Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 12th Dec 2012 22:03 UTC
Permalink for comment 545254
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/25/13 0:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 23:59 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Howard Fosdick on 05/24/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 14:44 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-11-13
No, spoken like a 50+ year old adult who is tired of parents trying to foist off their morals on everyone else.
Perhaps Google could filter by penis size to reduce your discomfort...
Really? What kind of "simple searches" of images on Google, with "Safe Search" turned on showed images like those? I've used Google image search for years and I've not found rape scenes, fellatio, or anal penetration when performing "simple searches."
Besides, the previews are the size of postage stamps. It's not like some child is going to be traumatized by seeing a 200x150 image.
If you want content filtered, then the filtering should *ONLY* take place if you turn some variant of "Safe Search" on. I have no problem with that. I'm even fine with them turning it on by default. But it's ridiculous to filter content when the user has explicitly turned Safe Search off.