The proposed government legislation on violent pornography.

[RiseAgainst]

just found this on net regarding Japan

Sex crimes in Japan have surged in recent years, with rape cases jumping 40 percent to 2,228 in 2001, from around 1,600 four years earlier, according to the National Police Agency. Offenses such as groping and obscenity tripled to 9,326 cases in 2001 from a decade ago.

The increase is due at least in part to a greater inclination by women to report attacks to police. Since the Super Free scandal broke, more of its alleged victims have come forward.

[chuckwasgod]

man, no wonder, have you seen legend of the overfiend?

[protex_lee]

Originally Posted by humndislocation

That wasn't his point, he wasn't saying that you're a peadophile, he was saying that he believed the logic you were using could be used to justify child porn as well.

Thats a fair enough point but really when it boils down to it.... is there any excuse for being turned on by that ??

thats twisted

being turned on by fully mature women naked and bound / gagged whatever is normal human activity.

some folk have kinks ... what i was trying to say was should the government be allowed to dictate what pictures you are allowed to be turned on by given that all models were of the age of consent...

have you noticed.... i bet your still allowed to look at schoolgirl porn !!!

is that gonna make horny old men go out and try it on with 14 year olds ???

basically using the child porn argument is invalid for the simple reason KIDS ARE NOT OF LEGAL AGE TO

a) have sex
b) view sexual content
c) appear in sexual content.....

this argument is about the LEGAL ADULT INDUSTRY and how the government are trying to blinker it again....

i think that the best argument i have seen on here so far was .....

Originally Posted by RiseAgainst

some people are happen to sit in "extreme" fantasies within their house but have no desire to do so in real life, to deny that could cause more sexual crimes

i think thats the point we are trying to get across here....

what next.... oh oh that song is about raping nuns.... lets ban that coz someone might violate a little sister of the poor !! :S

[Dj-Zero]

Originally Posted by : : Scott : :

The "your" was referring to DJ-Zero and whoever else made the point that Japan has a small number of reported cases of sexual assault despite high production and exposure to sexually violent media and suggested that this inferred no causal relationship between sexually violent media and sexual assaut.

yup, i was wrong, i didn' think about it like that

[RiseAgainst]

ok if any of this is wrong, someone feel free to point it out and shut my mouth

if this becomes law it will be illegal to buy a tape of say Jenna Jameson getting smacked about by Ron Jeremy (im just using names for my own wee purpose!)

so if i tune into Eastenders, will i see Little Mo getting smacked about by Phil Mitchell?

where is the difference? is it OK if its on mainstream TV?

[Pubic Wig]

Originally Posted by : : Scott : :

Argh what, are you serious? Yeah humanity isn't progressive and all we have done is regress and go backwards since the the Dark ages. Free speech and emancipation have always existed and are not the result of progress. We have always been able to eradicate diseases like Polio with simple innoculations by understanding immunocompetence in humans. I peferred the Internet and free healthcare in 1452! I wish it wasn't illegal for someone to steal all my stuff and kill my family because laws and legal systems are the result of progression from barbarism and THERE IS NO PROGRESS.


Stop talking shite.

Just define exactly just how humanity has 'progressed' then Scott mate? Do you mean that Britain, and the 'western' world has progressed? And is progression a good thing?
4000 years ago a laberour in Egypt would work some 10 hours a day, receive his food, lodgings, a large wage, the best medical care available at the time and a secure job for life in the service of his Pharaoh. Whats the unemployment rate like in Britain let alone so called developing countries in the year 2006?

What is so damn fantastic about the internet? Has humanity just survived miraculously without it for yaaay many thousands of years? Dont get me wrong, i appreciate it for what i use it for but it achieves nothing more than what we already had, exchanging information by word of mouth. And just like word of mouth the information we give one another can be easily falsified so that shoots down claims that 'it allows greater free speach'.

You talk about emancipation as if thats the end of slavery?
Is it fuck, aye, slavery thats obvious in the sense that theres no giant quarter past fuck off planations in the southern States of America, but what about the rest of the world or are we just neglecting countries were enforced child labour is a way of life?

Oh yes, we are so close to global peace and all that nonsense.
Back in the 'Dark Ages' a King or Warlord could send out his armies to attack his rivals and take their lands...oh yeah, a President or Prime minister or Dictator can do the same thing nowadays too! Only now thanks to Humanitys progression we can kill hundreds of thousands with weopons created as a deterant to the same damn weopons?

As for codes of law that prevent someone from killing you and stealing your stuff...just what the hell is it i read in the papers and see in the news everyday of the week man? Oh yeah...some innocent kid gets murdered in gang violence, a mother suffering post-natal depression drowns her newborn child, a madman with a grudge against the world takes out his anger on some Amish schoolgirls.

Dont insult my intelligence Scott. I respect you as a smart individual who more often than not makes some very good and valid comments on threads like these, but my god man, you can be a right insulting arse at times when someone disagrees with your point of veiw. Fair enough if you or anyone else disagrees with me, thats free speech for you...but lay off the insults where they arnt warrented. (especially for typos)

To everryone else i apologise, I realise this post has little or nothing to do with this topic.

[: : Scott : :]

Originally Posted by Pubic Wig

Just define exactly just how humanity has 'progressed' then Scott mate?

Hey, I dunno! Actually it probably hasn't! Well, I'm off to go haul some large stones around while getting whipped for the rest of my life (which won't be long, because I have leprosy!).

Oh wait, actually I'm going to make a coffee, and since it's my day off work I'm going to make a post in a debate on the Internet because I live in a world that has progressed enourmously over the last ten thousand years. Lucky me!

Originally Posted by Pubic Wig

Do you mean that Britain, and the 'western' worl has progressed? And is progression a good thing?

Yes and yes.

Originally Posted by Pubic Wig

4000 years ago a laberour in Egypt would work some 10 hours a day, receive his food, lodgings, a large wage, the best medical care available at the time and a secure job for life in the service of his Pharaoh. Whats the unemployment rate like in Britain let alone so called developing countries in the year 2006?

So, your answer to the woes of the world is a return to ancient Egyptian serfdom? Awesome, vote pubic wig for UN SecGen. I don't understand the basis on which you can even compare the freedom and quality of life that people experience in the most progressive societies of today with those of labourers 4000 years ago.

The best medical care available (stick leeches on everything), a secure job for life (about 24 years if you're lucky), sounds ace, but forgive me if I refrain from powering up my time machine just yet.

Originally Posted by Pubic Wig

What is so damn fantastic about the internet? Has humanity just survived miraculously without it for yaaay many thousands of years? Dont get me wrong, i appreciate it for what i use it for but it achieves nothing more than what we already had, exchanging information by word of mouth. And just like word of mouth the information we give one another can be easily falsified so that shoots down claims that 'it allows greater free speach'.

I used the Internet as an example of humanities desire to think up cool things and then make them. If you want a specific example of how the Internet is useful in terms of world progress, then consider the effect of media transmission over it.

Even doing something basic like setting up RSS to big news networks, you'll know when an Iraqi hospital has been bombed or whatever. Was that always the case, was information freely available instantly over long distances 100 years ago? I know the large media networks are still subject to some censorship, be it internel or external, but I'm going to make the assumption (can't source) that because of the Internet, we can find out about injustices committed in war that we perhaps couldn't have before (say 150 years ago). Another example of a system that isn't perfect, but it's better than what we had in the past, and that's progress.

Originally Posted by Pubic Wig

You talk about emancipation as if thats the end of slavery? Is it fuck, aye, slavery thats obvious in the sense that theres no giant quarter past fuck off planations in the southern States of America, but what about the rest of the world or are we just neglecting countries were enforced child labour is a way of life?

No, but it's progress. Maybe you're confusing the terms "progress" and "resolution", because that's the only way I can justify your comments to myself such that I can form a riposte.

By your own admission, you say that slavery and serfdom are inherent characteristics of humanity, from the slaves of ancient Egypt to the pre-emancipation plantation workers in southern USA. There are still slaves in the world, and lots of them; however, give it 100 years and there will be a lot less. Give it 500, and less still. As this time tends further into the future, the number of slaves will tend to 0. I'm justifying this by extrapolating based on the prevailing pattern that as time increases, political systems become more advanced and slavery decreases. This is the definition of progress. If you have information to the contrary, please explain it to me because I don't like playing host to misinformed beliefs.

Originally Posted by Pubic Wig

Oh yes, we are so close to global peace and all that nonsense. Back in the 'Dark Ages' a King or Warlord could send out his armies to attack his rivals and take their lands...oh yeah fuck a President or Prime minister or Dictator can do the same thing nowadays too! Only now thanks to Humanitys progression we can kill hundreds of thousands with weopons created as a deterant to the same damn weopons?

What's your point? Think about the Crusades, or Khan? It's speculated that the Mongolian invasion of China reduced its population by about 60 million, in the 13th and 14th centuries. Wether or not this can be attributed to mass slaughter is debatable, but it shows you don't need nuclear weapons to kill lots of people, you can do it just fine with arrows, swords and spears. I tried to find a source for the population decline, here's one that wp offers (I know wp isn't particularly reliable);

Ping-ti Ho, "An Estimate of the Total Population of Sung-Chin China", in Études Song, Series 1, No 1, (1970) pp. 33-53.

The good thing about modern weaponry is that it makes you think twice about having a war. How many full scale enourmous wars have there been since WW2, with comparable casualties? 60 years without an enourmous war in which millions of people die is pretty good. War has always happened, but hopefully we're getting closer to it not happening as much, and when it does, hopefully it will be less deadly.

Originally Posted by Pubic Wig

As for codes of law that prevent someone from killing you and stealing your stuff...just what the hell is it i read in the papers and see in the news everyday of the week man? Oh yeah...some innocent kid gets murdered in gang violence, a mother suffering post-natal depression drowns her newborn child, a madman with a grudge against the world takes out his anger on some Amish schoolgirls.

The point is that most people don't kill other people just because they can. Obviously we all live pretty privileged lives. We live in a small, relatively nice city in the UK. I could quite comfortably walk down the street playing my DS without constant fear of it being killed for it. I'm 21 and none of my close friends have ever been killed by violent crime. I don't know how many of yours have, but I'm going to confidently bet it's less than 5. This absolute value increases in other parts of the west where there are more people living in the same space, and the relative value increases with poverty and suchlike, but the relative crime rate is smaller than it would be given the same conditions thousands of years ago. In other parts of the world with more "primitive" legal systems and a lack of resources to fight crime, obviously the rate of violent crime increases. Consequently we can deduce that as a legal system and a society progresses, the relative number of instances of violent crime decreases.

Originally Posted by Pubic Wig

Dont insult my intelligence Scott. I respect you as a smart individual who more often than not makes some very good and valid comments on threads like these, but my god man, you can be a right insulting arse at times when someone disagrees with your point of veiw. Fair enough if you or anyone else disagrees with me, thats free speech for you...but lay off the insults where they arnt warrented.

The basic argument we are having seems to be that I think that the world, humanity, technology, medicine, society, political/legal systems, suffrage, and empathy are better now than 5000 years ago. You speak as though you don't.

If I insulted you, it's because I'm genuinely at a loss as to how someone in a position as privileged and fortunate as ours can so flippantly deny the benefits of humanities progression over the last ten millenia. Your opinions insult every enlightened person throughout history who has tried (and in many cases succeeded) to contribute something to the world that makes it better. The worst part is that I know you're not stupid, and that makes it all the more difficult to understand.

Edit: Fuck that post took like ten minutes and I've not even made my coffee yet. I hope you get that I'm not trying to be a dick or anything, just that I think you are so wrong. Sorry for derail.

[Pubic Wig]

Originally Posted by : : Scott : :

I hope you get that I'm not trying to be a dick or anything, just that I think you are so wrong. Sorry for derail.

Apology accepted and i take back my insult on you too as it was completely unnecessary. I do understand your confusion to my beleifs but they are mine to have.
My most valid point to me however is still in my first argument, progression in Humanity rather than Britain or the Western world. Becuase truth be told as none of us(i assume)have lived in a shanty town all their lives and wouldnt know, nor particularly care of what we can do in our homes this day and age.
However I am completlely off topic and not adding to this thread (i cant say i've made any mention of violant pornography) and your arguments are; i must conceed, quite frankly far more convincing than mine.

[RiseAgainst]

thats you telt Mark!

you both have valid points. we as a western society have developed in a very progessive manner. yet Aboriginals are still living the same existence they did a long time ago.

but is there any difference between being told to smash rocks and being whipped til bleeding and being told what to watch and being punished if you dont conform?

(i delibratly chose whipped to bleeding as it brings your argument right back into topic!!)

[Dj-Zero]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKDn216B2NE

[Jeebus]

Originally Posted by RiseAgainst

but is there any difference between being told to smash rocks and being whipped til bleeding and being told what to watch and being punished if you dont conform?

Quite a big difference, yes.

Originally Posted by : : Scott : :

just that I think you are so wrong.

I completely agree.