World pornography authority Professor Gail Dines says, “Iceland is taking a very progressive approach that no other democratic country has tried.”
Two years after the Icelandic Parliament successfully banned strip clubs, based on “the grounds that they violated the civil rights of the women who worked there and were harmful to society,” The island nation may become the first Western democratic nation to outlaw internet porn. Several new proposals in parliament are based on the argument that “porn violates the rights of both women who appear in it and children who are exposed to it.” The Daily Mail reports that legislation which bans the “printing and distribution” of pornographic materials has been in place in Iceland for quite some time, but it has never been updated to include the internet.
Several committees have been set up by Interior Minister Ögmundur Jónasson to determine the most effective way to block the “flood of graphic sexual material” that comes to the island via computers, games consoles and smartphones. Some of the methods being considered include a nationwide block on known porn IP addresses, and passing a law that would make it illegal to use credit cards based out of Iceland to access the sites.
Concerns over the potentially harmful effect of internet porn on children were first brought to the governments attention in 2010 after a nationwide inquiry and “wide-ranging consultation process” was undertaken to focus on how rape and sexual assault cases are handled in the Icelandic justice system. The investigation found that,
Children exposed to violent pornography at an early age were showing the similar signs of trauma as youngsters who had been actually abused … These included becoming increasingly isolated and playing out what they had seen on the internet on younger family members or other children … It concluded that the extremely violent nature of the material now freely available on the web was increasing the intensity of sex attacks.
Mr. Jónasson, who is a member of the Left Green Movement, claims that “filtering out porn is not a question of censorship. We have to be able to discuss a ban on violent pornography, which we all agree has a very harmful effects on young people and can have a clear link to incidences of violent crime.”
The political advisor to the Interior Minister, Halla Gunnarsdóttir says, “There is a strong consensus building in Iceland … We have so many experts from educationalists to the police and those who work with children behind this, that this has become much broader than party politics … This move is not anti-sex. It is anti-violence because young children are seeing porn and acting it out. That is where we draw the line … This material is blurring the boundaries for young people about what is right and wrong.”
While many argue that it is the right and responsibility of parents to determine what, and when their children are exposed to “graphic sexual content,” Miss Gunnarsdóttir argues that parents can no longer be held fully responsible for what types of sexually explicit material their children come into contact with. She says, “Parents are not the only ones responsible for protecting our young people. They cannot be with their children all the time and the porn industry actively tries to seek children out … Children also no longer use computers just in their homes. They access the internet in many places, in many ways and on smartphones. We say protecting our children is a task for the whole society.”
Do you think it is the right, or responsibility of the government to ban porn to protect children?
THIS IS GREAT
Recently It has been scientifically proved that porno materials cause Different physiological Disease
Such as Depression and schizophrenia both of them damages the brain functions badly
not to mention that who ever exposed to these materials in early age will probably suffer addiction
and various Masculinity disease which may eventually creates aver miserable person >>>>>>
SPREAD THAT TRUTH
Good luck…
Okay, this posting says “Iceland Set to Block Internet Porn” as if the law were imminent and a done deal. Other reports are saying that this might not be the case: A member of the parliament committee studying the issue, Jonsdottir says a porn ban has “near zero” chance of passing parliament and that she’s working to find other ways the government can help protect children from Web porn. “Introducing censorship without compromising freedom of expression and speech is like trying to mix oil and water: It is impossible,” she wrote. “I know my fellow MPs can often turn strange… Read more »
I would not label this as a “progressive” move. Quite the opposite, at least the way that I think of “progressive.” Maybe in the really old-fashioned sense of the Progressives from the 1890’s in America. Those old-school Progressives banned reproductive information from being sent through the mail, in the name of protecting people from obscenity. Even medical students couldn’t have their textbooks sent through the mail because the books showed where babies came from. This is a repressive move. One could present an argument that it could help protect children, but that by itself does not make it progressive. States… Read more »
Gail Dines is not a “world pornography authority”, she’s an anti-pornography activist. Don’t believe me? That’s the description that SHE HERSELF uses on her website. She calls herself “Anti-Pornography Activist, Lecturer, Author, Professor”. So not only is she far from objective, but she considers her anti-pornography activism as more important to her description than the fact that she is a lecturer, an author and a professor. As far as I am concerned, she has no credibility. This new law is unfortunately only too expected from Nordic countries, where feminism of an especially hostile mindset reigns, one that infantilizes women like… Read more »
Two quotes from two of my countrymen come to mind, “the first condition of progress is the removal of censorship” and “as to the evil which results from censorship, it is impossible to measure it, because it is impossible to tell where it ends,” George Bernard Shaw and Jeremy Bentham respectively. Censorship of expression is just a bad idea on so many levels. The existence of porn may offend, but it does not entail a violation of women or children’s rights. The argument that it does is riddled with gaping holes. It doesn’t make any logical sense, but I guess… Read more »
This is an incredibly dumb idea for one very simple reason: It won’t work. It’s impossible to block all porn, and in practice you can’t even block most porn without also blocking a huge number of legitimate sites, ranging from sex ed, to sites about Cockfosters and Scunthorpe, to sites like the GMP, which happen to mention a lot of “verboten” terms.
That’s before we even begin to deal with deciding what counts as porn, given that the best definition anyone can come up with so far is “I know it when I see it”.
You beat me to it. My thoughts exactly. Good point about how the GMP would probably be banned.
Another irony, perhaps, is that the Scandinavian countries, particularly Iceland, have a really low birth rate. Children are actually less common than they use to be. Maybe that’s part of the context? Protecting a vanishing group of people?
I have often wondered , is porn as exploitive as other industries. I wish I had the money to conduct an experiment in a large US or Canadian city. Here is what I would do I would advertise in the local newspaper, kijji or other forms of media looking for porn actresses and see how many responses I would get. If the industry is as explotive as some claim I should get next to none , if I were honest and upfront about what I wanted. After all, if people aren’t making a personal choice to do porn and are… Read more »
If the industry is as explotive as some claim I should get next to none , if I were honest and upfront about what I wanted. After all, if people aren’t making a personal choice to do porn and are somehow tricked into it then no one would answer the ad. But radical feminists and most other radical types do not accept this notion of consent and “making a personal choice.” For them, there is no such thing as consensual “sex work” (or any kind of work probably). For them, female persons only choose to do work like pornography because… Read more »
The hypocrisy is that those who are calling porn so exploitative are probably wearing clothes made by children in slave-labour style conditions, etc. I do hope they are also working against that too.
Huh, I always thought America was the only country where people would rather babyproof the entire nation than actually parent their own kids.
I don’t see this actually working though. People who want to look at porn will still find a way unless they prevent anyone in Iceland from accessing servers outside of Iceland.
Exactly. I’m puzzled why this being labeled as ‘progressive.’ What could more regressive than invoking puritanical anti-sex attitudes to clamp down on freedom “for the children”?
I’m not taking a side either way on the issue, but I found the legal wording behind their move rather interesting. They say the reasoning behind the possible ban is that “porn violates the rights of both women who appear in it and children who are exposed to it.” But I do have to ask: what about men in porn, who appear in “films” where they are abused or degraded (they do exist)? What about gay pornography? I guess, since they’re not women, men (gay or straight) can’t have their rights violated.
But I do have to ask: what about men in porn, who appear in “films” where they are abused or degraded (they do exist)? What about gay pornography? I guess, since they’re not women, men (gay or straight) can’t have their rights violated. No, the anti-pornography radical feminists usually condemn all brands of pornography across the board. And they say that male persons are also degraded and violated by pornography and that is bad too. Of course, that is probably a secondary concern. Is pornography always wrong in MacKinnon’s view? “If you actually think about it,” she says, “what is… Read more »
tendrecroppes beat me to it. Oh, well, here’s my ditto: According to the official announcement, “porn violates the rights of both women who appear in it…” — So, male-on-male porn would be acceptable? “…and children who are exposed to it.” — Perhaps it’s a translation issue, but I can’t help but notice the use of passive voice, which avoids any question of human responsibility. Children are exposed to it, by whom? Porn just has a mind of its own and infiltrates a society like the Invasion of the Body Snatchers? A more precise law, more focused on human culpability, would… Read more »
This is a fantastically progressive move. Bravo to you, Iceland, for facing this and dealing with it. I’m waiting for the USA to catch up with you.
If China & Saudi Arabia can’t stomp out porn with their draconian measures what makes you think Iceland will? BTW keep voting for the right to control your neighbor’s actions, nothing could possibly go wrong with that.
Archy, you often say exactly what I’m thinking when I read this tripe. I agree with you 100%. I would also like to point out that parents who let the government raise their kids due to being “busy” (IMO “lazy” or “scared”) are utter sheep, leaving their lambs at risk from the real wolves. Stand up and raise your kids, folks. Give the informed, educated and age-appropriate sex talk, preferably earlier than you think you should. Teach abuse prevention, respect, consent (even for hugs from relatives they don’t want to hug). Don’t teach shame, guilt, and especially body shame. Don’t… Read more »
Porn, violent or not, was unhealthy for me to grow up with, and caused problems for me that I had no idea were related until I finally decided to give it up for good 3 months ago. (I am a 25 year old male). There is no way for parents to successfully prevent their children from seeing online porn all by themselves, it is too easy to get to one way or another, especially as most children are more computer savvy than their parents anyway. Porn is something that one should be able to decide on as an adult, but… Read more »
Children can watch people killed on tv, torn apart in saw, yet we worry about porn? Internet filters, not giving them their own smartphone unless it’s got filters on it would be a start. The internet is not a place to just dump your kid n leave them. The internet should always be able to have adult content, I will not support measures to block ALL adult content whether that be violent games or porn because I as an adult have the right to choose to view it. Make a safe-net for kids to be in and let the adults… Read more »
“This comment could only come from a man…. nice work minimising degradation, exploitation and sexual violence. Selfish, exploitative, narcissistic hedonist.” Yes only a man could be so worried about censoring the internet for ALL to cater to children. The fear of children being exposed to content is justification to outright ban it because that is the intelligent thing to do. Thank-you mods for allowing personal attacks through, along with misandry to boot. Nice work to the commenter for showing outright sexism towards men on a site for men whilst assuming I am minimizing the harms done in porn. Did it… Read more »
How did this comment get by the mods of this site. A complete personal attack on Archy. I don’t usually call for bans, but this comment by chris should warrant a ban.
BTW, chris, banning porn is all well and good but what’s next. After all , violence is very harmfull to kids and yet we see it everyday, way more than porn.
(MOD NOTE: Comment has been blocked for personal attack)
Thanks, looks like it has been dealt with. I don’t mind criticism of what I say but outright sexism n useless personal attacks are annoying.