[AusNOG] conroy reaffirms commitment to filter

[Curtis Bayne]

Isn't restricting access to pornography and discouraging its creation a condemnation of the rights of women in the first place? Women should be free to do as men do IMHO.

-----Original Message-----
From: ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net on behalf of Grahame Lynch
Sent: Thu 7/1/2010 10:25 AM
To: Andrew Oskam
Cc: ausnog at lists.ausnog.net
Subject: Re: [AusNOG] conroy reaffirms commitment to filter
 
I just want to make a point as an observer and someone who
edits/processes/publishes copy about this issue and talks about it with
people in the government.

The policy is often described as a sop to the "right" or to the "religious".
My experience is that it is not. The intellectual grandfather of the
justifications for the filter policy in Australia is a left-wing
pro-feminist academic Clive Hamilton. I went to university and was a
political combatant with his protege Michael Flood (who published a men's
feminist magazine amongst other things) and I can can assure everyone that
the train of thought behind this policy is not about winning the church
vote, it is derived more from the intellectual construct that sees things
like an unfiltered Internet as reinforcing the patriarchy and the
exploitation of women (or kids). It is the same impulse that wants to
regulate the objectification of women via sexual imagery in media
advertising for example.

I've spoken with people in government who defend the policy from a feminist
POV, not a religious one.

It is really important to "know your enemy" if you want to fight something
and I don't see much evidence that in this case the enemy has been correctly
identified.

Oh and by the way I'm by no means anti-feminist or anti-religious. But I
don't particularly like the filter!

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20100701/5ff9939d/attachment.html>