadu Flyer

Oh and thanks to Frag for debating this much better than i can, and my absence is not from cowadice but lack of PC access and my work access.

You've asked what would make us feel better about this article, then when someone does you say they are too late.
I don't get time to go through the peer review page but I make sure that I check out the front page so I see entries as they come up. I assumed that's what it was for.
I am not going to be around for the next few days, but I am going to try to determine what is putting me off. I think it is a very good idea to have an enty like this, and I know I'm not being very helpful. But if I make suggestions, what use will they be if you think it is too late to make changes?

You have right on your side KF. We could/should have had this discussion in PR. But Mina is also right, an invitation was issued and accepted. Its up to Frag if she wants to change 'her' version or not. Whether or not the 'Guide' version can be/should be changed I don't know. Presumably the Guide's editors are happy with it as it is, and thats that.

Fair point, Frag did ask, but the entry was mine initially and i have the original and may if i have time alter it and let the team know, the path for updates is very unclear.

Certainly the feedback was welcome, don't get me wrong, if not 4 this 1 then 4 other entries i may do - no-one et volunteered to do a erotic Vs Porn entry? i feel there is an entry there waiting 2 b writen.

KF

Mina, try to understand that Kadu Flyer and me don't agree on everything all the time.

I think it would be easier to update the entry than Kadu Flyer fears. Once we have a better version, I would recommend running it by Ashley (one of h2g2's Italics). Under the circumstances, I think he might be very willing to make a change.

To make it easier for him, though, I would suggest keeping track of what has been changed. That way, it would only be necessary for Ashley to look over the changed material. I wouldn't want to ask him to review the whole thing again.

If this is an instruction manual it is actually incorrect and totally misleading. It is not enough to delete cookies, history and temporary files. The article gives the impression that that is enough.

When you delete files they remain on your hard disk. Filling up the hard disk until it is full is a reasonable way of getting rid of many traces of your surfing. However, professional software is necessary to do it with any degree of thoroughness.

In actual fact the only way to completely remove any trace whatsoever of your pornographic meanderings over the web with total certainty is take out your hard disk, put it on a hot fire and wait until it has glowed white for ten minutes.

Well, yes. The issue with computer surveillance of any sort is that it is basically a geek war. The person hiding their information has to attempt to out-guess the people they think might be trying to spy on their activities. All too often, the person with the greater technology skill will win.

There is a big difference between the extreme measures you would have to take to *completely* remove all information from your hard drive, and the relatively minor steps you need to take to keep a typical computer user from spying on you. If, for instance, the US National Security Agency is trying to spy on you, you're pretty much certain to lose.

If you're just trying to keep your grandmother from stumbling across your XXX choices, that's not usually very hard.

Ta Frag.

And the way to stop other h2g2 researchers know your talking about porn is to create a new researcher ID, don't change the default name and only post to the forum once


Kadu

LOL! Good one, Kadu Flyer.

Now, if the h2g2 employees were determined enough, they could probably detect the IP address of the user who created the account. This would at least give them a good idea where the user hails from. They could then run a match between that IP address and ones from the past month or so. If the user has a static address (like a work computer) or pulls from a small pool of addresses (like a school computer lab), we'd know their other identity(s).

This is just another example of how any measure besides junking your own computer can ultimately be defeated...

Just a question and a point to make. Firstly I certainly don't condone underage porn, mainly because it is illegal. But after reading the entries above about legal age girls posing as underage girls I would like to know your views.
The person veiwing the site, as far as they're aware, are seeing underage girls. The girls on the website are still very young 16-18. If this is the case what would be the difference between the 16-18 girls pretending and girls of 14-15 actually being pictured? (That's if they are happy doing it etc)? Also, how young could they be before it becomes unacceptable for them to be pictured?

Interesting issues I think...

That's a real good question.

I would have to say that I see more skin on 14-15 year old girls at the mall than on the internet, and their parents, I assume, know they dress like that.

In many states in the USA, the age of consent is under 18 (usually 16 or 17), but pornographers are so afraid of being prosecuted if their porn goes across state lines, they just stick to over-18 models.

Now there's a difference between different kinds of pictures, and an argument can be convincingly made that a tasteful, artistic, nude picture of a 17 year old girl (who is of legal age to approach sexually in my state) is not porn, but art. So I would be curious to know what constitutes the researcher's definition of child porn.

Generally, though, I doubt that there are many child porn sites out there. The way people report it seems to be very effective in ridding the internet of that particular problem.