UK govt wants all porn sites to prove you're adults

[Ifreann]

It was in the same issue of Scientific Asspull Monthly as that study you cited about kids without porn having sex with each other.

I'm not the one proposing government action.

No, you're the one making unsupported assertions about the results of an as yet unimplemented policy and thinly veiled suggestions that people who disagree with you are sexual deviants of some kind. That second one is my favourite, it nicely complements the other people suggesting that those opposed to this measure must be sexual deviants of some kind. Paedo if you do and paedo if you don't!


I could write headlines for the Dail Mail with lines like that...

If the government wants to do shit, it should conduct studies as to the possible adverse effects.
One of which is kids having sex with eachother more.

So I guess you're withdrawing your earlier request for a source. I mean, no one here is in Cameron's government.

[The UK in Exile]

It was in the same issue of Scientific Asspull Monthly as that study you cited about kids without porn having sex with each other.

I'm not the one proposing government action. If the government wants to do shit, it should conduct studies as to the possible adverse effects.
One of which is kids having sex with eachother more.

http://byuresearch.org/ssrp/research.html
Mitchell, Kimberly J.; Finkelhor, David; and Wolak, Janis (2003) The Exposure of Youth to Unwanted Sexual Material on the Intenet: A National Survey of Risk, Impact, and Prevention. Youth Society. 34(3); 330-358.

This national survey of youth, ages 10 to 17, and their caretakers has several implications for the current debate about young people and Internet pornography. Twenty five percent of youth had unwanted exposure to sexual pictures on the Internet in the past year, challenging the prevalent assumption that the problem is primarily about young people motivated to actively seek out pornography. Most youth had no negative reactions to their unwanted exposure, but one quarter said they were very or extremely upset, suggesting a priority need for more research on and interventions directed toward such negative effects. The use of filtering and blocking software was associated with a modest reduction in unwanted exposure, suggesting that it may help but is far from fool proof. Various forms of parental supervision were not associated with any reduction in exposure. The authors urge that social scientific research be undertaken to inform this highly contentious public policy controversy.

[Ostroeuropa]

I'm not the one proposing government action. If the government wants to do shit, it should conduct studies as to the possible adverse effects.
One of which is kids having sex with eachother more.

http://byuresearch.org/ssrp/research.html
Mitchell, Kimberly J.; Finkelhor, David; and Wolak, Janis (2003) The Exposure of Youth to Unwanted Sexual Material on the Intenet: A National Survey of Risk, Impact, and Prevention. Youth Society. 34(3); 330-358.

This national survey of youth, ages 10 to 17, and their caretakers has several implications for the current debate about young people and Internet pornography. Twenty five percent of youth had unwanted exposure to sexual pictures on the Internet in the past year, challenging the prevalent assumption that the problem is primarily about young people motivated to actively seek out pornography. Most youth had no negative reactions to their unwanted exposure, but one quarter said they were very or extremely upset, suggesting a priority need for more research on and interventions directed toward such negative effects. The use of filtering and blocking software was associated with a modest reduction in unwanted exposure, suggesting that it may help but is far from fool proof. Various forms of parental supervision were not associated with any reduction in exposure. The authors urge that social scientific research be undertaken to inform this highly contentious public policy controversy.

So they got upset?
So what. Boo hoo. That isn't a damaging outcome. It's people being upset. Far more people get upset by prudes raging about pornography i'm betting, if you were to take this NS poll as at all representative.

That said, if you want to add a law that porn sites should be spoilered with a warning i'd be in favor. That's an actually proportionate response, and is completely in line with consent ethics.

/you are about to view porn. Is that ok? yes/no.

That is all that is required to prevent this.

[Zaldakki]

I'm not the one proposing government action. If the government wants to do shit, it should conduct studies as to the possible adverse effects.
One of which is kids having sex with eachother more.

http://byuresearch.org/ssrp/research.html
Mitchell, Kimberly J.; Finkelhor, David; and Wolak, Janis (2003) The Exposure of Youth to Unwanted Sexual Material on the Intenet: A National Survey of Risk, Impact, and Prevention. Youth Society. 34(3); 330-358.

This national survey of youth, ages 10 to 17, and their caretakers has several implications for the current debate about young people and Internet pornography. Twenty five percent of youth had unwanted exposure to sexual pictures on the Internet in the past year, challenging the prevalent assumption that the problem is primarily about young people motivated to actively seek out pornography. Most youth had no negative reactions to their unwanted exposure, but one quarter said they were very or extremely upset, suggesting a priority need for more research on and interventions directed toward such negative effects. The use of filtering and blocking software was associated with a modest reduction in unwanted exposure, suggesting that it may help but is far from fool proof. Various forms of parental supervision were not associated with any reduction in exposure. The authors urge that social scientific research be undertaken to inform this highly contentious public policy controversy.

Maybe that 25 percent had negative reactions only because they were trained by society to have a negative reaction.

[Ostroeuropa]

Maybe that 25 percent had negative reactions only because they were trained by society to have a negative reaction.

That's my suspicion. 25 percent of people are prudes who think titties, boners, and asses are inherently awful things to look at.
I guess all this anti-porn rhetoric is damaging children. We should mandate that you have to be 18 before being exposed to it.

[Person012345]

What kind of hypocritical sack of shit want to stop teenagers from watching porn anyway? I guarantee that every single one of them deliberately viewed porn as a teenager.

[Pandeeria]

I don't know why from a purely logical point of view why you would want to stop kids from looking at porn.

It doesn't cause any harm, and does have benefits.

[Ostroeuropa]

What kind of hypocritical sack of shit want to stop teenagers from watching porn anyway? I guarantee that every single one of them deliberately viewed porn as a teenager.

The type of people who want to get involved in other peoples sex lives without the consent of the people there. You know, creepy authoritarian par for the course kind of stuff.

All this gayness is damaging the kids. Lets ban the gayness and vilify gays.
All this porn is damaging the kids. Lets ban porn and vilify pornography users.

[The UK in Exile]

Maybe that 25 percent had negative reactions only because they were trained by society to have a negative reaction.

That's my suspicion. 25 percent of people are prudes who think titties, boners, and asses are inherently awful things to look at.
I guess all this anti-porn rhetoric is damaging children. We should mandate that you have to be 18 before being exposed to it.

Much like masturbation, You're entitled to your suspicions but you really shouldn't indulge in them publicly.

[Ostroeuropa]

That's my suspicion. 25 percent of people are prudes who think titties, boners, and asses are inherently awful things to look at.
I guess all this anti-porn rhetoric is damaging children. We should mandate that you have to be 18 before being exposed to it.

Much like masturbation, You're entitled to your suspicions but you really shouldn't indulge in them publicly.

The proposal I made is based on just as much evidence as the porn claims. Except we actually know that slut shaming is a thing. There is no evidence to suggest porn actually damages people or changes their perceptions.

On the balance of it, i'm inclined to believe that 25% of those people are corrupted by slut shaming, which is caused in part by the anti-pornography rhetoric of people who are way too obsessed with other peoples sex lives.
It isn't insulting to tell a creep they are being a creep.

[The United Colonies of Earth]

David Cameron sits alone in a darkened study, revolver with a single bullet in one hand, iPad refreshing porn in the other.

Hilarious!
But Dave, this is just helping the capitalists get their money. Credit cards? You trying to drive Britain into even more credit card debt?

Maybe that 25 percent had negative reactions only because they were trained by society to have a negative reaction.

I had a negative reaction to porn once. Or twice. It popped up when I was searching for song lyrics.
Otherwise, my reaction has been positive.

[Aurora Novus]

I have a feeling a lot of these "negative" reactions to porn popups hve more to do with the "popup" part, and less to do with the "porn" part.

[Zaldakki]

I have a feeling a lot of these "negative" reactions to porn popups hve more to do with the "popup" part, and less to do with the "porn" part.

I agree. I 100% agree.

[Lemanrussland]

Hopefully they don't get the bright idea that they need to apply these "standards" to offshore sites as well, and then start dicking about with DNS filtering.

[Sanguinea]

Much like masturbation, You're entitled to your suspicions but you really shouldn't indulge in them publicly.

The proposal I made is based on just as much evidence as the porn claims. Except we actually know that slut shaming is a thing. There is no evidence to suggest porn actually damages people or changes their perceptions.

On the balance of it, i'm inclined to believe that 25% of those people are corrupted by slut shaming, which is caused in part by the anti-pornography rhetoric of people who are way too obsessed with other peoples sex lives.
It isn't insulting to tell a creep they are being a creep.

Has there actually ever been a comprehensive study on pornography's effects on society?

[Lemanrussland]

The proposal I made is based on just as much evidence as the porn claims. Except we actually know that slut shaming is a thing. There is no evidence to suggest porn actually damages people or changes their perceptions.

On the balance of it, i'm inclined to believe that 25% of those people are corrupted by slut shaming, which is caused in part by the anti-pornography rhetoric of people who are way too obsessed with other peoples sex lives.
It isn't insulting to tell a creep they are being a creep.

Has there actually ever been a comprehensive study on pornography's effects on society?

Who needs studies? We have the Bible.

[Ostroeuropa]

The proposal I made is based on just as much evidence as the porn claims. Except we actually know that slut shaming is a thing. There is no evidence to suggest porn actually damages people or changes their perceptions.

On the balance of it, i'm inclined to believe that 25% of those people are corrupted by slut shaming, which is caused in part by the anti-pornography rhetoric of people who are way too obsessed with other peoples sex lives.
It isn't insulting to tell a creep they are being a creep.

Has there actually ever been a comprehensive study on pornography's effects on society?

I doubt it, because nobody actually cares except the prudes, who have an inherent bias. It's usually sufficient to just point out their bullshit and ask them to actually come up with (And prove) negative effects, which none of them can manage to do. That's good enough.

It's coercive and controlling behaviour designed to force those people to have sex with those who are banning and regulating other types of sex.

Dominating other peoples sex lives without their consent, with the implicit intention of leaving themselves as the only alternative.
That's why they are such creepy people. I'm suprised anyone takes them seriously beyond just grimacing at them and telling them to fuck off and/or prepping their mace.

It's a running theme in all the anti-sex rhetoric that the only type of sex these people approve of is sex with them.

[Zaldakki]

Has there actually ever been a comprehensive study on pornography's effects on society?

Who needs studies? We have the Bible.

I have cognitive dissonance now.
I'm Catholic, but I'm still gonna watch porn. Just go to confession before I die.

[Sanguinea]

Has there actually ever been a comprehensive study on pornography's effects on society?

I doubt it, because nobody actually cares except the prudes, who have an inherent bias. It's usually sufficient to just point out their bullshit and ask them to actually come up with (And prove) negative effects, which none of them can manage to do. That's good enough.

It's coercive and controlling behaviour designed to force those people to have sex with those who are banning and regulating other types of sex.

Whoa, don't lump all us "prudes" in the same boat!

I think an actual study would help point out what should be restricted or not for kids, or if anything at all needs to be restricted.

[Ostroeuropa]

I doubt it, because nobody actually cares except the prudes, who have an inherent bias. It's usually sufficient to just point out their bullshit and ask them to actually come up with (And prove) negative effects, which none of them can manage to do. That's good enough.

It's coercive and controlling behaviour designed to force those people to have sex with those who are banning and regulating other types of sex.

Whoa, don't lump all us "prudes" in the same boat!

I think an actual study would help point out what should be restricted or not for kids, or if anything at all needsto be restricted.

I'm using prude in the sense of a political term for people who actually want government interference in this shit. People who simply aren't interested in sex aren't prudes. To be a prude implies an overbearing interest in other peoples sex lives.

[Ifreann]

I'm not the one proposing government action.

No, you're the one making unsupported assertions about the results of an as yet unimplemented policy and thinly veiled suggestions that people who disagree with you are sexual deviants of some kind. That second one is my favourite, it nicely complements the other people suggesting that those opposed to this measure must be sexual deviants of some kind. Paedo if you do and paedo if you don't!


I could write headlines for the Dail Mail with lines like that...

If the government wants to do shit, it should conduct studies as to the possible adverse effects.
One of which is kids having sex with eachother more.

So I guess you're withdrawing your earlier request for a source. I mean, no one here is in Cameron's government.

Yeah, that's what I thought.

[Ostroeuropa]

No, you're the one making unsupported assertions about the results of an as yet unimplemented policy and thinly veiled suggestions that people who disagree with you are sexual deviants of some kind. That second one is my favourite, it nicely complements the other people suggesting that those opposed to this measure must be sexual deviants of some kind. Paedo if you do and paedo if you don't!


I could write headlines for the Dail Mail with lines like that...

So I guess you're withdrawing your earlier request for a source. I mean, no one here is in Cameron's government.

Yeah, that's what I thought.

Answered UK in exiles repeat of your request.
And calling people out for dominating other peoples sex lives without their consent isn't a thinly veiled threat of sexual deviants.
It's a straight up accusation, and it's one with good basis, because it's what they are actually doing.

[Sanguinea]

Whoa, don't lump all us "prudes" in the same boat!

I think an actual study would help point out what should be restricted or not for kids, or if anything at all needsto be restricted.

I'm using prude in the sense of a political term for people who actually want government interference in this shit. People who simply aren't interested in sex aren't prudes. To be a prude implies an overbearing interest in other peoples sex lives.

Well...I would meet your definition of a prude then, however, I think it irresponsible and ignorant to jump the gun and implement restrictions on something who's effects on the groups targeted by this legislation hasn't been investigated.

[Reagan Memorial]

I'm 13 and glad I don't live in the UK.
That is all.

[The Joseon Dynasty]

Eh, it's consistent.

Consistently stupid.

Meh. As I said, as far as I can tell, this is just smoothing pre-existing regulations over all the different ways that people access pornography. It's a bloody nuisance, but I can't see why it's unjustified.