Internet Porn Site Regulation

One More Try, If You Want to Be Puritans.. https://www.xbiz.com/news/263262/u-k-gov...ion-scheme
I've yet to read it fully, but it's possible they might try to slip this through, whilst we're still in virus hiatus. If it works!?

Where is the political will going to come from to say this is massive on-going trend is WRONG? Why are some groups protected from discrimination and not others? Blatant hypocrisy from regulators and governments...

https://www.vice.com/en/article/jgmm9g/a...tent-banks

In the 'New Rules' thread, I linked this adultdvdtalk forum thread: https://forum.adultdvdtalk.com/brazzers-...dra-romain a discussion starting in December 2012, about scenes or entire websites that disappeared, at the behest of credit card processing companies.
As I said in a subsequent 'New Rules' post, these weren't widely publicised incidents.

Looking at that adultdvdtalk thread again, it's also interesting that a deleted website mentioned, and the scene that prompted the thread, were both produced by Brazzers, which as an adultdvdtalk poster says, is a relatively vanilla site, (and produces material which mostly doesn't interest me: https://www.babeshows.co.uk/showthread.p...pid2597694 )

Although there are also references to Kink, which despite there being a documentary about it, produced by mainstream actor James Franco, that premiered at the Sundance Film Festival: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=be9JcuyL9fk produces more consistently 'extreme' material, and as I've said on Twitter, seems to be in odd legal limbo, where it's based in the US, as their dvd's indicate "not to be sold in USA", if I've remembered the wording correctly.

However, as an adultdvdtalk poster points out, successful prosecutions related to the porn industry, have mostly arisen from restrictions on what can distributed by post in US.
Despite the still relatively censored, adult entertainment industry in the UK, successful prosecutions of material featuring consenting adults, are rare.
Notwithstanding, very specific restrictions on UK porn, overwhelmingly involving women being dominant, were passed in 2014, but overturned in 2019: https://uk.news.yahoo.com/violent-porn-i...30303.html that I mentioned in the 'New Rules' thread
Hence, not entirely dissimilar to the way governments and states, in 'liberal democracies', prefer to avoid political prosecutions of oppositional groups, by finding a technicality or pretext in civil or criminal law, to achieve the same goal, financial restrictions have become the default means, to at least start attacking porn.
A similarity to smoking could also be drawn, inasmuch it remains legal to make, sell and use tobacco products, but there are determined parties (in the broader than formally political sense), seeking to marginalise it out of existence, without necessarily directly banning the industry.
This being at the same time, conversely, that some forms of legalisation or decriminalisation of otherwise illegal drugs are being increasingly discussed.
But special taxes on food, and probably some other restrictions on otherwise legal acts and activities, I can't recall at the moment, are also being considered.

Determined prohibitionists abound in many and various directions. Yet some of the most purportedly libertarian, and anti-censorship campaigners do have areas where they are at best indifferent.
A pertinent example are some people in the orbit of Spiked, which published a moralistic attack on the OnlyFans phenomenon, back in the summer.
Merely mentioning in passing, the Visa and Mastercard restrictions on Pornhub, and the wider anti-porn propaganda campaign by religious fundamentalists in disguise, and major 'liberal' media organisations, such as the Guardian and New York Times.
I wrote about it on Facebook, where I'm friends with a couple of people from Spiked. Who I've known for over two decades, long before they became involved with Spiked. Indeed, were broadly from a very different political direction, for most of the time I've known them.
However, I doubt they've seen the post. One of the lesser reasons I'm leaving Facebook, is that it's less easy than even Twitter, to draw people's attention to your posts.
Especially when you've had no interest in being 'friends', with more than a small number of people you know anyway, whilst those themselves follow far more others.
I've known others around Spiked, for similar and greater lengths of time, but the Facebook friends are involved in a discussion group that hosted Jerry Barnett, anti-censorship campaigner, who had worked in the UK porn industry for a long time, in a discussion about porn, in 2016, which gives a good idea of their differences: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=f0m9q-haoEs&t=33s (There's audio of only the speeches, with photos from the event.)
Plus, it demonstrates the need for the widest, open, and informed discussion of these matters.

Just a short note to say, that within a couple days of my writing above:

"A similarity to smoking could also be drawn, inasmuch it remains legal to make, sell and use tobacco products, but there are determined parties (in the broader than formally political sense), seeking to marginalise it out of existence, without necessarily directly banning the industry."

This news came from New Zealand..
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-59589775

https://www.xbiz.com/news/263603/billie-...terns-show
When (young) celebrities self-diagnose their ongoing troubles, everyone gets drawn into the renewed war on porn, which has escalated during the pandemic. Making wider, sweeping claims, without referencing any research, except anti-porn propaganda in disguise, whilst more impartial, substantial research, indicates otherwise.

Good evening there a couple of things that will never be allowed on the stock market and they are religion and the adult industry because it would be a muti trillion business. What the big boys don't like to see is it's being taken away from there company's and the performers now see they can make an income from selling there own content. Look what the babe channels try to do when onlyfans popped its head up these babe channels came down hard on the babes which is why most left one station and went to the other. They gave out suspension to babes who used there shift time uploading there own content to onlyfans as well.
Onlyfans thought they were being clever with there new terms and conditions to there platform all this has done is made the these babes realize that they don't have to have there content on just one site
There's loads of these babes platforms out there but why is it that one doesn't seem to attract much attention which is adultworks which is worldwide and does everything.
If a bank profit is greater than the fine they might receive then the banks are always going to take that risk on whatever they might be dealing in. Give a man a gun he will Rob a bank. Give a man a bank and he will Rob the world

https://twitter.com/hoffman_noa/status/1...2816585728

It would be good to see the back of that bill, but some news sources are suggesting that the government has merely run out of time and has had no choice but to postpone the bill. Of course by the time it comes back in the autumn there will be a new prime minister, so possibly it's then a whole different ball game.

(14-07-2022 11:37 )4waydiablo Wrote:  It would be good to see the back of that bill, but some news sources are suggesting that the government has merely run out of time and has had no choice but to postpone the bill. Of course by the time it comes back in the autumn there will be a new prime minister, so possibly it's then a whole different ball game.

So if this Bill cannot be passed yet or is scrapped, can the web shows revert to their usual standard?

Oh what a surprise, after all the fanfare Mad Nad & the tories made about making the Internet safer etc for everyone..nothing happens wouldn't be surprised if the new pm quietly drops it