Not all but at least some women just want to be involved in the adult industry.

These women want to work in the porn/erotic dancer industry to get ahead. Who is to say that their plan is wrong? They aren't hurting my by doing it. It has no effect on me. It doesn't mean that they should be shunned by society. I'm not interested in watching them do it.

Conroy, being a conservative, anti porn sort of guy would probably be against their right to choose for themselves and an audiences right to decide to be entertained by their show.

Censorship is all about protecting the weak. On this round it is the children who are being held up as the innocent victims of porn. Firstly, I want to see the empirical data of who is getting harmed and how.

In the 1800s the intelligencia felt that they could deal with adult entertainment but that their wives and the working class had to be protected. Little consideration was given to limiting information available to children. Prior to the sexual revolution in the 1960s women had to be protected from information. This is the burkah that women still wear under Islam. This patronising attitude that they need to be protected from something that their husbands access freely is really just a way of keeping them ignorant and, thus, easier to control.

So we move to Conroy's great wall. Under the guise of child protection the elderly wont be able to access euthenasia information. WTF?! It sounds like the church (not happy with the impending doom of irrelivence) trying to re-assert it's control over who gets to shag who and the proper place for women in society.