[GN] Hey European News Editors
Rex Wockner
As some of you know, I'm in Amsterdam, where I covered the world's first
fully real weddings for gay people.
In the process, I discovered this annoying story, which you might want to
pursue. I plan to pursue it when I find time.
EasyEverything (www.easyeverything.com) is Europe's largest chain of
Internet-access superstores -- the store I'm sitting in in Amsterdam right
now has more than 200 high-speed access stations with flat-panel monitors.
It's an impressive operation.
BUT, there's a filter on the Web to block porn and in the process it is
blocking such things as
www.gaywired.com (completely)
www.gay.com (it'll load the text of gay.com but no pictures)
and other legitimate gay-news Web sites.
I complained to the manager of this store 12 hours ago and he said he'd
call the head office in London and fix it immediately -- at least for
gaywired.com and gay.com.
Well, I'm back 12 hours later and the sites are still blocked.
That's outrageous.
Please write about it if there are EasyEverything cafes in your country.
Thanks,
Rex Wockner
**********
If you receive GayNet via direct email:
To post, send mail to gay...@queernet.org.
To unsubscribe, send mail to majo...@queernet.org; put a line saying
unsubscribe gaynet
in the body. (This may fail if your address has changed since you signed
up; if so, or for other assistance, contact gaynet-...@queernet.org.)
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Zeke Krahlin
<< there's a filter on the Web to block porn and in the process it is blocking such things as
www.gaywired.com (completely)
www.gay.com (it'll load the text of gay.com but no pictures)
and other legitimate gay-news Web sites. >>
Just as I suspected: when you have anti-porno policies, there will be a de facto censor of any and all gay-related sites. Bad enough with these unofficial anti-porn settings, but just wait until Ashcroft passes the Internet pornography laws here in the U.S.!
What a perfect cover for the Religious Reich to ban any lesbian or gay presence on the Internet...just report it as "offensive"; toss in the word "gay", and *bang, you're history. This is partly because the majority accepts the Nazi-Christian definition of "pornography" as including any term or discussion relating to homosexuality...that is, "gay" is defined as innately perverted, inferior, and dangerous.
And, as we have seen various times in the Supreme Court: when it comes to any gay issue, all legal processes are suspended, and all due process is thrown out the window. There is virtually NO justice and NO protection of our gay citizens, here in the United States.
And when such an anti-porno/anti-gay Internet law is passed in the U.S.A....the next step is to do same in real space (not just cyberspace). "Well, if we found it so important to ban any gay presence from the Internet, then how much more important it is to do the same for our real spaces, our communities, our homes. Think of the children!"
==
Lavender Revolution
http://surf.to/gaybible
_____________________________________________________________
David Alan Thompson
> Just as I suspected: when you have anti-porno
> policies, there will be a de facto censor of any and
> all gay-related sites. Bad enough with these
> unofficial anti-porn settings, but just wait until
> Ashcroft passes the Internet pornography laws here
> in the U.S.!
First of all, the last time I checked, the US Attorney
General did not pass laws in this country; he is
merely part of the branch that enforces them once they
have been passed by Congress.
As for tying even sterile gay sites to pornography, I
can only add that parenthood is, in and of itself, an
irrational state of mind. If it is necessary to ban
even constructive gay sites in order to block out
pornography, they will do so. Companies such as the
one when Rex Wockner originally referred to are
private companies and--barring government regulation
which is only minor and has recognized the inability
of government to regulate the Internet--they can
basically do what they want with their assets. They
really aren't hurting anyone and I'm sure Wockner
could have found another place to surf the Internet if
it was so important to do so.
What I would point out, however, is that those who
complain about the filtering are not offering any
choice except an end to any and all censorship and
parents who are seeking to protect their children
simply won't tolerate that. No, I'm not trying to
defend censorship; but the political reality is that
parents will readily sacrifice liberty (especially
others) for the security (however overestimated) of
knowing that their children are not seeing porn on the
Internet.
I would offer at least a partial suggestion of a
solution: It seems inappropriate that one company--in
this case the software manufacturer who develops the
filtering protocol--to decide what is and isn't
appropriate for EVERYONE.
My niece is going to be 5 years old this years and my
brother and sister-in-law are considering options for
her including home schooling. They are not worried
that she is going to be taught that homosexuality is
acceptable; they are worried that she is not going to
be taught that homosexuality is acceptable and that
being gay does not stop her uncle from loving her very
much (and buying her way too many toys and gifts and
generally spoiling rotten, but I digress). They know
that she is going to start getting out on the Internet
very soon and are VERY concerned that what she sees is
not appropriate.
My idea: I'd like to see a software manufacturer
create a filtering program and then release the
standards to anyone and everyone. Any organization
that wishes to develop a filtering protocol is welcome
to do so and the manufacturing company could make
those protocols available on their web site. And when
I say any company, I mean anyone and everyone--from
Focus on the Family to NGLTF to Concerned Women of
America to the UFMCC to anyone else who might want to
provide that service.
Furthermore, I would hope that such software includes
the option of allowing parents to not necessarily
block a specific set of sites but to also allow access
to some sites but red flag them for parents who can
later discuss items on said site.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/