• news
  • WEDNESDAY MARCH 8 2006 4:14 PM

The Strange, Strange Saga of SmartFilter, BoingBoing, and Adult Babies

Submitted by seanbonner

Edited by seanbonner

Wildly popular blog BoingBoing was recently blocked in many places around the world after being classified as a "nudity site" by SmartFilter, which is censorware from a company called Secure Computing.

In their efforts to determine why their site had been mis-classified, the editors at Boingboing did some research, and discovered that SmartFilter has a 99.5% false-positive rate, and a rather uncooperative staff: Though a statistically miniscule portion of BoingBoing's pages contain SmartFilter-described "nudity" (like photos from Abu Graib, or Michelangelo's David) SmartFilter tagged the entire site as contaning nudity, and put the burden on BoingBoing to specially mark the so-called offensive pages.

In response, BoingBoing published a Guide to Defeating Censorware for people who want to get around these wildly innacurate filters, and launched a campaign encouraging other bloggers to post artistic nudes (like images of "David"wink on their blogs in protest. The New York Times just wrote a piece about this situation including a quote from one of the people at Secure Computing who decides what to block.

In an e-mail message to Xeni Jardin, another of Boing Boing's chiefs, Tomo Foote-Lennox, a director of filtering data for Secure Computing, asked why the bloggers were starting a war. "We discussed several ways that you could organize your site so that I could protect the kids and you could distribute all the information you wanted," Mr. Foote-Lennox wrote.

(Emphasis mine)

Please note that Mr. Foote-Lennox seems to imply that he has to protect the children.

Now, let's do a little research on this man who is so concerned with children, shall we? Googling his name turns up some rather . . . interesting . . . results. There are several messages on the alt.sex.diapers newsgroup (a group for Adult Baby fetishists) that come from someone named Tomo Foote-Lennox. Is it the same guy? (searching for his name on this page seems to make the connection.) In one of these messages he's inviting people to a party and then later posting a review of that party.

I am still in the process of locating the AB's in Minnesota. People are pretty private here, but I contacted several in time to invite them to the party. Several people hoped to drive in from Chicago, but at the last minute, plans fell through. People from as far away as New Jersey and San Francisco were attempting to make it, but didn't pull it off this time. We ended up with a nice, intimate gathering of seven with even gender balance. I hope for more next time.

Pam was new to being a baby, but willing. She chose a bubble sun suit with a bib top from Kitten's wardrobe. After being powdered and diapered, it just took some pigtails to make her look positively adorable.

Clinton brought some really, really thick diapers. Though there was some talk about having an all baby girl party (we had enough cute little baby frocks), Clinton and Erich ended up being baby boys. Since we had Mommy Kathy and Daddy Mike to run the party, I decided it would be more fun to be a baby. Often I am a baby girl, but at the birthday girl's request, I was baby boy this time.

You are following this so far right? So is noted sex educator and author Violet Blue who is currently working on a book about sexual fetishes and this this has her more than a little worried. She writes:

I've lectured on panels with AB practitioners and pro-doms who specialize in AB play. This, however, is a particularly disturbing context for an AB fetishist. This is exactly the problem we're facing; people like Lennox are likey *dangerously* confusing fantasy with reality. The important thing to remember, though is that AB and diaper fetishists are typically not sexualizing babies, though it is a very, VERY extreme type of fetish play that you need to really be articulate about. In my strong opinion, it is not a fetish that someone who works for, or with, children should be doing; how can anyone ever know where fantasy and reality merge in their minds?

Look, I don't think it's anyone's business what someone does to get off in their private lives. But it's a HUGE red flag when the person aggressively "protecting children" is into AB play; I'd way rather have a medical fetishist or a human pony -- something neutral. Or at least a dominatrix, who spends her professional time negotiating the differences between fantasy and reality (often explaining these distinctions to AB's). Now no one can ever know if Lennox knows what it means to be a responsible adult (especially one who can keep a fetish on a low profile). Either way, AB's have a very different way of seeing children and childhood than the rest of us. The key thing with most ABers is that they typically don't sexualize children -- the want to *be* children in the worst way, and it's usually the mommy figure that's sexualized.

She has more on this as well as a great deal more info about ABs in general. Kathryn Cramer has also been looking into Smart Computing and what they are blocking and has had some e-mail exchanges with Mr. Foote-Lennox which she's posted. Violet says the bottom line is "YIKES" and I agree whole heartedly.

  • PERMALINK
  • PRINT
  • Digg This
  • Email To A Friend
 

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2

Next

Comments
hadees

hadees

Austin, TX
December 2003

MAR 09, 2006 10:28 AM

Yeah I don't care. It is called an anonymous proxy. Use it. If the one you try is blocked find another one. There are literally hundereds if not thousands out there.

I usually don't like any kind of censorship but this seems to be opt-in so you don't really have control over the computer anyway.

[Edited on Mar 09, 2006 by hadees]

EndedBen

EndedBen

Grand Rapids, MI
August 2004

MAR 09, 2006 10:40 AM

An adult man has sexual desires that he indulges on the internet and with other consenting adults? This is a strange, strange saga?

Also, I googled it and my dad can beat up Violet Blue's dad. I googled it.

[Edited on Mar 09, 2006 by SuperNintendo]

reprobate

reprobate

New Orleans, LA
December 2002

MAR 09, 2006 10:58 AM

Keith said:
I mean, really, their entire "logic" here is:

Secure Computing makes SmartFilter, which is designed to prevent children from accessing adult material on the internet. Tomo Foote-Lennox has a diaper fetish, which concerns pretending to be an infant child. Tomo Foote-Lennox also works for Secure Computing, which makes SmartFilter... bad somehow?

Because I'm sure Tomo Foote-Lennox personally decides every site to be included in SmartFilter.

And I'd love to see them hold up the alias someone uses in newsgroups as evidence in court. I, for example, have been known to post as Martha Stewart@living.com in alt.binaries.sounds.mp3.bootlegs



I'm sorry but hypocrisy is germane to the discussion, and, frankly newsworthy. Firstly, SmartFilter isn't designed to keep children from accessing adult content. Its designed to keep adults from accessing adult content at work, because the filter companies have successfully terrified employers into believing that any gateway to any content that isn't disneyfied will subject them to sexual harassment suits. They also work with entire countries to block upstream gateways. They are censors for hire and they are complete hacks, and yes, there is something relevant about a guy who censors the internet for a living using the internet, especially newsgroups which are accessible by Google and really cant be externally filtered, for trolling for adult baby playmates.

EndedBen

EndedBen

Grand Rapids, MI
August 2004

MAR 09, 2006 11:04 AM

reprobate said:...and yes, there is something relevant about a guy who censors the internet for a living using the internet, especially newsgroups which are accessible by Google and really cant be externally filtered, for trolling for adult baby playmates.



I agree with you until this.

No. There isn't anything relevant about anyone's sexual desires and urges. It's not even interesting, just mudraking and loathsome tabloid bullshit. This would have been a fascinating article if it wasn't based on humiliating a human being, regardless of his political/business practices.

emperorreagan

emperorreagan

Baltimore, MD
January 2004

MAR 09, 2006 11:16 AM

SuperNintendo said:
No. There isn't anything relevant about anyone's sexual desires and urges. It's not even interesting, just mudraking and loathsome tabloid bullshit. This would have been a fascinating article if it wasn't based on humiliating a human being, regardless of his political/business practices.



I think it's interesting to examine the individuals behind a drive for censorship, whether it's a company like this using scare tactics to push for private censorship in the business world, or someone on the national level pushing for larger scale censorship in the media, in libraries, in the arts, or in other mediums. I think it's rather telling that an individual with a fetish like this, for example, is perfectly happy to label all sorts of other things as inappropriate for other people.

I also think the old idiom, "People who live in glass houses should not throw stones," applies here.

[Edited on Mar 09, 2006 by emperorreagan]

reprobate

reprobate

New Orleans, LA
December 2002

MAR 09, 2006 11:17 AM

SuperNintendo said:

reprobate said:...and yes, there is something relevant about a guy who censors the internet for a living using the internet, especially newsgroups which are accessible by Google and really cant be externally filtered, for trolling for adult baby playmates.



I agree with you until this.

No. There isn't anything relevant about anyone's sexual desires and urges. It's not even interesting, just mudraking and loathsome tabloid bullshit. This would have been a fascinating article if it wasn't based on humiliating a human being, regardless of his political/business practices.



I say again hypocrisy is relevant. The man has chosen, as his job, denying discourse to entire fucking countries and he hides, ironically enough, behind a "but won't you please think of the chiiiiiiildren" beard. He is, in reality, saying, in word and deed, "Hey, sucks to be you Iran, no political dissent for you, homo in the UAE, too damn bad, we don't allow that, pregnant and a teenager in Sudan, tough shit, kid, no information for you. Now if you'll excuse me I'm going to go home and use my unfiltered broadband which I pay for by effectively oppressing you for a living and exercise the rights I personally deny you to find people to watch me shit in my pants."

I hope he is fucking humiliated. He should at the very least be ashamed.

EndedBen

EndedBen

Grand Rapids, MI
August 2004

MAR 09, 2006 11:29 AM

He should be ashamed of himself. I'll give you that. And the damage is done. I just hope for his sake, for the sake of his loved ones, that whatever comes from all this is over relatively soon.

I can't help but think there will be an escalating number of girls in the near future denied a wide range of things and judged publically over their work on this site.

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2

Next

featured interviews