Yes Rammy I get what you and Dan are pointing out. But isn't that just stating the obvious and posting for the sake of posting. The sky is blue, I don't need anybody to tell me that when I can see it for myself. This discussion is about ofcom related issues. Fair enough if anybodys got any points they wish to bring to the table, then fine, post away
Now on the Issue with regards to Maria Miller wanting more equality for women here is something that occurred to me. With the current ofcom rules and regulations in place the models working on the channel's could face the sack if they were to accidentally flash the gash. Surely this must be addressed why the vagina is deemed so offensive anyway in the first place. Weren't women in the 60's burning their bra's in the name of women's lib. Maybe now in 2012 we could have the same scenario repeated, only this time with the knickers
After last night's ultra tame output - we are back to the two pairs of knickers farce again - I fear we are pissing into the wind in light grey trousers.....we can slag them all we like but the channels are playing their game and not listening to the customers. When a company blatantly ignores its customers it usually goes under.......
(05-09-2012 07:51 )elroyticklestab Wrote: [ -> ]After last night's ultra tame output - we are back to the two pairs of knickers farce again - I fear we are pissing into the wind in light grey trousers.....we can slag them all we like but the channels are playing their game and not listening to the customers. When a company blatantly ignores its customers it usually goes under.......
i cant understand why they are so up and down with the quality of the shows,they should be on an even keel through out the week , they are so inconsistent
(05-09-2012 07:51 )elroyticklestab Wrote: [ -> ]After last night's ultra tame output - we are back to the two pairs of knickers farce again - I fear we are pissing into the wind in light grey trousers.....we can slag them all we like but the channels are playing their game and not listening to the customers. When a company blatantly ignores its customers it usually goes under.......
but in the babeshows case. if you ignore ofcom you will go under, simple as that.
Lol @ the latest posts on here.
A woman is appointed as minister for women and equalities and that must mean she'll be looking into why women can't go full frontal on the babeshows?
I think people would have done well to do a bit of research into this particular lady.
A mother of 3 who was previously shadow family minister. She has previously voted against gay marriage, voted to stop abortion providers providing counselling for women with unwanted pregnancies and voted for the abortion time limit to be reduced to 20 weeks.
Not withstanding the rather dubious voting record in matters of equality, her background suggests that the harm to children mentality is likely to be far more prevalent than any desire to fight them on the beaches for women's rights to show their fannies on babe channels. A right that probably 75% of the current babe channel models would have no wish to see her fight for in any case.
I'm afraid this isn't some liberal leaning hippy who likes nothing better than going for naturist walks with the family of a weekend.
To be honest I doubt any significant changes are going to happen now as long as The Conservatives are in power
(05-09-2012 16:13 )dan g 27 Wrote: [ -> ]To be honest I doubt any significant changes are going to happen now as long as The Conservatives are in power
about another 2 years then,unless something drastic happens like the channels launch their own attack !
(05-09-2012 12:56 )MARCCE Wrote: [ -> ]Lol @ the latest posts on here.
A woman is appointed as minister for women and equalities and that must mean she'll be looking into why women can't go full frontal on the babeshows?
I'm afraid this isn't some liberal leaning hippy who likes nothing better than going for naturist walks with the family of a weekend.
You mean this isn't her and her civil service team on a day at the beach? Darn!
![[Image: gstk7711.jpg]](http://www.imagechunk.com/images/gstk7711.jpg)
(05-09-2012 09:04 )Rammyrascal Wrote: [ -> ] (05-09-2012 07:51 )elroyticklestab Wrote: [ -> ]After last night's ultra tame output - we are back to the two pairs of knickers farce again - I fear we are pissing into the wind in light grey trousers.....we can slag them all we like but the channels are playing their game and not listening to the customers. When a company blatantly ignores its customers it usually goes under.......
but in the babeshows case. if you ignore ofcom you will go under, simple as that.
You don't go under when you ignore Ofcom's freeview rules if you have a Dutch licence and start broadcasting 2 hours before Ofcom rules allow babe channels to broadcast from on Freeview , all Ofcom's bleating and moaning about the Cellcast/BS shows starting before the Ofcom imposed Freeview babe channel watershed start time of 12am has come to nothing, BS have been and still are ignoring Ofcom rules , i just loved it when Ofcom complained to the Dutch regulators about BS breaking their rules and the Dutch told Ofcom to fuck off
, or words that had the same meaning ..
Regardless of Babestations Dutch licence, we heard at work that OFCOM had passed comments that the actual licence for the Freeview Multiplex Babestation is on IS a UK licence and with that ultimately the buck still might stop with OFCOM as if Babestation cannot be found in contempt cos of their Dutch licence, the Multiplex holder with their UK licence might instead be found responsible for rebroadcasting a channel with content outside of UK OFCOM rules so it is possible the UK regulators could yet win despite babestations Dutch licence?