Related Keywords

No Related Keywords

Register NowHow It Works Need Essay Need Essay
Feminist theory, it should be mentioned from the beginning of the paper, is not a unified theory. As women experience the social world differently according to class, age or "race", there exist different feminist standpoints within the feminist tradition "“ i.e. Marxist or Postmodernist feminists and this explains the need to talk of Feminisms "“ in plural. In general though, feminist theorists in order to explain the marginal position women's issues hold in the social sciences "“ and why they are merely "added on" in the academic discourse, focus their critique upon traditional scientific approaches existing in the social sciences, offering alternative theories of knowledge. In addition, they attack concepts that originate from the founding fathers of each discipline i.e. Durkheim in Sociology, and which still hold an exceptional position in the social sciences. For example, feminists believe that the concepts of scientific neutrality, or objectivity, or the belief that we can achieve "pure" knowledge of the social world, have all contributed to the androcentric status of the social sciences. In this essay we will attempt to define what is meant by "conventional epistemologies" focussing primarily upon Sociology, suggesting also that different feminist epistemologies offer different approaches regarding conventional epistemologies. Thus, it is going to be discussed why feminists view as problematic the "scientific" approach that permeates and influences traditional explanations of the social world. Moreover, we will attempt to explain how feminists, with the introduction of new ways of investigating society "“ that is, the introduction of new subject-areas in social research, the placing of the researcher along with the research in the centre of research analysis, or the emphasis of the importance of locating experience and emotions in the research, challenge conventional epistemologies. Finally, in the end we will suggest that feminist epistemologies strongly challenge not only the theoretical basis of conventional epistemologies, but its application to the methods of investigating the social world as well, offering feminist versions of traditional theories. Feminists criticised traditional social science, suggesting that it offers a distorted picture of social reality, as it predominantly focuses its attention upon men's experiences. But before taking this point further, it is pertinent to briefly explain what is meant by "epistemology". As L. Stanley and S. Wise suggest 1993, the question of epistemology is fundamental for feminism. They state that an "epistemology" is a framework or theory for specifying the constitution and generation of knowledge about the social world; that is it concerns how to understand the nature of reality: A given epistemological framework specifies not only what "knowledge" is and how to recognise it, but who are "knowers" and by what means someone becomes one, and also the means by which competing knowledge-claims are adjudicated and some rejected in favour of another/others. page 188. However, conventional epistemologies and for the purpose of this paper we will limit our discussion of conventional epistemologies referring to the positivist tradition, exclude in their discussion women. As S. Harding puts forward 1987, "epistemology" answers questions about who can be a "knower" and what tests beliefs must pass in order to be legitimated as knowledge. Yet, Traditional epistemologies systematically exclude the possibility that women could be "knowers" or agents of knowledge; they claim that the voice of science is a masculine one"¦ page 3. She goes on to suggest that traditional philosophy of science suggest that the origin of scientific problems or hypotheses is irrelevant to the "goodness" of the results of the research. However, feminist challenges reveal that the questions that are asked in social research, and most significantly those that are not asked, are at least as determinative of the adequacy of our total picture as are any answers we can discover: Defining what is in need of scientific explanation only from the perspective of bourgeois, white men's experiences leads to partial and ever perverse understandings of social life. page 7 Sociology's role in the exclusion and silencing of women from this discourse has also been the object of feminist criticism. D. Smith 1987 states Sociology has been based upon men's social universe. This renders problematic the attempt to think how women experience the world from their place, given the limited concepts and theoretical schemes available to employ. In addition, Smith repudiates the idea that Sociology can be a science challenging therefore directly positivist ideas concerning the status of this discipline within the social sciences. She argues that The Sociology I conceive is much more than ideology and at the same time much less than "science". The governing of our kind of society is done in concepts and symbols. The contribution of Sociology to this is that of working up the conceptual procedures, models and methods by which the immediate and concrete features of experience can be read into the conceptual mode in which the governing is done. page 87. Similarly, M. Millman and R. Kanter 1987 argue that Sociology focuses only on the formal, official action and actors. Thus, it explains the status quo and does not explore much needed social transformations; neither does it encourage a more just humane society. It is also relevant to mention here that the sociological subject in language has been male -"he" and that language which is used describes experiences purportedly universal, although they are exclusively male. Before turning our attention to the different feminist epistemologies mainly the "feminist empiricist" and the "feminist standpoint" we should explicate how feminists take concepts, as well as research practices dominant in conventional epistemology such as "empiricism" "objectivity" "positivism" and "scientific methodology", and deconstruct them in order to challenge the hegemony of such epistemologies. As far as 'objectivity' is concerned, positivist methodological approaches claim that 'objectivity' is an ideal that is attainable, as we can actually stand "outside" of our social world, and observe it without any preconceptions. As a result, the aim of the social scientist is to be detached from the research subject, excluding from the research analysis any discussion of "feelings" or "experiences". Stanley and Wise 1993 state that it is the inductivist research methodology which claims that pure, unbiased, objective knowledge can be produced from the scientific mind's experience of the world. Sydie also suggests that in traditional social science there exists a dichotomy in the sexes where 'objectivity' is given as a male attribute and 'subjectivity' therefore as a female one: The attributes of science are the attributes of males; the objectivity said to be characteristic of the production of scientific knowledge is specifically identified as a male way of relating to the world"¦women by contrast, are 'subjective'. Page 207. Sydie also discusses Weber and Durkheim ideas in relation to the issue of "objectivity" in the social sciences, as their ideas still hold an eminent position in modern social theory. Weber, she argues page 214 sustains that "objectivity" in the social sciences is secured by the fact that once the object of the sociological interest has been selected in terms of values, then values cease to enter into the causal explanations offered regarding the behaviour and events. If we turn to Durkheim now, we can see that he believed that it is possible for social facts to become visible to the sociologist, as they exist "independent of the individual forms" and can be "recognised by the power of external coercion it exercises over individuals Sydie, page 43. Thus, for Durkheim as Sydie argues the independence of social facts from particular individuals meant also that social facts had to be explained in terms of other social facts and therefore the "objectivity of the observation would be secured in the same manner as the natural sciences" page 43. However, according to many feminist theorists objectivity should not be the primary aim of a social investigation. Rather, researchers should take into consideration their age class and "race" and consider how these will effect the research process. In addition, it should be recognised that feminist researchers shape the results of their analyses no less than do those of sexist and androcentric researchers. The "objectivist" stance should be avoided as it attempts to make the researcher's cultural beliefs and practices invisible, while simultaneously skewering the research objects, beliefs and practices to the display board Harding, 1987:9. From the above discussion it is evident that feminist theories do not advocate the positivist methodology which exists in conventional theories of knowledge. However, we should be cautious here about how we use the term "positivist". And that because there are various schools of positivism i.e. the new realists, and also because the word "positive" can take different ontological, epistemological and practical forms Bryant, 1985. Johnson et al 1984 offer us a general definition of the term, stating that it refers to the extension of empiricist models of natural science, to the field of human action, by arguing for either a methodological or substantive unity of the two page 32. Its main methodological approaches of research are inductivism and deductivism. The former refers to the idea that knowledge "“ theory, can be produced by the researcher according to her experience of the world. By the latter term it is meant that theory pre-exists the actual research. Feminist thinkers have fiercely challenged those concepts found in traditional epistemologies, offering new approaches towards the research praxis. As it has already been mentioned, they place particular emphasis upon the location of the researcher in the research process. In addition, as we shall see, they introduce new subject areas for research, stressing the importance of conducting research on the subject of everyday life experiences. But let us see first how feminist theorists have rejected positivist attitudes. Stanley and Wise 1990 put forward that all knowledge is partial, results from the conditions of its production, is contextually located and originate from the minds and intellectual practices of theorists and researchers who give voice to it page 39. Therefore, this feminist standpoint dismisses claims of objective knowledge. Stanley and Wise 1993 also attack the method of ethnography in social research, claiming that it is an approach, which is positivist in nature: "Scientific detachment", "truth", "non-involvement" all exist as the aims of an ethnography. And despite all the controversies and debates about the place of "values" in ethnographic research, "scientific detachment", "truth" and "non-involvement""¦are still alive and well and frequently to be met. page 159 But what is the alternative approach of the feminist standpoint? First of all, as it has already been mentioned it is the location of women within research. And this is crucial to our understanding of women's place in the social world. Smith 1987, argues that in order to increase our understanding as women, we need a method from where women are, as subjects, located in the everyday world, not in imaginary spaces constituted by the objectified forms of sociological knowledge. Similarly, for Millman and Kanter 1987 there is the need for research in "local" settings, which are largely populated by women in their daily rounds of life and which have received no serious sociological attention. Thus, for them the importance of ordinary aspects of our social life becomes more prominent in a feminist perspective, as "women have traditionally been chained to an existence of cleaning up and caring for others" page 33. Another way of challenging conventional methodologies in social research is to encompass "emotions" and "experience" in the research analysis. And that because the employment of emotions in the social investigation challenges dominant notions of the inferior status of emotions as a reliable source of data. Thus, the use of emotion in research does not somewhat fit with the conventional image of the detached, objective social researcher. Stanley and Wise 1993 state that their own feminist epistemology does include emotionality. They view emotionality as the product of a culture and therefore open to "rational" analysis as much as any other culturally inscribed behavioural forms. Moreover, they argue that emotions are vital to systematic knowledge of the social world and that "any epistemology which fails to recognise this is deeply flawed" page 193. As mentioned before, feminist criticism is not unified and consists of different epistemologies "“ some more marginal than others i.e. black feminist or lesbian epistemologies. One thing that has in common though, is the belief that social sciences should have a new purpose. That is, to use women and their experiences as new empirical and theoretical resources. If we are to look at feminist empiricist, we can see that this epistemology advocates a stricter adherence to the existing methodological norms of the scientific inquiry, in order to eliminate sexist and androcentric biases. What is responsible therefore for biases in social research according to this standpoint, is the misuse of existing research methods Harding, 1987. Also, what we can deduce is that feminist empiricists do not see anything fundamentally wrong with dominant, conventional methodologies in social science. It is merely the case of conducting the research better. The "feminist standpoint" position on the other hand, claim that their research findings offer a more complete and less distorted picture of social life. And this because knowledge is supposed to be based on experience and feminist standpoint theorists argue that their experience is more complete because it originates from the struggles against their male oppressors Harding, 1987. Yet, Stanley and Wise 1990 are against both these feminist epistemologies, as "they still accept the existence of a "true reality" and the methods of science as a means to establish it" page 42. Considering now another feminist epistemology "“ the lesbian one we can see how diverge feminist epistemologies are. The starting point of this epistemology is that "women" is a social category defined in terms of economic, physical or other dependency on men Stanley and Wise, 1990. As a result, they view women as a politically and socially constructed class. It is evident therefore how this epistemology challenges conventional theorising on women, in the social sciences. What is ambiguous about feminist epistemologies is whether they wish not only to challenge conventional ones but also lose their marginal status and substitute conventional epistemologies with feminist ones as well. For some feminists feminist theories of knowledge are best kept in the margins in order to avoid temptations of assimilation Stanley and Wise, 1990. Thus, according to Miles quoted in Sydie feminism is not simply about substituting a female understanding for the current male viewpoint. In addition, feminism is the viewpoint of outsiders to power, who have therefore a more accurate view of reality because they have no stake in mystifying that reality page 214. On the other hand, it can be argued that feminism is primarily a political movement for the emancipation of women, and as such, the predominance of its theory in the social sciences could ameliorate women's position in society mainly through social research. Smith quoted in Sydie is in fact in favour of creating a Sociology for women, instead of women. This will result in initiating a discourse among women that "transcends the traditional academic and knowledge boundaries" page 216. As a result, what has been argued in this paper is that there exists a twofold challenge of traditional epistemologies of the social sciences. That is, feminists challenge dominant ideologies located in the social world i.e. sexism as well as dominant methods of investigating it. Finally, despite the tensions within feminist epistemology feminism has managed to expose what dominant models of viewing and researching the world have overlooked.
1 User(s) Rated!
Words: 2602 Views: 845 Comments: 0
Feminist theory, it should be mentioned from the beginning of the paper, is not a unified theory. As women experience the social world differently according to class, age or "race", there exist different feminist standpoints within the feminist tradition – i.e. Marxist or Postmodernist feminists and this explains the need to talk of Feminisms – in plural. In general though, feminist theorists in order to explain the marginal position women's issues hold in the social sciences – and why they are merely "added on" in the academic discourse, focus their critique upon traditional scientific approaches existing in the social sciences,...
of creating a Sociology for women, instead of women. This will result in initiating a discourse among women that "transcends the traditional academic and knowledge boundaries" page 216.

As a result, what has been argued in this paper is that there exists a twofold challenge of traditional epistemologies of the social sciences. That is, feminists challenge dominant ideologies located in the social world i.e. sexism as well as dominant methods of investigating it. Finally, despite the tensions within feminist epistemology

feminism has managed to expose what dominant models of viewing and researching the world have overlooked.

Become A Member Become a member to continue reading this essay orLoginLogin
View Comments Add Comment

The Internet has been in universal...The Internet has been in universal use for many years. It is a powerful research and communication tool, and it can be used for personal enjoyment. However, there is a dark side to the Internet. "There is obscenity on the Internet. There is also explicit but legal material [. . .]. There are bomb recipes, militia materials, hate speech of every stripe"”mixed in small amounts with political, legal, medical, technical, and sports-related resources, the rock music fan pages, [and] the science fiction forums" Wallace and Mangan xii. The Internet is not owned or regulated by one particular place or person; therefore, anything can be put up on the Internet despite the objections of others. The Internet has become a home for thousands of pornographic and explicit websites and other websites dealing with hate, violence, and terrorism. There is no universal definition of what is objectionable and what is decent. Children are exposed to "objectionable" material on the Internet everyday; however, measures are being taken to prevent this from happening. Internet filtering technology has become a growing industry during the past few years. Internet filters are a type of computer software that identify and block objectionable content on the Internet, and prevent it from being shown on the screen. The Government has been arguing for years whether or not to require Internet filters in schools and libraries. This author believes that the Government should not require mandatory Internet filters and that schools and libraries should be able to choose whether or not to use them. Internet filters are not foolproof, and sometimes they can block more than what they are supposed to do. However, filters still provide protection to minors and others that use them. To decide whether Internet filters should be required, it is important to know about the different types of filters and how they work and about the laws having to do with Internet filtering and Internet censorship. It is also essential to understand the advantages and disadvantages of Internet filtering and to know that there are other solutions to protect children other than filtering. Internet filters have been in use for several years. They have mainly been used in schools and libraries, but many filters are being used in homes. The main reason for these filters is to protect children from pornography and sexual content. In her book, Karen Schneider says, "Internet filters are mechanical tools wrapped around subjective judgment. They are designed to block Internet content [. . .]. Some filters try to block keywords; some try to block individual sites; some try both" xiv. There are two main methods used to filter the Internet; they are keyword blocking and website blocking. Each has its own advantages and disadvantages, but most Internet filters offer the use of both methods, and the opportunity to disable each one Schneider 3-6. Keyword blocking filters use pre-defined lists of objectionable terms. It is also referred to as "content identification," "content analysis," and "phrase blocking." These filters search the website for certain words, usually words with sexual references, before it is displayed and then determine whether or not it is suitable for viewing Schneider 3. Because it has to search the page before it allows it to be displayed, it can slow down Internet viewing. The filters also assume that words can only be used in one way. Words that are used innocently or technically are automatically presumed to be objectionable Schneider 4. The phrases "chicken breasts" or "breast cancer" could just as easily be blocked as the phrases "human breasts" or "women's breasts" Schneider xv. Because of the keyword blocking filter's unreliability, over six percent of blocked websites have been "overblocked" Slobodzian B05. Improving keyword blocking is almost impossible without first creating artificial intelligence that can understand that words can be used in different ways. However, "Keyword blocking is the only 'line of defense' against any website that has not been manually identified by a human content selector" Schneider 5. Despite the faults of keyword blocking, it still provides a high level of protection for children on the Internet. Website blocking, or "site" blocking, is a blocking method in which people review Internet websites and decide whether they meet the criteria to be blocked. The websites are then put on a "site list" that the filter uses to block the websites. Internet robots are used to flag Internet sites that could potentially contain objectionable content for humans to review. However, many problems arise in this method as well. The Internet robots can still miss objectionable websites if the content strays too far from what is being checked, and the people responsible for reviewing the websites may not check all the subdirectories of a website if the top directory meets the blocking criteria Schneider 6-8. Even using this method, websites can be overlooked or over blocked. Another downside to site blocking filters is that the vendor is the one who chooses which websites should and should not be blocked. Some filters allow changes to be made to the site list, but most filters do not even allow the user to see the list. Luckily, many filters include a feature that allows the user to create a local site list to work in conjunction with the filter's site list. Some companies allow the user to submit a request to make a certain website available that was previously blocked Schneider 8, 31-33. Many site lists or so large that the websites must be grouped into different categories. This allows the user to select certain categories to block and improves the overall flexibility of a filter. However, as with all filters, problems can arise. Different filters categorize websites differently. This affects which websites are blocked in certain situations. Websites dealing with homosexuality could be grouped into different categories like "Sexuality," "Lifestyles," or "Adult" Schneider 7. It will only be blocked depending on what category it is in and what categories are selected to be blocked. There are three main types of filtering software. These main types have to do with where the software is installed. The place where it is installed makes a big difference on how the filter operates and how much it costs. In most cases, filters of different types from the same company will seem like completely different products. That is because the function of each type is slightly different. The three types of Internet filters are client software filters, proxy server filters, and remote proxy server filters Schneider 13-14. Client software filters are designed to be installed on individual workstations or computers. The cost of these filters depends on how many computers on which the filters are being installed. One copy of the filter must be purchased for each computer, so the more computers being used, the less cost-efficient client software filters will be. These filters are ideal for home computers or for a small collection of computers at a home or business Schneider 14. For large businesses, schools, and libraries, proxy server filters are more efficient. The cost of using a proxy server filter again depends on the number of computers being used; however, licensing is very cheap, which makes it ideal for large networks. The filter only needs to be installed onto one computer, which makes it much easier to perform maintenance. All Internet access is directed through that computer and through the filter. Because of this, the proxy server needs to be a powerful computer with high processing speed and memory Schneider 17. Remote proxy server filters are nearly the same as proxy server filters. Internet access is directed through a third-party or vendor's server. Most vendors provide several servers so Internet speed is not affected when there are many users. All maintenance is done by the vendor, which makes this very cost-efficient, even though it costs more per computer. If the user wants to run Internet filters on a large amount of computers while doing the least amount of work, then remote proxy server filters are a good solution Schneider 15. Many Internet filters contain numerous other features that can be very helpful to the user. There are many forms of blocking besides keyword and website blocking that can be used in different situations. Protocol blocking allows the user to disable certain types of Internet services. This can include the blocking of ftp, telnet, gopher, irc, or Usenet. This can be helpful in preventing hacking or bandwidth consuming activities. Many schools, libraries, and businesses choose to use protocol blocking Schneider 9. User and client blocking are also very common. User blocking activates filtering for certain people or accounts. Client blocking filters only certain workstations or computers Schneider 10-11. Using these types of blocking can allow libraries to target the filtering to minors. Another useful feature in many filters is time blocking. Time blocking allows librarians to only allow library patrons a certain amount of time for Internet use. This prevents patrons from using the Internet too long so others may use it as well Schneider 9-10. Time blocking is also very common in libraries. Many filters also include the option to warn instead of block. This feature allows adults to be warned about possible obscene websites but still allows them to access those websites if they choose. One of the most important features a filter can have is diagnostics support. This is simply the ability to find out why a page was blocked and if there is anyway to override it. However, many filters do not have this feature or only give coded or limited feedback Schneider 37-41. Many filters now also include support for PICS. PICS stands for the Platform for Internet Content Selection. It is a method that enables rating systems to be used on websites by adding certain codes to the website. The most common rating method, called RSACI Recreational Software Advisory Council on the Internet, rates the website based upon nudity, sexuality, language, and violence. Filters can use this data to block or show the website based upon how high the rating is in each category. Though PICS is not very widely spread, many people believe that PICS will play an important role in Internet filtering in the future Schneider 63-66. As the Internet started to grow into wide use, the Government began to become concerned about what children were being exposed to online. Until the Government began to interfere, most libraries did not use Internet filtering. Many cases of minors being exposed to pornography began to appear. In the year 2000, Bill Clinton signed the Children's Internet Protection Act CIPA as part of Federal Bill HR 4577. The CIPA required schools and libraries that had federal funding designated for Internet use to install Internet filtering systems to block content that is harmful to minors. If they failed to do so, their funding, given to them by the Universal Service Discount and Library Services and Technology Act, would be taken away. This funding includes 2.25 billion dollars for technology and Internet in schools and libraries. The CIPA passed ninety-five to three in the United States Senate Borja 1; Dyrli 33; Slobodzian B05; Kellner 21. However, not everyone agreed with the Government on this issue. The American Library Association ALA and the American Civil Liberties Union ACLU both filed lawsuits challenging the CIPA Slobodzian B05. Librarians around the country protested the CIPA. Congress claimed that the CIPA protects youth from pornography while the librarians claimed that it makes libraries choose between funding or First Amendment rights Slobodzian B05. The First Amendment protects almost all speech, because there has never been an agreement about what speech is objectionable and what speech is acceptable. Therefore, "the First Amendment is interpreted to say that we will not make content-based distinctions of speech" Wallace and Mangan xii. Because of this, the opponents of the CIPA declared that it was unconstitutional, because mandatory filtering was blocking constitutionally protected speech. They also claimed that filters block legitimate and educational information from being viewed Menhard 26; Dyrli 33. Critics of the law also said that the law "violates the First Amendment, removes community control, and prevents students from using the Internet effectively" Borja 1. Many felt that filters would cause the free flow of information on the Internet to cease Kellner 21. However, according to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, one out of every four children between the ages of ten and seventeen were exposed to unwanted pornography in the year 2000 Dyrli 33. The law was made to protect minors, not destroy free speech. Pat Sullivan, the Assistant Superintendent for Technology at San Marcos Consolidated Independent School District, believes that "Internet filters help protect students from hate sites, pornography, and other inappropriate information. These filters can expand a learner's world and even assist them in staying focused on their work" 12. People opposed to online censorship claimed that "free access to information is fundamental to a democratic society" and that students and children "need to learn responsible online use and behavior apart from the backdrop of filtering" Dyrli 33. However much the law would help protect children, the court needed to decide whether the CIPA was eliminating the basic rights of the people. In June of 2002, the Philadelphia federal court struck down the CIPA and declared it unconstitutional. Because of the limitations of Internet filters, it is impossible to comply with the CIPA without blocking constitutionally protected speech. Libraries and schools are able to choose whether they want to use Internet filters Kosseff and Barnett A01. Seventy-four percent of the nation's public school districts use Internet filters without being required to by law, and despite the law being struck down, most libraries will still choose to filter Borja 1; Kosseff and Barnett A01. Some people will protest libraries that use filters, and some people will protest libraries that do not use them. The important thing is that the people have the decision to decide, not the Government. The CIPA was not the first law that tried to censor the Internet. In 1997, Senator James Exon from Nebraska sponsored an amendment to the Telecommunications Act called the Communication Decency Act CDA. This amendment criminalized the transmission of obscene or indecent messages to a recipient under the age of eighteen. The American Civil Liberties Union challenged this law as well Simon 153. There was a large debate about this law in the Senate. In the debate, Senator Exon said: If in any American neighborhood an individual were distributing pornographic photos, cartoons, videos, and stories to children, or if someone were posting lewd photographs on lampposts and telephone poles for all to see, or if children were welcome to enter and browse adult bookstores and triple-X-rated video arcades, there would be a public outrage. I suspect and hope that most people, under those circumstances, would immediately call the police to arrest and charge any person responsible for such offenses. I regret to inform you that these very offenses are occurring everyday in America's electronic neighborhood. Wallace and Mangan 179 Despite Senator Exon's remarks, the Supreme Court found the CDA to be unconstitutional. The Judge said that the Internet does not impose itself like other media types. Pornography does not usually just appear on the screen, the Internet user must go looking for it Simon 153. Terms from the CDA like "indecent," "patently offensive," and "harmful to minors" are terms that cannot be universally defined. The CDA attempted to outlaw speech on the Internet that was legal in real life Menhard 29. Internet censorship was also an issue in other countries. Countries like China and Vietnam try to censor the Internet for their whole country. They use this censorship to stop citizens from getting information from certain countries as well as protecting their citizens from obscenities. However, they are learning that Internet censorship only keeps countries poor and isolated Simon 149; Menhard 24-25. European countries also had concerns about children's safety on the Internet. They came to a conclusion much like our country did. The Government should not control censorship of the Internet; the people should deal with it themselves Simon 155-56. There are mixed feelings about the use of Internet filters in school. Most schools, however, choose and support filters. As mentioned earlier, seventy-four percent of the nation's fifteen thousand public school districts currently use Internet filters Borja 1. Many schools complain that it costs too much to implement and maintain filters, and that children do not learn responsible use of Internet Borja 2. This author believes that school is not the place to learn responsible Internet use; it is a place to use the Internet for research and educational purposes. Parents cannot forget their responsibility to know what their children are viewing on the Internet anymore than they can forget their responsibility to know what television shows and movies their children are watching Wallace and Mangan xii. Internet filters with the aid of teacher monitoring allow students to properly use the Internet and focus on their work. Some schools use a proxy server filter to monitor and filter all Internet activity. They then use the data gathered from the monitoring to update their site lists Sullivan12. However, filtering is not the only way to protect children from obscene content. Many schools have an Internet policy that the students and parents have to sign. If students are caught violating the policy, their Internet privileges can be taken away Borja 1. Filtering in libraries is a more temperamental issue. As observed from the debates about the CIPA, many people wish libraries to filter and many people are opposed to it. Classroom situations are usually safe for children because a teacher can monitor the computers, however, librarians cannot monitor all the computers in a library Sullivan 12. The Internet has expanded library services, even small libraries. Using the Internet, libraries are able to conveniently offer databases, catalogs, and other helpful services. Library patrons want and need the Internet Schneider xii. Internet use in the library should not be unguarded. Even though the CIPA was declared unconstitutional, libraries should still use filters or some form of protection on computers that children have access to. Most libraries tweak filters to only block sexually explicit websites Schneider xii. This is a very practical solution because people should not be able to access pornography where children can see it. Libraries also have to option of using privacy screens on the computers so people walking by cannot see what others are viewing Kosseff and Barnett A01. Libraries and schools need to make efforts to protect children from viewing obscenities on the Internet, but the Government should not be the one to make the decision. Despite their drawbacks, Internet filters can be very useful tools in protecting children if they are tailored to meet the requirements of the community in which they are being used. It is also important to understand that there are over 1.6 billion web pages on the Internet and foolproof filtering of them all is impossible Dyrli 33. There are obscenities on the Internet, but there are ways to keep them away from children without letting the Government take away people's constitutional rights.   

The Internet has been in universal use for many years. It is a powerful research and communication tool, and it can be used for personal enjoyment. However, there is a dark side to the Internet. "There is obscenity on the Internet. There is also explicit but legal material [. ....

Words: 3217 View(s): 192 Comment(s): 0