Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
adfegg

Mother wins ban on violent porn

Recommended Posts

She was my sister's music teacher from school, and lived just around the corner from me :tdown:

When they say she was kept in storage before being found, her body was literally kept in a lock box thing at a storage company... madness.

but yeah, I agree, those sites aren;t to blame, maybe they even helped him to not go and kill people beccause he had the porn there.

I think it's more of a case of... having somehting to do though, to keep you going because your daughter is dead. And it isnt exactly a bad thing that insane rape, killing and strangling porn is banned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Niels' friend lives in the house that the murder took place. OOoo!

I'm going to be quite frank here. Lots of people have rape fantasies, women in particular. That doesn't mean they want to be raped, but it's still a common fantasy.

I'm not really comfortable with 'violent porn' being illegal because, well... where do you decide what's acceptable and what's not? Millions of people who 'get off' on rape/control/bondage/blahblahblah fantasies are actually going to be criminals now? Sexual fantasies are perfectly healthy and not necessarily a reflection on what a person actually wants in real life...

Also, what about movies with violent rape scenes? What about music with violent sexual lyrics? What is okay, and what ISN'T okay?

I think it's a real shame that people are going to be persecuted for their sexual fantasies. You can't fucking arrest somebody for something they haven't quite done yet but may do in the future at some point.

Reminds me of that Captain Planet comic where the bad guy says, "Haha I have an idea!" and then they all rush in to arrest him... Can somebody find that please?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no insight into the case, beyond that article, but censorship is always going to be bad, especially when censoring sexual fantasies. What would you say the consensus in England is about this ruling? Is there a lot of morality policing?

Captain Planet is ok though, busting thought crime or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
por·nog·ra·phy (pôr-ngr-f) Pronunciation Key Audio pronunciation of "pornography" [P]

n.

1. Sexually explicit pictures, writing, or other material whose primary purpose is to cause sexual arousal.

2. The presentation or production of this material.

So then, if I act out a 'non-consensual' fantasy (to put it tactfully) with my boyfriend, that makes me a criminal? Or is it only if I film it? Or is it only if I watch what I've filmed later? Or is it only if I keep it on my PC hard drive?

But there's nothing wrong with that, because that would just be acting. But then, 'violent' pornography is really just acting (unless it's actual videos of people being raped or tied up against their actual will in which case it's already illegal anyway).

That film where Sharon Stone (I think) gets violently and horribly gang-raped for about ten minutes in a pub, over a pool table. If I have that movie, does that make me a criminal? What about if I have that particular scene of the movie on my PC, does it make me a criminal then?

I saw a movie before about America in Korea, there were many many scenes involving young women and teenagers being dragged away from their parents and husbands, raped in front of everybody and then brutally murdered. If I own that movie, or have those scenes on my PC, does that make me a criminal?

I don't know how they're going to enforce it or if they're even going to bother. I think that persecuting people on the basis of their sexual fantasies is horribly wrong, though.

I was walking into work today and saw the headline in a local newspaper, "MY DAUGHTER DIDN'T DIE FOR NOTHING". Well, that's pretty much all it is, really. No mother wants a child to die in vain, and so I guess this one feels like her daughter somehow died to rid the world of some kind of evil.

If that makes her feel better, fine. But unfortunately lots of non-murderers and quite ordinary people get off on various forms of 'violent pornography', and pornography didn't kill your daughter... some weird guy did.

Oh man, this reminds me of when the 'Paedo Panic' started and everybody and their dog was a paedophile for the slightest of reasons... once, a 15 year old girl went missing near her home and the first thing the police did was check out which known paedophiles lived in the area!!! I mean come on, she's 15 ffs!! Not to be crude, but it seems kind of obvious she's a bit too old for your average paedophile...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got the picture that this applies to actual non-consensual stuff (actually someone getting raped), not faked (filming a fantasy). Maybe I'm wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's illegal anyway though!!

So really what they are doing is making it illegal to view actual real violent porn?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but how do you know if it's real or not!?

snuff movies are made to look real, but they're not...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the media got the wrong twist on the story, it was not the campaign of a mother which was the main factor for the introduction of this legislation but this porn was mainly banned as the woman in the movies are usually victims of human trafficking and sex slavery, so by encouraging people not purchase such videos (which censorship will probably have only a marginal impact on) it could possibly stop the suffering of a few woman, which I think is a good thing, but much more needs to be done to stop such vile a thing as the sex slavery trade.

As for the censorship of fictional violent porn (which I'm not sure if it is included in the new law) hmmmm, I don't agree with that as I believe censorship will prove largely ineffective at changing peoples’ attitudes and I think some other way of educating men, (when I say men I don't mean all men just a lot of them) to be less misogynistic and to be less objectifying of women, would prove more effective at reducing sexual violence and violence towards women which is ridiculously high for a society as "civilised" as ours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the classic definition is that you speak english and believe in Jesus. In that case, fuck civilization.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, the classic definition is that you speak english and believe in Jesus. In that case, fuck civilization.

Since when, think classical civilization, your mind will not go to any English speaking Christians. I believe it is a a society with a high moral and intellectual values. just because bush describes America as a civilized country doesn’t (which i would say in it is in some ways and certainly isn't in others) doesn't mean that the word should be bastardised

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not saying that that should be civilization, just that that's what a lot of people mean when they say that something needs to be civilized. They think it should become more like America or England. I don't approve, but a lot of stupid people like to use words in that way. This mother in the story obviously thinks that she's civilizing the world by enforcing her christian values, for example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But what are christian values, in this modern society? Should not our attentions be focused less on enforcing negative values upon the youth of our society, and more perhaps, on reaching out to those inner beings within the outer layers of the fabric on which society is constructed like some kind of disgusting wart, wrapping its wicked roots around our suffocating bones as it strangles the last of our milky life from within. disgusting. "felice is that you, come in please" what good will that do you when you are decayed?

Once, I met a man who believed he was good. He was a christian, he attended church every sunday. But he murdered people in his spare time and then watched them decay as they hung by their toes from meathooks in the ceiling. Is this what you want? Is it what anybody wants? Tell me what to think, because I really don't know.

And what of the people who run the churches, the people who fashion the meathooks out of sand, the people who dig the sand up to make meathooks, the age-old process of errosion and deposition which created the sand, the beaches, the children who play on the sand as though nothing is wrong? It's a cycle from which, CAN we be released? It's not right, it can never be right, and we shouldn't let people tell us that it is. Negate, I beg of you. Diorama for heavens sake, please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would also like to know the answer to that. What the fuck is all that about sand? Did your brain just kind of vomit onto the page?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

forcing your foul negative views on us would you! Did something happen to her?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the media got the wrong twist on the story, it was not the campaign of a mother which was the main factor for the introduction of this legislation but this porn was mainly banned as the woman in the movies are usually victims of human trafficking and sex slavery, so by encouraging people not purchase such videos (which censorship will probably have only a marginal impact on) it could possibly stop the suffering of a few woman, which I think is a good thing, but much more needs to be done to stop such vile a thing as the sex slavery trade.

As for the censorship of fictional violent porn (which I'm not sure if it is included in the new law) hmmmm, I don't agree with that as I believe censorship will prove largely ineffective at changing peoples’ attitudes and I think some other way of educating men, (when I say men I don't mean all men just a lot of them) to be less misogynistic and to be less objectifying of women, would prove more effective at reducing sexual violence and violence towards women which is ridiculously high for a society as "civilised" as ours.

The women in these movies and on these sites are not "Usually victims of human trafficking".

Where it may be that victims of humen trafficking are forced to take part in sex acts (including for web sites) that they do not want to, it is a giant leap to suggest that the majority of those on websites that show violent porn do so against their will. In fact no one has been able to quote a single site where real, serious violence or coerced sex take place. They probably exist, but to suggest that they do so on an industrial scale is niave.

The law specifically states that it will not discern between real acts and fictional scenes nor even scenes of computer generated characters. All this even though they cannot show that real, violence is a major factor in this kind of porn.

As for the levels of sex crimes, well we know for a fact that the UK is the most censored of all democracies and 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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×