The UK Babe Channels Forum

The truth of the matter is Ofcom associate these channels with the working class, pervs and the unemployed and have allways looked down on them as something sleazy since day 1 and in their opinion it's something really that shouldn't be on the telly in the first place in any way shape or form and has showed them the very minimum of tolerance or leeway and the fact that one of the models was recently busted signing on at the dole at the same time under a different name isn't exactly going to do them any favours either. Ofcom think the whole Adult entertainment business is corupt and is run by people like dodgy Dave who have got nothing better to do with their time than exploit beautiful women on a very tacky and exploitive level and view the whole thing as a form of prostitution. But because of the fact this is a democracy and SKY have to reflect all tastes it's unlawful for Ofcom not to grant any of them a licence, but they will make life very difficult for them and will pounce on them without the slightest thought or hesitation. Ofcom have rewritten the watershed rules for all the Adult Channels so as to show control and play dirty tactics by trying to ultimately force them all out of business. I know it's a bitter pill to swallow but Ofcom are allways going to be more fair on the mainstream channels so to be making comparisions between what they can show and the babe channels is proving to be a very futile exercise. We will continue to see channels such as SKY ARTS show full nudity at any time of the day until ofcom opinion is changed, let's be honest, the brutal fact is Ofcom like I said hate the Adult Channels so there is allways going to be no comparision made in Ofcom's eye's between what they percieve as OK on the main channels to show and what is shown on the babes channels. It's highly unfair but that's the situation we find ourselves in at present

Sadly the Content Committee seem unrepresentative of anyone except the civil servants who wrote the Communications Act. Ex civil servants, a few journalists, a few academics. No drama producers, feted actors or members of the working class. A bit like the House of Commons.

Example of a more relaxed attitude in the "real" world of newspapers rather than highly regulated TV. Papers have no guaranteed income or sales, they darent offend readers, but rely on juicy content to get readers to return. Metro is handed out free in major cities, on trains and in offices, there isnt even a cover charge. Todays issue featured a photo from a fashion show where a new miliner hit on the idea of having nude models to get noticed. No pretention, milliner Robyn Coles at The White Rabbit Studio just said "as a new name you have to do something to get noticed." The papers website has 11 nude pictures including

Metro Page

Another example of strange standards in the wider world.

Quote:Facebook 'gives green light to gore but thumbs down to nudity'
Staff who screen content for Facebook are being told to block photos of mild nudity – but allow images of death and disfigurement, it has been claimed.

A 17-page document given to staff at online moderator oDesk tells them to delete ‘obvious sexual activity, even if naked parts are hidden from view’, a former worker has revealed.

But guidelines give the go-ahead to ‘deep flesh wounds’, ‘excessive blood’ and ‘crushed heads, limbs, etc – as long as no insides are showing’.

In it, staff are told images of ‘urine, faeces, vomit, semen and ear wax’ are banned but images of ‘snot’ are allowed – as are ‘cartoon faeces, urine and spit’.

Depictions of illegal drug taking should also be deleted but marijuana is OK as long as it does not depict selling, buying or growing, moderators are told.

So thats OK then, images of death, disfigurement, excessive blood and crushed heads could not possibly cause offence or harm developing minds as these are part of normal adult life, unlike mild nudity. Oh hang on, thats the wrong way round, at least in the UK.

Note the one restriction - insides must not be showing. At least thats consistent.

Metro Claimed Facebook Guidelines

Back to double standards in television.

A Girls Guide to 21st Century Sex

Channel 5 seem to showing the series again, starting at 11:15 on 5* on Friday 24 Feb (Sky 176). Scheduled for 11:15-midnight, 45 minutes, which sounds like a full uncut episode.

This was the series featuring demonstration of real sex positions, cameras inside a womans woopsie and strapped to a mans train when it went into the tunnel of love, and close up ejaculation shots. Really close up, from less than a centimeter.

Repeated on 5*+1 at 00:15 which could be useful if the inlaws are visiting and are slow to leave.

Featured Elizabeth Lawrence and Stefan Hard according to Wikipedia, which strangely has no screenshots.

What has happened to all the late night wank material we used to get elsewhere on SKY TV outside of the Adult EPG. Here's some programmes from the past. Naked News - A daily late night round up of the news broadcast every night first on Get Lucky TV and then Sumo TV which as well as being very informative, it also gave you the added kick of seeing hot naked presenters. Topless darts and the World Of Sex on Men And Motors. Living TV - Brand New and uncut episodes of Sexcentra aswell as a programme called Sexy Sexy. Fight Network TV - Late night asian birds in oiled up and often naked catfights. Fashion TV - Regular sexy naked photoshoots. Infact new documentaries were allway's airing. Back in 2005 for example you didn't have to watch the babe channels to get your kicks as I quite often got them elsewhere. Now that's only a few examples and programmes I've used as numourous other's were on the go too at the time. From 11PM onwards you must have had about up to 15 to 20 channels showing Adult Content on a regular basis. This thread has dried up of late because there is fuck all to report on. I mean FFS how's about SKY ART's at least put on some Dutch Naked Ballet especially for eccles as he's been requesting this now for ages

Only just seen Scottishguys post and yet again I feel its 5-10 years too late. Its not just TV, its got to be at least 7 years since The Crown and Shuttle closed down, followed by The Norfolk Village, and the Sir John Franklin went respectable a very long time ago.

Trouble is television has divided into sectors and heaven help the channel that crosses boundaries, and there are ghettos. Religion ghettos. Sports. Kids. Music. Sex. Comedy. Only a small number of "category" shows venture out into other categories or general entertainment, so its possible to watch, say, documentaries 24 hours a day 7 days a week without anything else by staying in one part of the EPG. Its also general entertainment is becoming more narrowly defined. It used to be normal for an early evening variety show to have some leggy dancers in skimpy costumes, drama would contain sex scenes, satire and comedy would have topless scenes. Remember Ken Russells films on the BBC? Benny Hill? The Two Ronnies? Monty Python?

Regulation leads to segmentation.

(23-02-2012 00:57 )eccles Wrote: [ -> ]snip...

This was the series featuring demonstration of real sex positions, cameras inside a womans woopsie and strapped to a mans train when it went into the tunnel of love, and close up ejaculation shots. Really close up, from less than a centimeter.

Got to love your description, do you write sex ed books for schools?

I don't know about anyone else but I like my sex and nudity to be compartmentalised.... I dont wanna see sex scenes during quality drama... I'd much rather tune in to a specialised show or channel to get my thrills

(23-02-2012 00:41 )eccles Wrote: [ -> ]Another example of strange standards in the wider world.

Quote:Facebook 'gives green light to gore but thumbs down to nudity'
Staff who screen content for Facebook are being told to block photos of mild nudity – but allow images of death and disfigurement, it has been claimed.

A 17-page document given to staff at online moderator oDesk tells them to delete ‘obvious sexual activity, even if naked parts are hidden from view’, a former worker has revealed.

But guidelines give the go-ahead to ‘deep flesh wounds’, ‘excessive blood’ and ‘crushed heads, limbs, etc – as long as no insides are showing’.

In it, staff are told images of ‘urine, faeces, vomit, semen and ear wax’ are banned but images of ‘snot’ are allowed – as are ‘cartoon faeces, urine and spit’.

Depictions of illegal drug taking should also be deleted but marijuana is OK as long as it does not depict selling, buying or growing, moderators are told.

So thats OK then, images of death, disfigurement, excessive blood and crushed heads could not possibly cause offence or harm developing minds as these are part of normal adult life, unlike mild nudity. Oh hang on, thats the wrong way round, at least in the UK.

Note the one restriction - insides must not be showing. At least thats consistent.

Metro Claimed Facebook Guidelines

The mind fucking boggles, it really does. We are, without doubt, the most fucked up, perverted, twisted, sick, depraved, immoral country in the western world.

When are these fuckwits going to realise that it's decades of this kind of attitude that's resulted in this country having one of the highest levels of sex crime? These useless twats are trying to protect the young and lower sex crime by outlawing any depiction of it, and don't even realise they're having the exact opposite effect.