01-01-2011, 19:43
(01-01-2011 18:52 )Light Entertainment Wrote: [ -> ]Gazfc, the pic you posted raises thought in the kind of direction I feel this discussion could do with heading...
[i][SNIP]/i]
I agree with the not showing full nudity because it's showing all for nothing, which is why they should figure out how to charge for this. Encryption doesn't seem to be happening, so this probably won't happen.
As for context (Hate this word ), well if the shows were encrypted, then there would be no need for context, as it would be only available to those who know the pin code, but that won't happen because not as many people have SKY, and Ofcom will lose their power over the channels.
But back to context again. Why does this have to come into play on adult channels that are their to stimulate? When they are allowed to show and do almost everything, covering their private parts gives off the impression that it's something so dirty and horrible that nobody is allowed to see. It makes no sense on Ofcom's behalf, and the only reason why not showing everything makes any sense at all, is because they aren't making enough money to do so. Also, not all of the women would be happy to show everything, but many ARE, and would if allowed.
I still think that many members of Ofcom find vaginas to be frightening Even on the other shows I've mentioned, it's rare to see an uncensored open leg vagina shot, yet penises are always uncensored. Why is that? Maybe they've seen Alien too many times, and vaginas remind them of facehuggers?
In the recent posts by Eccles, Ofcom says that genitals can be shown, as long as they aren't aroused. Um, OK.
This topic is getting a bit tiring to be honest.