Tuesday, November 13, 2001

Anorexic sites merit censorship
Laura Parcells is a columnist for the Cavalier Daily at Univ. of Virginia.

No one ever claimed that the Internet wouldn’t cause problems. A dangerous new trend has begun to emerge on the World Wide Web: An estimated 400 Web sites have materialized that proclaim themselves to be “pro-Ana” — pro-anorexia.

These sites devote themselves solely to the encouragement of anorexia, offering tips not only on how to stay anorexic, but it also tells how to increase the effects of the disease in one’s life. The existence of these Web sites not only betrays the presence of deep-seated problems in our society, but demands the attention of politicians who hold the power to control these types of atrocities.

The creators of these Web sites are anorexics seeking support from others suffering from the disorder through these organizations. Those who frequent the sites are proud of their anorexia, claiming that individuals who try to help them are taking part in a “misguided witch-hunt against those who responsibly restrict their caloric intake as a lifestyle choice.”

These sites, contain “inspirational” pictures of women so thin that they are on the verge of death, offer tips such as, “Make a sort of ‘ritual’ that you make yourself do every time you eat, preferably something that you don’t enjoy. This will make you less likely to eat, because you’ll dread whatever it is that comes next.”

On the same “pro-Ana” Web site, one girl left the following statement: “‘I hate it when my stomach cramps, my ribs hurt and my throat hurts from purging and the acid peeling the skin off my right hand, and the dizzy feeling. [But] being pro-anorexia is my choice ... If I continue to fight to be thin, I will win in the end.”

Though these types of behaviors are troubling, those who frequent the sites believe in what they are saying. These individuals are in dire need of medical and psychological attention, and these Web sites are giving anorexics encouragement and attempting to paint the disease into a lifestyle.

Politicians have debated the regulation of e-commerce and online gambling but have backed away from questions involving the censorship of material available on the Internet. This is understandable because anytime the First Amendment is brought into question controversy is sure to arise. However, these Web sites, have gained widespread popularity (as is evident from the number of them) help to perpetuate and encourage a psychological disorder which can result in death. This shows us that the question can no longer be avoided. It is time to take a stand.

The developments in technology that enable information to travel across the globe require a type of regulation that our founding fathers could not have anticipated when they wrote the First Amendment. In an age where information moves at the speed of light, we need to modify our initial conceptions of what liberty really means.

We have clung to the notion of complete anti-censorship that in recent decades we have sacrificed all in its name — including reason.

Many claim that to begin censorship in any form is a departure from American values and is the first step toward the tyranny that our society so despises, but we have to remember that the deliberations of our legislature, in addition to the system of checks and balances, will remain intact to keep censorship from exceeding moderation.

Each legislative initiative dealing with the issue of censorship should be considered on a case-by-case basis. However, generally speaking, it is time to move toward government regulation of Internet technology, and thus stand up for the victims of the reckless indiscretion of pure anti-censorship.

Laura Parcells is a columnist for the Cavalier Daily at Univ. of Virginia.
This column was distributed by U-Wire.