It’s bad enough that the Left wants to regulate the Internet through “net neutrality” interventions.  Now we have Republicans talking about regulating the Internet in order to protect “women and children.”  Carly Fiorina told an audience in San Francisco that the “duality” would have to end:

She mentioned that politicians should be held accountable just the way that business managers and board members are, and that the U.S. government cannot continue to spend money without dealing with entitlement programs such as Medicare and Social Security. Fiorina criticized Boxer for successfully sponsoring only three relatively insignificant bills in her 18 years in the Senate.

“I don’t think that’s good enough,” she said.

Asked what she thought about regulation of the web, she said it was inevitable that there would be more regulation of it. Why, for instance, is there no protection of women and children on the Internet, when there is plenty in real life. She said this duality — where anything goes on the wild wild west of the Internet — would have to end.

What protections do women need on the Internet that they have off of it?  After all, the Internet can’t mug you, or worse.  It’s a forum for free speech and commerce, which makes it no different than the shopping mall in most respects, except that the parking situation doesn’t stink. There is nothing on the Internet from which women need protecting that they don’t access on their own, and no threat different from those facing men on the Internet.

As for children, everyone understands that children’s access to the Internet should be supervised — by parents.  That’s just as true for the Internet as it is for the television, or for reading material, or for that matter, the aforementioned shopping mall.  We don’t regulate bookstores on the basis that children might enter it and shouldn’t see The Joy of Sex or Valley of the Dolls.  Parents should parent their children; governments should not parent anyone.

It’s almost as if Fiorina is equating “women” and “children” in terms of their ability to navigate the world, and especially in terms of potential victimhood.  Obviously, I don’t speak for women, but I would not be surprised if women found that kind of construct offensive, especially these days.

We have enough Democrats pushing a nanny state on us, especially in this Congress.  The last thing we need is a Republican candidate for the Senate running on the promise to make the Intertubes safe for the wimminfolk.

Update: Should have been, “I would not be surprised …”  I fixed it above.