You'd think supposedly civilized nations wouldn't be blowing millions of forcefully confiscated tax-victims' money on ill-conceived projects aiming to "protect" children from imaginary threats. You would be wrong.

In Talibanland, women are taught to hide under all-covering blankets. People fear that so much as the sight of a woman's ankle in public will lead to unspeakable harm, so women are punished severely for that. In Australia and the United States, people fear that letting children see naked women online will corrupt them immeasurably, so "something needs to be done" to protect children from such awful, soul-corrupting sights.

Well, guess what. If the mere sight of something can divert a child away from what you are trying to teach them, may it be because what you're trying to teach them is an exaggeration and a lie?

Dear prudish parents of the world: is the reason you're trying to "protect" your children from their own curiosity because you know deep down inside that your teachings are fragile and that any contact with the real world will cause your children to see them for the untruths they are?

Are you trying to wrap your children in a cocoon, not just because you need to lie to your children, but because you need to lie to yourselves - to avoid confrontation with the parts of you that you've been trying to run away from, to preserve the special world of denial in which you live?

Dear prudish parents of the world - get a life!

I grew up just fine not needing a net filter, my wife grew up just fine not needing one as well, and I'm sure your kids don't need one to turn out just fine, either. Perhaps the greatest damage that can be done to them is from you and your narrow-minded, prudish worldviews.