The correct term is Liberal Fascism. The do gooder self righteous brigade tell us they are banning certain content to protect us from ourselves. The new American far right are mad keen on banning all sorts of content, not just sexual....
You have freedom of choice when buying a car, phone or new jeans but whoa you want to see tits...utter pervert. Eh hang on I was on holiday in France last summer and the majority of women were topless....and the do gooders opinion on that would be????
Personally I have a couple of minor issues with the epetition.
Firstly, I'm not entirely convinced that the 'it's sexist' line is really the correct route to be going down, it just seems like such a flimsy argument to me.
Secondly, the whole argument that it disadvantages UK porn producers. That may well be the case, but I really don't think the powers that be will be terribly concerned by that, if anything, they are likely to be thinking 'good, less porn being produced in our wonderful, wholesome, and family friendly UK'.
The real issue I have with this whole thing is the restriction on personal freedom. None of the acts being banned are dangerous or violent or oppressive or any such thing. None are illegal in real life. As has been stated, other more extreme and perhaps 'disturbing' acts are still permitted. So it seems like just an arbitrary list, designed perhaps for a purpose - we can't just ban ALL porn, so we'll pick on a few niche areas that will slip through more readily, then once the ball is rolling, we can add more to the list.
Thing is, whilst I am all in favour of protecting the innocent, I personally am an adult, and would like the freedom to pick and choose what I watch, or read, or listen to. I have my own standards of what I find acceptable or not, tasteful or not, and what I don't like I can choose to avoid, I don't feel I need to be dictated to by others who choose for me.
Today pornography, tomorrow, literature and art and music. What next, books being burned in the streets?
The internet is supposed to be open. Of course there is certain stuff like child porn and violent porn that really shouldn't have a place in any society, but the fact that it is such harmless stuff being banned here is really worrying, and set alongside the widespread barring of websites being exercised in this country, I really fear for our future freedoms.
As far as protecting our kids from viewing such stuff, as with the babeshows, it is surely down to the parents to exercise some control and authority, not for the isp's or the computer manufacturers.
Banning porn, and page3, covering up the Lads Mags on the shelves etc etc, all this does is create a more repressive attitude towards sex, make it seem like something mysterious, dirty, make people more confused and ashamed about their own sexuality. Every other week we seem to be hit by yet another scandal of some celeb accused of sexual misdeeds many years ago, Saville, DLT, Rolf, now Cosby, not to forget the catholic priests, and rumours of a 'sex ring' involving politicians and others. Most of these offenses occurred many years ago in a time before the internet, a more 'innocent' time, and yet these things were apparently rife. It makes you wonder if the reason these things were so widespread was precisely because of the repressive attitude towards sex, that attitude screwed these peoples views up, and either allowed them to think this behaviour was acceptable, or gave them an extra thrill because they knew it wasn't acceptable, and the victims were too repressed to stand up for themselves when being abused by somebody 'famous' or powerful, and too ashamed to come forward about it at the time. Perhaps a more open attitude towards sex and sexuality will actually help prevent these situations in the future.
So for me, this whole attack on our freedom to choose, and on the very freedom of the internet, and the potentially dangerous repression of sex and sexuality, is the real issue here, not some woolly semi-feminist, liberal-capitalist nonsense.
wow munch you just won the internet for that... well said mate.
^I wonder if there are any tory MP's among the protestors because fetish wear and anything to do with that lifestyle does seem to be their normal mode of dress in private.
^^^ Munch, put up a petition with what you said here as its base and I'd sign it like a shot and so would many more I'm guessing. The current epetition is an ill thought-out, limited and poorly argued opposition.
What we have seen from this government and various pressure groups this last year on curtailing various aspects of personal freedoms has been nothing short of scandalous. Some very unhealthy presidents are being set. All in the name of one elite group or another thinking they know what's better for the rest of us.
We are becoming quite the judgemental invasive society.
The consistent attacks on the internet with restrictions being lined up, seemingly one after another, are particular worrying and smack of a hidden agenda from certain politicians to me. One that is all about the control of the dissemination of information and other liberties that the net can bring. There is deep suspicion of the net from some out there and they would like to hack back its scale and reach. Easy targets first is the way to achieve such things.
As some here have pointed out already, it feels like we have taken the first few steps down the slippery slope. What are they lining up as their next target I wonder..?
(12-12-2014 14:47 )munch1917 Wrote: [ -> ]... Every other week we seem to be hit by yet another scandal of some celeb accused of sexual misdeeds many years ago, Saville, DLT, Rolf, now Cosby, not to forget the catholic priests, and rumours of a 'sex ring' involving politicians and others...
Every one of the celeb offenders convicted so far did so in secrecy. A show called "It was alright in the 70s" tried to draw a link between causal sexism and Savile etc, but apart from draping an arm around an audience member, Savile was noticeable for not having a girl friend, groupies or going to strip pubs. For 40 years he was not romantically linked to anyone.
Rolf, priests, etc were squeaky clean. Any public figure who publically expressed an interest in more than one woman in anything other than a jokey way was off limits for family viewing, politics or a position of responsibility.
Its now turning out that people who were honest and open about liking sex who went around cracking filthy jokes and leering over fit birds were the trustworthy ones, and the decent upright ones with no little apparent sex drive were the ones who should have been shunned.
Honesty about peoples sex drives is what we need, not political correctness.
So do these regulations mean that a UK based Chaturbate couple could be illegal if they do face sitting, or even a just female performer who squirts?
It is utterly absurd that perfectly legal pastimes are illegal to view on video.
