I share your concern about us being on camera most of the time, which is why we need to accept the ubiquitous nature of such technology and the fact that information needs to be allowed to be possessed freely, otherwise LEAs [Law Enforcement Agencies, for the newbies] will gain vast powers to imprison an unprecedented number of people for having the "wrong" type of images in their possession, and (even worse) for being suspected of thinking offensive thoughts while looking at or reading the info. And we have to keep up the fight for civil rights, and demand freedom over security, otherwise we will indeed have a surveillance society with the government using various types of moral panics (like the current one about minors and sexual activity) to justify installing "security" cameras in our own homes against our will, as well as every square inch of every public recreation area or mall, just to look for evidence that adults are thinking "impure" thoughts when looking at kids in their presence, or that kids themselves are thinking or saying "inappropriate things that may indicate the intention to have sexual interactions with a peer" when interacting with each other. Just imagine combining modern and upcoming surveillance technology with Victorian moralism and the type of moral panic that brings out its worst excesses.

This article was indeed a small step in the right direction, because it shows just how far this moral panic and its Orwellian implications are beginning to gradually incite civil rights advocates outside of the MAP community to break their fear of speaking out against draconian measures that are rationalized as being designed to "protect" children, because they are actually becoming more terrified about the implications of these ever-expanding Hitleresque laws for a free society than they are of broaching this powerfully emotionally charged subject. All progress and change is made in steps, and this, IMO, is a major step in the right direction. This also shows that people who continue to take civil rights seriously, and who refuse to let emotion trump reason when they fear the very concept of civil liberties are at stake, prefer to live with offensive material in people's possession than live in a police state. Tough luck for people like my newest friend Lee Lette, hmmm?

Hopefully, terms like "MAP" [Minor Attracted Person, the slightly more inclusive descendent of MAA, Minor Attracted Adult, since there are adolescents under the age of 18 who are pedophiles] and "GLer" [Girl Lover, and its ideological cousin, "BLer"--Boy Lover] will be more palatable for people to mention, since they do not carry all of the gut-churning emotional connotations of the term "pedophile" thanks to the media's frequent bastardization of the term over the past 30 years.