genderberg.com

Just google "getrealfruitminis" to see names of html pages that were on the site. That will give you an idea of what kids were exposed to.

Child Find PEI bracelet led children to porn site
CBC News

Child Find PEI has apologized for recently selling goodie bags to children that contained some not-so-good information. A colourful bracelet in the bag inadvertently directed children to an adult porn site.

A couple of weekends ago, Diana Getson took her nine-year-old son to a Child Find event in Charlottetown. Treat bags were on sale for $1.

In the bag she bought for her son was a bright yellow bracelet with the Child Find logo and an invitation to win great prizes by visiting a website called getrealfruitminis.com.

But the prize turned out to be a surprise when Getson's son typed in the address. The site offered "hard-core nudity and dirty porn pictures," Getson said.

It turned out the original owner of the site, Dare Foods, had let the website expire after its contest ended last December. Then, two weeks ago, Child Find discovered the site had been bought by a porn company.

Child Find had stopped handing out the bracelets when the contest ended, but neglected to tell local chapters like Child Find PEI about the problem with bracelets linking to the the porn site.

Child Find PEI had some leftover bracelets and decided to get rid of them in the goodie bags even though the contest was over.

"They're bright and colourful. The kids like them…. So instead of throwing them out, we just kept using them, not expecting anything like this would ever happened," said Lynn Coyle, president of Child Find PEI.

Dare Foods has bought the site back, and it's filled with wholesome messages for children.

Coincidentally, Child Find PEI has an information session coming up soon to warn parents to keep watch over what their children find on the internet.

http://www.cbc.
ca/canada/prince-edward-island/story/2007/05/21/childfind-porn.html

So two companies, a food company and a porn company benefit in the transaction (the selling of a popular domain name), and yet you are responsible to:

to keep watch over what their children find on the internet.

right, that makes real cents...

So two companies, a food company and a porn company benefit in the transaction (the selling of a popular domain name), and yet you are responsible to:

The food company didn't sell it: they just didn't pay to extend their usage of it, making it up for grabs for whomever swooped in the fastest. (There's people who buy up sites automatically/by remote control the second after they expire.) A cybersquater bought it and resold it.

thanks for clarifying!

Your point about parents (which really means mothers) being held responsible for stopping their kids seeing porn, whilst everybody else washes their hands of it is well made though, Sunny. I've seen this happen a lot in discussions about pornography and children, parents get the blame whilst the pornsters can just carry on doing their thing.

delphyne wrote:(which really means mothers)

Word! LOL now we just got to put those two together: bad mothers let their kids watch porn. A non-profit on behalf of the porno-capitalists must teach these bad mothers to keep their children safe from the industry's right to violate women.

I used to see similar arguments made about children who had been abused by paedophiles when I wasted my time posting at the Guardian's website - that their parents hadn't taken good enough care of them. It's a bit extreme, but I always remember hearing about a quote from Myra Hindley (notorious accomplice to a child murderer) speaking about one of their victims that "her mother shouldn't have allowed her out so late at night". It really sticks out that these people will never ever take responsiblity for their own actions, no matter how damaging those actions may be.

Maybe if women/mothers were allowed more political and social power we'd find it easier to protect children. It's another catch-22.

to keep watch over what their children find on the internet.

Mother and child could be connected at the hip, making it impossible for mother not to see everything that the child sees. That still wouldn't change the fact that when a child is directed to a porn site hidden behind an innocuous URL, no matter how quickly mother can and does close the window, the front page of the site has already been seen by child and mother. Yet this is still mother's fault.

The only redeeming thing here is it at least they had to admit that kids seeing porn sites is bad! Now if we could extend that realization to anyone viewing porn sites is bad>>>>