[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

The Australian in support of Pete



On line at:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,5843596%255E7583,00.html

Greg Barns: Save the hard line for real abusers 

January 16, 2003
BRITISH rock star Pete Townshend's taste in Internet
sites mightn't be everyone's cup of tea.

But for law enforcement authorities in the UK to drag
him down to the local nick and threaten to prosecute
him for using a child pornography website should be
offensive to all who believe that the state has no
role in regulating what adults do in their own homes. 

Of course, it would be different if Townshend were
showing children the offending material, or
downloading and distributing it in a workplace. But
the evidence here is that there was no one else
involved in his cyber activity other than himself. 

Not only that, but Townshend was downloading material
that is available to anyone in the world who dials up
the Internet. 

In our justifiable rage against the exploitation of
children we have overstepped the mark in the
legislative response. And Australia is no different to
Britain.

In most Australian states it's an offence to possess
child pornography materials from the Internet. In NSW,
for example, you can go to jail for up to two years if
convicted of this offence. 

But what's the rationale for punishing people over 18
who, in the privacy of their home, look at and/or
download such material? You and I might think it's in
poor taste and that the individual concerned needs to
seek therapy, but should they go to jail? 

What has happened to the right to privacy in this
context?

New York University academic Amy Adler answers that
question by noting that what the law is doing here is
unprecedented. She notes that the right of freedom of
expression or speech is banned because of the
possibility that someone might use it for nefarious
purposes. 

And in the US, this stance is leading to bizarre
consequences. Take the case of the 1980s American TV
personality Pee-Wee Herman. Herman's real name is Paul
Reubens and he apparently loves collecting vintage
erotica. The police recently raided Reubens's home and
found about 100,000 such items, some of which
contained photos taken in the '60s of under-age boys
which were by today's standards rather tame.

A district attorney with an obsession about child porn
has taken up the cudgels and is prosecuting Reubens.
His prize exhibit for the trial is, according to media
reports, a few minutes of "grainy footage" among hours
of adult porn videos, showing teenage boys
masturbating. 

The cases against Townshend and Reubens suggest that
our society, when it comes to children, is prepared to
abandon the liberal ideal, so well expressed by former
Canadian prime minister Pierre Trudeau that the
government has no place in the bedroom or in this
case, the computer room. 

The law in this area is censorious and one wonders why
so much taxpayers' money goes towards finding out
who's paying $2.95 to satiate their erotic desires,
when child prostitution and other forms of sexual
abuse should be the real target. Don't throw the
viewer in jail, stop those who make the movies and
take the photos in the first place because then
Townshend and Reubens would have nothing to collect or
buy.

Greg Barns, a former Howard government adviser and now
a member of the Australian Democrats, is a columnist
with the The Mercury in Hobart. 


=====
-Brian in Atlanta
The Who This Month!
http://www.thewhothismonth.com
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com