Mother wins ban on violent porn

[Mukkinese]

Are you talking about the US?

Citisens of the USA have far more freedom than citisens of the UK, we don't have a written constitution, we don't have freedom of speech enshrined in our law.

Recently we adopted the European human rights charter, which supposedly gives us freedom of speech, but the small print allows UK ministers to overrule that on matter of 'protecting morals'.

The UK government is requiring that all ISPs implement it's 'cleanfeed' technology.

A way of filtering all internet content entering the UK, initially this was argued to be specifically to stop child porn, but surprise, surprise, the list of sites we are to be banned access to grows and grows everyday.

Many are political (terrorists and such) and now 'violent porn', the ability to expand the list even further without new law is already in place.

We routinely have our emails scanned (without a court order) and are required by law, under threat of two years imprisonment, to hand over encryption keys to the police.

[Roderick]

Hey, it's how every perfectly fine democracy starts to slip away into tyranny. You have a fine set of predecessors, nothing to be a ashamed of there.

[Jat316sob]

Citisens of the USA have far more freedom than citisens of the UK, we don't have a written constitution

Wrong. We have a written constitution, it's just not codified, i.e. in one document.

we don't have freedom of speech enshrined in our law.

Wrong. See: The Human Rights Act 1998 Article 10 Freedom of Expression.

Recently we adopted the European human rights charter, which supposedly gives us freedom of speech, but the small print allows UK ministers to overrule that on matter of 'protecting morals'.

What you mean to refer to is the European Convention on Human Rights, which we incorporated into national law as the HRA (see above.) There is no "small print" in a statute, like every other nation in the world the UK restricts total freedom of speech with necessary laws against defamation, obscenity, incitement of racial hatred, laws to protect official secrets, etc. Ministers don't get to overrule anything, in legal cases involving matters of freedom of speech the decision lies with the judiciary.

[Salka]

This conversation is getting interesting, and I like it

[LOPcagney]

Mukkinese

Thumb Tourist

Join Date: Mar 2007

Posts: 0

Um... 0 posts?

I don't think it's that ridiculous that they put a ban on owning violent pornography. Well, that didn't come out right. People should be allowed to do whatever the fuck they want, as long as it doesn't involve depriving unwilling persons of their "life, liberty, and property", and violent consensual pornography should be a-ok (not to start a whole new discussion, but by that same logic, why is suicide illegal?). However, it's not, in my mind, any more unbelievable or unfair to put a ban on violent pornography than it is to ban kiddy porn. There are alot of unpleasent things in the world that many people don't want anyone to see (if you close your eyes and ears and hum, it goes away, right?), and without condoning kiddy porn or violent pornography, I can say that I believe violent pornography is ultimately much more damaging, however indirectly it's influence may be.

[Redwall]

Posts in Idle Banter aren't in the count.

[Oath]

Posts in Idle Banter aren't in the count.

That's censorship! The British are fucking us again!

[partystar]

Um... 0 posts?

I don't think it's that ridiculous that they put a ban on owning violent pornography. Well, that didn't come out right. People should be allowed to do whatever the fuck they want, as long as it doesn't involve depriving unwilling persons of their "life, liberty, and property", and violent consensual pornography should be a-ok (not to start a whole new discussion, but by that same logic, why is suicide illegal?). However, it's not, in my mind, any more unbelievable or unfair to put a ban on violent pornography than it is to ban kiddy porn. There are alot of unpleasent things in the world that many people don't want anyone to see (if you close your eyes and ears and hum, it goes away, right?), and without condoning kiddy porn or violent pornography, I can say that I believe violent pornography is ultimately much more damaging, however indirectly it's influence may be.

I think that everyone has the right to do what ever he wants. If someone doesn't want to see porn then he has the choice not to see it. But if someone want to see some porn then he will look for it and he will watch it. We have 2 choices to watch or not. Everyone does what ever he wants but we have to give them this alternatives.

[Wrestlevania]

I think that everyone has the right to do what ever he wants. If someone doesn't want to see porn then he has the choice not to see it. But if someone want to see some porn then he will look for it and he will watch it. We have 2 choices to watch or not. Everyone does what ever he wants but we have to give them this alternatives.

Searching is one thing. Blatantly drawing attention to it is quite another, despite how "clever" you think you are:

[JoannaDark]

I don't know if you can call it repression. Even if you had a certain fantasy, not being able to download it in action isn't really gonna do you much harm. Unless you're totally Freudian and think that it'll lead to a neurosis of some sort. Can't find violent porn? Just type in something else instead! Who knows, it may broaden these otherwise "perverse" minds!

[Nachimir]

there is plenty of evidence to suggest (I will provide links if you want) that the greater the free access to porn is, the lower the level of sex crimes are.

Repression is a far more likely cause of deviant behaviour than porn.

I really would like to see those links. I'm not challenging you, in fact I agree with you. I was in a discussion recently where Japanese culture came up, specifically lower rates of actual paedophilia yet media/pornography that are generally more permissive of it. Noone had a reference though. Got any, or similar?

[DonnaH]

This is an incredible debate featuring a lot of people trying to make a definite conclusion with apparently no research or information to back anything up.

Helping people "fantasize" about beating up women while fucking them is not healthy in my opinion, in precisely the same way it's not healthy for someone to look at child porn... It unfortunately can lead to this sort of fantasy getting more addictive for the viewer. But the question is also; Why are people wanting to see it in the first place?

This isn't so-called "fictionalized rape" which has long been illegal - even in the US (presumably because 1) how can you be SURE it's not real, if it looks real? and 2) it's glamorizing violent crime while involving real acts). The new sort of "gonzo" porn that's tried to loop-hole this law involves abusing women instead: Strangling them, spitting on them, hitting them; while they're being fucked.

(If this didn't involve sex, would it be any more acceptable??)

WHY does anyone enjoy this type of porn?? Even major porn stars have become shocked at the amount of abuse that some of these women are subjected to.

With some sites, the more real the woman's distress (looks of pain, tears, throwing up etc), the better the "porn".

Again, I have to ask; how can anyone find this sort of thing a turn on? And how can it be a "good" thing that this sort of thing is available for those who want to see it? Like child pornography, it's not a healthy interest, IMO, and, also, it has nothing to do with "fiction" when the abuse is very real.

It's hard to argue that it's "fictionalized" when you're watching a woman give a blow job, then suddenly the man takes his dick out and slaps her across the face very hard (hard enough to elicit a shocked/tearful reaction). Puts his dick back into her mouth and forces it down her throat, even though she's apparently in discomfort at this point, gagging, until she literally throws up. He then fucks her mouth harder saying, "ah, lubricant!". My guess is that she's not enjoying it so much anymore, and unfortunately, this is just the beginning of the humiliation "porn".

Such porn likes to make it clear that these women are not enjoying themselves - they pride themselves on it - which is supposed to be the turn on. There are accounts from the women who have worked on such things (it's the internet, afterall, everyone has a blog), and they're not good, even if they've stayed in the industry afterwards. Some well known stars have even ended up in hospital (damaged cervixes, damaged entrails, etc).

This leads to the very real feeling these women are simply being exploited: They sign up for a quick buck, get physically threatened that they MUST finish the scene they've signed up for or they'll "get a bad rep in the industry and never work again" (as one documentary caught on camera). Unfortunately many of these women are very vulnerable (they've just embarked on a career selling their bodies - that should give you a clue that they're not always in a great place, mentally) and so it's not impossible to coerce them into doing something.

I don't think there's any law in place to protect these women, either.

I'm sorry to say that it's something I wish wasn't so prevalent, and it's my (and others in the industries hope) that people will get bored of seeing something "extreme" and move onto something else instead.

DH

[DanJW]

What really surprises me is that complete strangers keep turning up and resurrecting this thread after it's been cold for weeks.

[Nachimir]

Maybe I can kill it or turn it into something useful.

This is an incredible debate featuring a lot of people trying to make a definite conclusion with apparently no research or information to back anything up.

Unfortunately, there is absolutely nothing incredible about that kind of debate online. Your post and the one I'm about to type also don't differentiate themselves from it either, because porn and sexuality don't really lend themselves to statistics.

What I do find incredible about nearly every porn debate I've been in is that people have some really strange assumptions about what pornography is, what certain types of it mean, or who likes them and why.

(If this didn't involve sex, would it be any more acceptable??)

WHY does anyone enjoy this type of porn?? Even major porn stars have become shocked at the amount of abuse that some of these women are subjected to.

I do find it disturbing that some people's sexual fantasies are about abusing other people, but additionally I find it annoying that people mistake kink stuff for the same thing, and few outsiders are capable of distinguishing between the two. I certainly wasn't until I met some people who were into it and could explain it to me.

Also, stuff like bangbus is blatantly faked, especially because of laws on exploiting people's image. (Stricter porn laws of late have their own problems: 2257 opens up potential for stalking rather than protecting porn stars). Also, the scumbag who runs Girls Gone Wild has been in court due to getting underage girls drunk, screwing them and putting it out on DVD.

It's not like there are no legal protections at all, but at the same time, it's not like mainstream porn is healthy. I think the same can be said of mainstream sexuality though, in its idealism and its lack of tolerance and openness. I can easily believe the anecdotes you cite, because I've met plenty of people who've talked openly enough about their sexuality to indicate they could be the abusers (or the abused) in them.

That's a cultural issue with sexuality, but porn is often the easy target for all the outrage to hit. A lot of issues people have with porn stretch way beyond it into really fucked up cultural issues over body image and power, and I think some porn is a symptom of those much bigger issues rather than any kind of cause.

I'm sorry to say that it's something I wish wasn't so prevalent, and it's my (and others in the industries hope) that people will get bored of seeing something "extreme" and move onto something else instead.

I'm not so sure what is and isn't "prevalent". Most porn I've seen just has really awful, stupid, clumsy sex in it. Some things I thought were abusive or dominant turned out not to be: I always interpreted men cumming on womens faces as non-fantasy dominance imagery, until I learned there are women out there who really enjoy it and couples who feel closer because of doing it.

Not to my taste personally, but who am I to rule the underpants of others? Noone, that's who.

It's plain that typical california produced, porn valley stuff is not a very good portrayal of sexual behaviour, whether the content is abusive or not.

Can't link anything here I suppose, but if you look up comstock, beautiful agony and i feel myself, you'll find porn that's based on some very healthy views of sexuality. The first revolves around couples rather than "professional hook ups" or models, and the latter is even produced by feminists, ffs. Between the unreal fantasy bodies of porn valley and the ghoulish expanses of untended flesh on adult friend finder, there is actually some healthy stuff out there ("IMO...").

It's because of this wide variation that I get really sick of anti-porn arguments. The variation is so wide that it's like arguing against film or comics or games.

[Ginger]

Even if violent porn is not the cause of the real life sexual violence (IMO, it probably greatly varies among individuals as to whether it acts as pressure release and hence reduces it or allows potential offenders to fall into a deeper blur between fantasy and reality and raises it) as long as we can't guarantee that those within the movies are not being forced, abused or exploited I feel that censorship, which is never an ideal solution, is the lesser of the evils and this is regardless of the impact that violent porn may have on the offence rate of real sexual violence.

[Spaff]

yeah, why the fuck are there random strangers turning up to comment, it's bizarre... and kinda good in some ways i guess.. but.. video games anyone?

[Wrestlevania]

but.. video games anyone?

As opposed to playing Hide the Sausage? Toughy...

[raith2006]

basically this is just another case of people needing to point the finger at someone or something in order to fell that they have solved a problem and are therefore safer. however getting rid of any source of catharsis, and that is exactly what pornography is, can make matters worse in the vast majority of cases. if say for example i videotape myself being violently raped and distribute it in any form, i am basically going to be classified as a criminal because of an act that harms absolutely no-one in any visible form. I would also like to add that these materials becoming illegal may strngthen thier appeal by making them tabboo, in psychology this is called the forbidden fruit phenomenon if I remember correctly. I know someone personally who enjoys engaging in sexual acts that some would describe as brutal and i do not think this person is any more likely to go on some sexually driven killing spree than say, the mailman. so what to do? do we all start fearing the mailman? no, of course not, that would be a dangerous level of paranioa. eventually they are going to run out of things to blame and will have to accept that there is no simple answer to why some people do the things they do.

[OssK]

basically this is just another case of people needing to point the finger at someone or something in order to fell that they have solved a problem and are therefore safer. however getting rid of any source of catharsis, and that is exactly what pornography is, can make matters worse in the vast majority of cases. if say for example i videotape myself being violently raped and distribute it in any form, i am basically going to be classified as a criminal because of an act that harms absolutely no-one in any visible form. I would also like to add that these materials becoming illegal may strngthen thier appeal by making them tabboo, in psychology this is called the forbidden fruit phenomenon if I remember correctly. I know someone personally who enjoys engaging in sexual acts that some would describe as brutal and i do not think this person is any more likely to go on some sexually driven killing spree than say, the mailman. so what to do? do we all start fearing the mailman? no, of course not, that would be a dangerous level of paranioa. eventually they are going to run out of things to blame and will have to accept that there is no simple answer to why some people do the things they do.

Someone typed in "violent porn" in google with their safesearch filter on.

[miffy495]

And just like that, Ossk became one of my favorite internet people.

[Lu]

HAHA, wow. This discussion is ooooold.

I was agreeing with Yuffster until there was some shit about meathooks in sand made out of sand. No idea what that was about though.

Not trying to start discussion up again, but some people putting violent porn and kiddie porn in the same sentence *cough* DonnaH, LOPcagney*cough* is ridiculous.

So is this ban still in effect, or what happened since then?

I know someone personally who enjoys engaging in sexual acts that some would describe as brutal and i do not think this person is any more likely to go on some sexually driven killing spree than say, the mailman.

I'm sure you doooooo.

[OssK]

And just like that, Ossk became one of my favorite internet people.

That is greatly appreciated, I will try not to deceive you.

To differ from my predecessors, I will never abandon a podcast in distress ! Also, I might not start one.

[ThunderPeel2001]

Yuk. I can't believe some newb resurrected this thread. Please go away! (The thread, not the newb.)

[syntheticgerbil]

But we must remember the day in 2007 when violent porn was banned from existence.

[Fuzzy Lobster]

Woah!

The conversation around here certainly seems to have had a different edge back in the day, huh?