Violent Pornography

Dj-Zero · 7th November 2005, 10:53 AM

I think this is a pretty important topic, and one that could affect some, maybe all of us, in the next few years.

A month or so back there was a lot of publicity about how the government was going to clamp down on ‘extreme pornographic images’ on the internet. What that actually meant was that they were asking for input and opinion from the public around a consultation paper that they had written.

It’s a bit much to go into detail now. However, what they seem to be saying is that there are some images on the internet that they can’t police (because they are outside their boundaries). They would not be publishable in this country, because they would be considered obscene (under the Obscene Publications Act). And they are so ‘abhorrent’ that all right-thinking people would like them banned.

So the government reckons it has to do something – and what it plans to do is to make it a criminal offence to POSSESS such images in future. From the net, certainly – but also in book or other form. If you possess any of the images that the government doesn’t like, you could end up in prison for three years and/or on the Sex Offenders’ Register.

Now I know that it is very tempting to say ‘jolly good’ – because I am sure that every one of us can think of images that they would find horrid to view and that maybe we would rather did not exist. But there are a number of problems with this proposal.

First, the government admits there is no evidence of harm at all from people watching these images – if anything, the evidence is the other way, with Japanese studies suggesting that people who look at a lot of porn often use it as a means to reduce their desires to DO things.

Second, it is about sex: the government is not proposing to ban ALL nasty images or nasty news images or whatever. Only images ‘in a sexual context’. Which is pretty dumb: because if they REALLY thought that these images led people to commit crimes, they would want them ALL banned anyway.

But they are saying there will be exemptions for images taken from films already passed by the censor and for artistic works – and that it won’t be a crime if you download stuff ‘accidentally’.

Which really sounds like spin and lies. Because once this proposal is law, I can’t see the police being impressed by someone saying: this image of a rape taken from a 18 film was only for personal interest or was downloaded accidentally or just didn’t turn me on.

Once this law is law, they are going to go after any images that anyone possesses that the local police chief doesn’t like – and if you remember James Anderton, the ultra-Christian police chief, what chiefs don’t like can be pretty innocuous indeed.

Anyway, all this worries me. There is a group set up to fight the proposal – details are at

www.backlash-uk.org.uk

You can also find links to the government consultation paper there. And if these proposals worry you, too, then please, please write in to the consultation. You don’t have to be wity, academic or anything. You don’t even have to answer THEIR rather biased questions. Just write in and make your point.

And you have until 2 December to do it!!!!

Keerin · 7th November 2005, 10:56 AM

i wish that i had never seen a picture of a woman with two cocks in her ass, but i knew what it was when i clicked on it.

this is a case of a minority spoiling it for everyone else.

Kevxx · 7th November 2005, 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keerin

i wish that i had never seen a picture of a woman with two cocks in her ass, but i knew what it was when i clicked on it.

this is a case of a minority spoiling it for everyone else.

post it up ..i need a laugh

Dj-Zero · 7th November 2005, 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevxx

post it up ..i need a laugh

Come on guys, not in here, please, this is Serious Discussion after all.

Keerin · 7th November 2005, 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dj-Zero

Come on guys, not in here, please, this is Serious Discussion after all.

i was being serious. i made a point.

ZenElements · 7th November 2005, 11:28 AM

I think this is a serious discussion - I also think that porn would be a very hard thing to police being the largest entity on the Internet and am interested to see how this all develops.

Note: There has been discussion of bringing out the .xxx domain extension for some time now, specifically for porn web sites. This is with the sole purpose to free up some of the domains taken by these pornographic sites.

I am going to following this thread, it seams quite interesting and I would also like to hear other peoples views to.

FINAL NOTE: Please, this is an important issue and we don't want a list of posts about what you have seen or sites you like to jerk off to... Create another room for that.

Thank you Dj-Zero

Dj-Zero · 7th November 2005, 11:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZenElements

I also think that porn would be a very hard thing to police being the largest entity on the Internet and am interested to see how this all develops.

It's started in America already, there are some of the Suicide Girls photo sets have been banned because they used fake blood.

Dj-Zero · 7th November 2005, 12:03 PM

One point I'd like to emphasise is: And if these proposals worry you, too, then please, please write in to the consultation. You don’t have to be wity, academic or anything. You don’t even have to answer THEIR rather biased questions. Just write in and make your point.

syntheticsound · 7th November 2005, 01:23 PM

anyway ...who wants to get off to a creepy goth chick who looks dead ...damn necrophiliacs

DissolveD_JameS · 7th November 2005, 05:11 PM

The lines all seem kinda blurred to me. If The Man manages to outlaw and abolish all "violent pornography" - it will just make people look in different places.

I don't think people look at certain fetish porn just because it's available. They look at it because it's what turns them on, possibly the only thing that can.

I personally, see no harm in any pornography that's not doing anything bad to produce it, like actually abusing people. Hell as long as they keep using fake blood and making sure you have a credit card to see it then what's the problem?? It's like the old boxing debate, when there was talk of banning it because of the violence. The people participating and the people watching it all know what they're getting into. As long as everyone involved has a choice then it's all good.

Fair enough, there's always a chance some minor might accidentally download some via P2P and be disturbed by these images - but as always that should come down to the person responsible for the child. The internet is full of things a whole lot more disturbing things than pornography, at least pornography is remotely useful.

What's with these people? They'll give methadone to heroine addicts but they want to take away the only thing that gives the depraved Joe Bloggs his jollies.

Dj-Zero · 7th November 2005, 05:13 PM

Well put James!

Schmurgle · 7th November 2005, 07:23 PM

i think theres a difference between violent porn and normal softporn and even hardcore porn. i personally dont see the problem with them cracking down on the violent part, espec if it involves kids and shit like that. Im not saying i want the government to be policing t'internet like big brother and if someone wants to watch shagging the so be it, but there needs to be some sort of censorship in place, not only for the viewer but for the people in the porn as well.

DissolveD_JameS · 7th November 2005, 07:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schmurgle

i think theres a difference between violent porn and normal softporn and even hardcore porn. i personally dont see the problem with them cracking down on the violent part, espec if it involves kids and shit like that. Im not saying i want the government to be policing t'internet like big brother and if someone wants to watch shagging the so be it, but there needs to be some sort of censorship in place, not only for the viewer but for the people in the porn as well.

Porn involving kids is already illegal, as is any porn that doesn't have the consent of the people appearing in it. I think what's trying to be banned now is the currently-legal pornography starring consenting adults (that may or may not have violent connotations ans imagery) - and I think that's fucked. It wouldn't call it artistic license but if people are doing what they want, giving other people what they want and nobody is getting hurt then I don't see the need to ban it, sounds like it will just cause more problems.

7th November 2005, 10:53 AM	#1 (permalink)
Dj-Zero I am Sancho Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Scumdee Posts: 3,961	Violent Pornography I think this is a pretty important topic, and one that could affect some, maybe all of us, in the next few years. A month or so back there was a lot of publicity about how the government was going to clamp down on ‘extreme pornographic images’ on the internet. What that actually meant was that they were asking for input and opinion from the public around a consultation paper that they had written. It’s a bit much to go into detail now. However, what they seem to be saying is that there are some images on the internet that they can’t police (because they are outside their boundaries). They would not be publishable in this country, because they would be considered obscene (under the Obscene Publications Act). And they are so ‘abhorrent’ that all right-thinking people would like them banned. So the government reckons it has to do something – and what it plans to do is to make it a criminal offence to POSSESS such images in future. From the net, certainly – but also in book or other form. If you possess any of the images that the government doesn’t like, you could end up in prison for three years and/or on the Sex Offenders’ Register. Now I know that it is very tempting to say ‘jolly good’ – because I am sure that every one of us can think of images that they would find horrid to view and that maybe we would rather did not exist. But there are a number of problems with this proposal. First, the government admits there is no evidence of harm at all from people watching these images – if anything, the evidence is the other way, with Japanese studies suggesting that people who look at a lot of porn often use it as a means to reduce their desires to DO things. Second, it is about sex: the government is not proposing to ban ALL nasty images or nasty news images or whatever. Only images ‘in a sexual context’. Which is pretty dumb: because if they REALLY thought that these images led people to commit crimes, they would want them ALL banned anyway. But they are saying there will be exemptions for images taken from films already passed by the censor and for artistic works – and that it won’t be a crime if you download stuff ‘accidentally’. Which really sounds like spin and lies. Because once this proposal is law, I can’t see the police being impressed by someone saying: this image of a rape taken from a 18 film was only for personal interest or was downloaded accidentally or just didn’t turn me on. Once this law is law, they are going to go after any images that anyone possesses that the local police chief doesn’t like – and if you remember James Anderton, the ultra-Christian police chief, what chiefs don’t like can be pretty innocuous indeed. Anyway, all this worries me. There is a group set up to fight the proposal – details are at www.backlash-uk.org.uk You can also find links to the government consultation paper there. And if these proposals worry you, too, then please, please write in to the consultation. You don’t have to be wity, academic or anything. You don’t even have to answer THEIR rather biased questions. Just write in and make your point. And you have until 2 December to do it!!!!

7th November 2005, 10:56 AM	#2 (permalink)
Keerin Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: probably work Posts: 5,790 Band: Welcome Home, Explorer; Vulsellum; Altruist	i wish that i had never seen a picture of a woman with two cocks in her ass, but i knew what it was when i clicked on it. this is a case of a minority spoiling it for everyone else. __________________ Welcome Home, Explorer \|Vulsellum\|Scum Killer

7th November 2005, 11:28 AM	#6 (permalink)
ZenElements Registered User Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Scotland \| Dundee Posts: 118	I think this is a serious discussion - I also think that porn would be a very hard thing to police being the largest entity on the Internet and am interested to see how this all develops. Note: There has been discussion of bringing out the .xxx domain extension for some time now, specifically for porn web sites. This is with the sole purpose to free up some of the domains taken by these pornographic sites. I am going to following this thread, it seams quite interesting and I would also like to hear other peoples views to. FINAL NOTE: Please, this is an important issue and we don't want a list of posts about what you have seen or sites you like to jerk off to... Create another room for that. Thank you Dj-Zero

7th November 2005, 12:03 PM	#8 (permalink)
Dj-Zero I am Sancho Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Scumdee Posts: 3,961	One point I'd like to emphasise is: And if these proposals worry you, too, then please, please write in to the consultation. You don’t have to be wity, academic or anything. You don’t even have to answer THEIR rather biased questions. Just write in and make your point.

7th November 2005, 01:23 PM	#9 (permalink)
syntheticsound Registered User Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: forfar Posts: 17	anyway ...who wants to get off to a creepy goth chick who looks dead ...damn necrophiliacs

7th November 2005, 05:11 PM	#10 (permalink)
DissolveD_JameS Restrained Abuser Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Dundee Posts: 1,252 Band: Dissolved	The lines all seem kinda blurred to me. If The Man manages to outlaw and abolish all "violent pornography" - it will just make people look in different places. I don't think people look at certain fetish porn just because it's available. They look at it because it's what turns them on, possibly the only thing that can. I personally, see no harm in any pornography that's not doing anything bad to produce it, like actually abusing people. Hell as long as they keep using fake blood and making sure you have a credit card to see it then what's the problem?? It's like the old boxing debate, when there was talk of banning it because of the violence. The people participating and the people watching it all know what they're getting into. As long as everyone involved has a choice then it's all good. Fair enough, there's always a chance some minor might accidentally download some via P2P and be disturbed by these images - but as always that should come down to the person responsible for the child. The internet is full of things a whole lot more disturbing things than pornography, at least pornography is remotely useful. What's with these people? They'll give methadone to heroine addicts but they want to take away the only thing that gives the depraved Joe Bloggs his jollies.

7th November 2005, 05:13 PM	#11 (permalink)
Dj-Zero I am Sancho Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Scumdee Posts: 3,961	Well put James!

7th November 2005, 07:23 PM	#12 (permalink)
Schmurgle Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: schmurglesville Posts: 935 Band: spam purse	i think theres a difference between violent porn and normal softporn and even hardcore porn. i personally dont see the problem with them cracking down on the violent part, espec if it involves kids and shit like that. Im not saying i want the government to be policing t'internet like big brother and if someone wants to watch shagging the so be it, but there needs to be some sort of censorship in place, not only for the viewer but for the people in the porn as well.

7th November 2005, 09:25 PM	#14 (permalink)
humndislocation Hardcore is serious guys