Parents can block porn PPV from hotel TVs. Porn is also freely available in newsstands. Magazines only have plastic wrap around them. Are you suggesting that porn should not be sold in newsstands because idle kids can easily tear the plastic wrap in order to browse at the unpaid for magazine?
Let's refocus on the topic of this thread - porn on hotel TV's.
It has been our experience that not every hotel/motel that offers porn has the capability to selectively block channels on their television system - so, No, parents can not always block porn from hotel TV's. And if you read my earlier posts, you would see I mentioned a system where if you don't a change channel for >3 minutes, movies automatically start - and you don't necessarily know what the movie will be on that system.
What I am suggesting:
1. The default setting on porn be "OFF" - make it an opt in system so those who wish to watch it can do so, but those who do not are not subjected to it. I know far more people who would be offended by spontaneous skin on screen than would enjoy it - and they are definitely NOT all children.
2. Those ADULTS who wish to watch porn take some sort of minor action to make the purchase - get a code from the front desk, etc.
If people wish to view pornography outside of hotels, it isn't spontaneouly available - they must take some form of action to obtain it (order the cable, channel, rent the flick, etc.). Why would it be such an imposition to do that in a hotel as well?
Many people find porn profoundly offensive, and would like to see it banned entirely. If some, like myself, are willing to respect the rights of adults to make choices in their private lives, why can not those who want porn reciprocate with a little respect for others' desire NOT to watch it, and support an opt in system?
Many people find porn profoundly offensive, and would like to see it banned entirely. If some, like myself, are willing to respect the rights of adults to make choices in their private lives, why can not those who want porn reciprocate with a little respect for others' desire NOT to watch it, and support an opt in system?
Just so long as you make everything opt-in. I am profoundly offended by religious crud (TV preachers etc.), annoying commercials, moron-level chair-throwing talk shows, and similar things. Can we make those opt-in too? I don't see a difference between my having to watch those things for a few seconds before the remote changes the channel and someone seeing a porn promo for a few seconds in a similar situation. (And by the way, the porn promos are pretty tame.)
The American great unwashed seem to have a weird obsession about being "profoundly offended" by sex to the exclusion of other things, and frankly, I don't see any particular reason to indulge that obsession.
Whatever happened to parents being responsible for their children's TV surfing?
Please explain to me what is not "being responsible" in this situation:
1. Child and parent in same hotel room
2. Parent packing suitcase
3. child has TV remote trying find to Sesame Street
4. Child comes to channel to that is just static
5. child sets remote down to get toy
6. TV suddenly starts showing porn flick that is NOT soft core
7. child gets quite an eyeful before parent can lunge across room and shut TV off.
When there is no TV Guide equivalent available, channel surfing is the only way to find a program. Would you suggest that people who don't want to watch porn have no right to use the TV at all?
And for those who have stated that porn is mainly in business oriented hotels meant for adults: this was in a locally owned motel in Medford, Oregon, with a playground out front - not a business executive in sight.
Please explain to me what is not "being responsible" in this situation:
1. Child and parent in same hotel room
2. Parent packing suitcase
3. child has TV remote trying find to Sesame Street
4. Child comes to channel to that is just static
5. child sets remote down to get toy
6. TV suddenly starts showing porn flick that is NOT soft core
7. child gets quite an eyeful before parent can lunge across room and shut TV off.
When there is no TV Guide equivalent available, channel surfing is the only way to find a program. Would you suggest that people who don't want to watch porn have no right to use the TV at all?
And for those who have stated that porn is mainly in business oriented hotels meant for adults: this was in a locally owned motel in Medford, Oregon, with a playground out front - not a business executive in sight.
If I were you, I'd be upset about this situation. But, as I stated earlier, I do not, and would not, allow my child to channel surf. Even if the porn did not come on automatically, there is plenty of content on "regular" TV that is inappropriate for children. And I don't think the appropriate response to what you experienced is to make all guests at all hotels have to opt-in to view otherwise legal content. Part of the freedom we are debating is being able to choose the content you want to view without having to "out" yourself to do so. (That said, although the name of the movie doesn't typically appear on the hotel bill, they all know what you're watching: when the hotel staff see a movie on your bill, they just assume it was porn, and they're wrong less than half the time!!!) I assume you complained to the hotel, and hopefully if the hotel receives enough complaints, they'll fix their system. But to mandate a country-wide opt-in program because some hotels have less protection than others is a huge overreaction.
If the parent is so totally obsessed with the child not getting an "eyeful", whatever that might mean, the parent should keep the TV turned off and the remote at hand while packing/unpacking or otherwise distracted. How hard is that?
(A more reasonable solution might be to just not worry so much about it, but the anti-sex crowd doesn't want to hear that.)
A more reasonable solution might be to just not worry so much about it, but the anti-sex crowd doesn't want to hear that.
Let's be clear: although we are having a spirited debate, there's no reason to believe that SptCA is part of the "anti-sex crowd." He or she had an unfortunate pay-per-porn experience, and we're debating the appropriate response. (You certainly don't have to be "anti-sex" to want to shield your child from porn, although certainly some will react more strongly than others.) I agree that SptCA bears some responsibility ("contributory negligence," the lawyers would call it), but I also agree that the hotel system is not as secure as it should be. That said, I don't agree with SptCA than any sort of government-mandated response is appropriate.
If the parent is so totally obsessed with the child not getting an "eyeful", whatever that might mean, the parent should keep the TV turned off and the remote at hand while packing/unpacking or otherwise distracted. How hard is that?
(A more reasonable solution might be to just not worry so much about it, but the anti-sex crowd doesn't want to hear that.)
So you're saying that children in hotels shouldn't be allowed to watch Sesame Street so that the hotel can be free to have porn promos or flicks on every channel?
Do adults who don't want to watch porn have any rights to use the TV in your value sytem?
As for your "anti-sex crowd" crack: I'll just quote one of my college professors:
"Those who can, do. Those who can't, watch it on TV."
To me, all things displayed on a hotel room TV have equal status. Some people like some things, some people like other things. Adults who don't want to watch porn have no greater rights than those who don't want to watch other things (religion, talk shows, commercials). If you don't like what you see, change the channel. If the channel does not change immediately, accept the fact that (gasp!) you might see a snippet of something you don't care for, whether that's porn, Jerry Springer, or a a Depends commercial. Get over it.
If you want your kid to watch Sesame St., go tune the TV to Sesame St. and go back to packing. Otherwise, if your kid not getting an "eyeful" is a major thing of importance to you, take control of the remote. If it isn't, then don't worry about it. But I don't think it's the hotel's duty to "protect" you from a porn promo any more that it's their duty to "protect" me from a TV preacher.
1. The default setting on porn be "OFF" - make it an opt in system so those who wish to watch it can do so, but those who do not are not subjected to it. I know far more people who would be offended by spontaneous skin on screen than would enjoy it - and they are definitely NOT all children.
2. Those ADULTS who wish to watch porn take some sort of minor action to make the purchase - get a code from the front desk, etc.
I think number 1 is reasonable, but number 2 isn't. They shouldn't have to ask to opt in. The code or key or whatever, should just be given to every customer. Those who don't want it can hide, or throw away, the paper with the code on it. Those who want it don't have to ask for it since it's included.
Programs: AA EXP/2MM, QF WP, DL PM, US Conscientious Objector, TED Boycotter, SPG PLT, TSA Disparager Diamond
Posts: 37,443
Quote:
Originally Posted by SptCA
Please explain to me what is not "being responsible" in this situation:
1. Child and parent in same hotel room
2. Parent packing suitcase
3. child has TV remote trying find to Sesame Street
4. Child comes to channel to that is just static
5. child sets remote down to get toy
6. TV suddenly starts showing porn flick that is NOT soft core
7. child gets quite an eyeful before parent can lunge across room and shut TV off.
What's not being responsible in the first place? #3, giving the child the remote. Duh.
Controling what your children watch and handing the child an "unsecured" remote are incompatible.
Damn Society, it's all your fault again.
__________________
You cannot uphold American ideology with un-American actions. It's time for change.
I think number 1 is reasonable, but number 2 isn't. They shouldn't have to ask to opt in. The code or key or whatever, should just be given to every customer. Those who don't want it can hide, or throw away, the paper with the code on it. Those who want it don't have to ask for it since it's included.
I agree w/ DeafFlyer. The porn channels should be defaulted to OFF. And I've been to hotels where you use the room number as the confirmation/key to get the channels. Seems like a reasonable system to me.
I recall checking in a rather fancy hotel in Paris a month ago, turning on the TV and BAM! right there, no kid security screen nothing, a couple of hard-core channels! And I do mean hard core, close-up, bareback stuff, none of that faux-romantic Playboy channel material.
Psst -- in some European countries, (softcore) porn is shown on free-to-air channels on weekend nights. And absolutely anything goes on cable, the French channel Canal Plus is known as "Anal Plus" for a reason
