<rss version="0.91"><channel>
<title>The web's porn problem</title>
<link>http://www.roughtype.com/archives/2005/11/the_webs_pornog.php</link>
<description>Huh? Problem? What problem? Ah, precisely. A week or so ago, the U.S. Senate held some hearings on pornography, including the internet's vast and various store of the stuff. Orrin Hatch, the Utah Republican, called porn a "problem of harm, not an issue of taste." Nobody, though, paid much attention to the proceedings. Popular blogger Jeff Jarvis, in a post titled A Nation of Hairy Palms, dismissed it all as "silly crap" from "conservative prudes."...</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<item>
<title>teen sex</title>
<link>http://qt.kharkov.ua/teen/</link>
<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://qt.kharkov.ua/teen/">teen sex</a> <a href="http://qt.kharkov.ua/teen/">teen pussy</a> <a href="http://qt.kharkov.ua/teen/">teen pussy</a> <a href="http://qt.kharkov.ua/teen/">teen sex</a>
]]></description>
</item>
<item>
<title>An Internet that is Safe for Kids</title>
<link>http://www.mowoman.com/2005/11/an_internet_tha.html</link>
<description>Parents have long been concerned about ways to make Internet access safe for their kids. Even if you can put a stop to annoying and offensive pop-ups and spam, one typo in an innocent web address can open up a</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>A matter of harm, not a matter of taste (Nick Carr on porn)</title>
<link>http://weblog.infoworld.com/openresource/archives/2005/11/a_matter_of_har.html</link>
<description>So, I&apos;m a silly prude. I don&apos;t find porn ennobling (as unthinking feminists apparently do), titillating, or otherwise worthwhile. I think it is harmful, and not just to children. It has no redeeming value. It has no justification. All of...</description>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>