To sum up:
If I want to laugh I will watch a comedy
If I want to cry I will watch a tear-jerker
If I want to be scared I will watch a horror movie
If I want an adrenaline rush I will watch an action movie
But if I want to be aroused I must hit myself repeatedly on the head with a brick until the bad thoughts go away!
No, I don't understand it either!
Anyone see the shamless episode earlier,sex scene with positions you would see in a porn lol at one point i thought they were gonna show penetration
when you see what normal shows can do before 12 and flick on the 900 channels late into the night and you see the tame shit they show.......only proves what kind of a scam ofcom are running.Ofcom,deep down must love these channels......easy money
(25-01-2012 01:20 )babefinder Wrote: [ -> ]Anyone see the shamless episode earlier,sex scene with positions you would see in a porn lol at one point i thought they were gonna show penetration when you see what normal shows can do before 12 and flick on the 900 channels late into the night and you see the tame shit they show.......only proves what kind of a scam ofcom are running.Ofcom,deep down must love these channels......easy money
http://www.channel4.com/programmes/shameless/4od (40:40 for the impatient)
Cheers stan,its even better the second time i watched
that was the end of the show,so it was on before 11 o clock LMFAO.How babe channels pay the fines ofcom give is beyond me
KIDS watching is ofcom's biggest defence for fining the channels
if i was young and looking for a sneaky wank i wouldn't be watching the 900s....id be watching shamless
LOL
Yeah, it's beyond pathetic that we can't see close to that on the babe channels. It's all a tease, but a normal body part is not allowed???
OFCOM's stance is simply untenable. It is clear that the British public do NOT have a problem with the portrayal of explicit sex and nudity on TV else OFCOM would be inundated with complaints about programmes such as The Sex Education Show, Embarrassing Bodies and the Lover's Guide on Body in Balance TV. If these explicit portrayals of sex and nudity are not deemed harmful and offensive and do not require special restrictions (e.g. mandatory PIN) to 'protect vulnerable people' then neither do any other channels showing exactly the same type of material in some other context. Indeed, to allow such material in one context but not another is ridiculous and clearly discriminatory. The material itself is the same - explicit sex and nudity - thus if this CONTENT caused harm or offence it would cause harm or offence in any context. The law says it is the CONTENT OF PROGRAMMES that OFCOM are to concern themselves with, NOT the 'CONTEXT' in which it appears. Indeed, it is on this unnecessary and unlawful issue of supposed 'contextual justification' that OFCOM has based every single one of its discriminatory, unnecessary and unlawful decisions.
(25-01-2012 17:04 )IanG Wrote: [ -> ]OFCOM's stance is simply untenable. It is clear that the British public do NOT have a problem with the portrayal of explicit sex and nudity on TV else OFCOM would be inundated with complaints about programmes such as The Sex Education Show, Embarrassing Bodies and the Lover's Guide on Body in Balance TV.
This does raise another question; if sex and nudity on tv are not the problem - as is clearly illustrated here - then just what
is Ofcom's problem with the babeshows?
They cant stand sex for enjoyment. They probably believe that the political class cant either.