UK - porn block plan to stop "childhood corrosion"

[The Blue Wolf Federation]

What a horrible world we'd live in if you ruled it.

Says you. It'd be a ideal society, no retarded sex positivity, no prostitution.

Utopianism. A dream if anything. It wouldn't work nor would it happen in this century. Too much room for loop-holing.

The only problem if you ruled the world I would have is that SOMEONE IS RULING THE WORLD.

Libertarianism for the win

[Zweite Alaje]

I'm not Christian, nor am I religious. I've said that millions is times here.

As for what sorts of porn I would see as bannable, all depicting live sexual acts. I have little issue with nude photography, but video sex is vile.

Uh huh, so there go a lot of TV shows and movies. It may be censored but there's lots of sex on TV.

So why is that bann-able but any animated cartoons that display any hint of nude women okay? I mean, kids might get some sort of sexual arousal if they watch Outlaw Star anytime Melfina is on screen.

What about images of feet in any context, or videos? It's not an outright sexual video, but people have foot fetishes and that can cause a sexual response?
What about written erotica? No images outright, but the words can generate rather salacious images in somebodies head, does your ban have providence on that?

More importantly... what makes your authoritarian views and personal squeamishness any more applicable in any? Why do we have to give your moral compass more regard when there are plenty of individuals out here in couples of varying commitment that have lots of safe consenting sex in their own fashions but keep the rest of us out of it? What if erotica enhances their sex lives, why do you want to punish them because the idea of something makes you, personally, squeamish?

Too bad, that's part of why TV is shit these days. They put more emphasis on sex than the actually story.

I don't have issue with nudity (live or animated) per se, more the sex. Nude dudes, nude women, big deal its the sex that I find objectionable. Nor do I have issue with written erotica, it'd fall under my fake porn rule just like Hentai.

I'm not "squeamish", I'm morally opposed to much of the pornographic media, it isn't some childish "eww, coodies" routine. I could ask you the same thing, why should I be willing to allow people to commit acts of sheer objectification and sexual deviancy? You believe people laying about fucking all day is healthy, and I believe it isn't.

[Fartsniffage]

Masturbation for the enjoyment of another is porn.

Anything beyond missionary position for procreation is to be banned.

A sheet with a hole in it to be issued with all marriage licences.

[Divair]

Anything beyond missionary position for procreation is to be banned.

A sheet with a hole in it to be issued with all marriage licences.

Burkas all around.

[Khadgar]

Uh huh, so there go a lot of TV shows and movies. It may be censored but there's lots of sex on TV.

So why is that bann-able but any animated cartoons that display any hint of nude women okay? I mean, kids might get some sort of sexual arousal if they watch Outlaw Star anytime Melfina is on screen.

What about images of feet in any context, or videos? It's not an outright sexual video, but people have foot fetishes and that can cause a sexual response?
What about written erotica? No images outright, but the words can generate rather salacious images in somebodies head, does your ban have providence on that?

More importantly... what makes your authoritarian views and personal squeamishness any more applicable in any? Why do we have to give your moral compass more regard when there are plenty of individuals out here in couples of varying commitment that have lots of safe consenting sex in their own fashions but keep the rest of us out of it? What if erotica enhances their sex lives, why do you want to punish them because the idea of something makes you, personally, squeamish?

Too bad, that's part of why TV is shit these days. They put more emphasis on sex than the actually story.

I don't have issue with nudity (live or animated) per se, more the sex. Nude dudes, nude women, big deal its the sex that I find objectionable. Nor do I have issue with written erotica, it'd fall under my fake porn rule just like Hentai.

I'm not "squeamish", I'm morally opposed to much of the pornographic media, it isn't some childish "eww, coodies" routine. I could ask you the same thing, why should I be willing to allow people to commit acts of sheer objectification and sexual deviancy? You believe people laying about fucking all day is healthy, and I believe it isn't.

So, porn stars are acting out a sexual act for the gratification of others which is deviant. Hentai VAs are acting out a sex act for the gratification of others and that's totally kosher.

Da fuq?

[Zweite Alaje]

Says you. It'd be a ideal society, no retarded sex positivity, no prostitution.

What an authoritarian, tyrannical, boring world.

Authoritarian, sure.

Tyrannical, not really, I don't value cruelty.

Boring, no. Sex doesn't make a fun world, there are thousands of entertaining things one can do that are probably more fun and less risky than sex.

I'm not Christian, nor am I religious. I've said that millions is times here.

As for what sorts of porn I would see as bannable, all depicting live sexual acts. I have little issue with nude photography, but video sex is vile.

What about boyfriend and girlfriend, separated by distance and circumstance, "engaging" with each other via skype?

That's a bit...odd, but they're in a relationship, and not physically having sex, so meh.

[The Blue Wolf Federation]

A sheet with a hole in it to be issued with all marriage licences.

Burkas all around.

Yeah. No... just no...Burkas? That's Islam. Not Christianity. Don't even claim we would do that to women.

Personally, as long as the populace isn't flaunting their private parts in the streets, I'm good and don't need a trash can to puke into. A girl can sport being feminine without going to the extreme of being perverse. But again, we hit definition. Another reminder legislation would fail.

[New Laikland]

Yeah. No... just no...Burkas? That's Islam. Not Christianity. Don't even claim we would do that to women.

Personally, as long as the populace isn't flaunting their private parts in the streets, I'm good and don't need a trash can to puke into. A girl can sport being feminine without going to the extreme of being perverse. But again, we hit definition. Another reminder legislation would fail.

Why do other species walk around naked but are just fine without having to rape eachother because they're too immature to look at a woman's body? Clothes are unnatural first off.

[Zweite Alaje]

Too bad, that's part of why TV is shit these days. They put more emphasis on sex than the actually story.

I don't have issue with nudity (live or animated) per se, more the sex. Nude dudes, nude women, big deal its the sex that I find objectionable. Nor do I have issue with written erotica, it'd fall under my fake porn rule just like Hentai.

I'm not "squeamish", I'm morally opposed to much of the pornographic media, it isn't some childish "eww, coodies" routine. I could ask you the same thing, why should I be willing to allow people to commit acts of sheer objectification and sexual deviancy? You believe people laying about fucking all day is healthy, and I believe it isn't.

So, porn stars are acting out a sexual act for the gratification of others which is deviant. Hentai VAs are acting out a sex act for the gratification of others and that's totally kosher.

Da fuq?

The VA's aren't themselves committing sex acts, pornstars are.

[Northern Dominus]

Uh huh, so there go a lot of TV shows and movies. It may be censored but there's lots of sex on TV.

So why is that bann-able but any animated cartoons that display any hint of nude women okay? I mean, kids might get some sort of sexual arousal if they watch Outlaw Star anytime Melfina is on screen.

What about images of feet in any context, or videos? It's not an outright sexual video, but people have foot fetishes and that can cause a sexual response?
What about written erotica? No images outright, but the words can generate rather salacious images in somebodies head, does your ban have providence on that?

More importantly... what makes your authoritarian views and personal squeamishness any more applicable in any? Why do we have to give your moral compass more regard when there are plenty of individuals out here in couples of varying commitment that have lots of safe consenting sex in their own fashions but keep the rest of us out of it? What if erotica enhances their sex lives, why do you want to punish them because the idea of something makes you, personally, squeamish?

Too bad, that's part of why TV is shit these days. They put more emphasis on sex than the actually story.

I don't have issue with nudity (live or animated) per se, more the sex. Nude dudes, nude women, big deal its the sex that I find objectionable. Nor do I have issue with written erotica, it'd fall under my fake porn rule just like Hentai.

I'm not "squeamish", I'm morally opposed to much of the pornographic media, it isn't some childish "eww, coodies" routine. I could ask you the same thing, why should I be willing to allow people to commit acts of sheer objectification and sexual deviancy? You believe people laying about fucking all day is healthy, and I believe it isn't.

Really? Are you refering to all entertainment media or just specific programs that are designed as cheap entertainment? Last I checked the most titillating Pacific Rim got was a shirtless moment for the hero and even then there was context.

... so you'd ban "fake" porn, but then not? I'm terminally confused. and there is no "real" or "fake" pornography. The broad definition of the word "pornography" according to Webster-Mirriam is as follows:
"1
: the depiction of erotic behavior (as in pictures or writing) intended to cause sexual excitement
2
: material (as books or a photograph) that depicts erotic behavior and is intended to cause sexual excitement"

So by that definition, anything designed to cause sexual excitement is pornography regardless of the medium or portrayal of the individuals involved. That includes your hentai and your literotica and any sort of phone sex or cybersex or non-artistic nudes or foot fetish sites along with video images of one or more live human being engaged in sexual acts. And if you're going to ban that, then why not ban any sort of suggestion in regards to attraction between individuals, since any sort of attraction can lead to sex?
You see how slippery that slope gets? By blaming pornography for societiy's ills you basically blame any sort of relationship for the same in one way or another.

And I would certainly argue that people engaged in various forms of sexual gratification, with full legal participatory status and consent of course, is far more productive and enjoyable than being a busybody concerned with what people do in their own homes by themselves or with each other that involves a simple normal part of human existence. Sex isn't a bad thing, it's a good thing. The only deviant thing in regards to sex is poking your head into what other people do and wagging a finger without being explicitly invited, that's sexual harassment.

[Condunum]

Japan did something similar long ago. That's how tentacle porn became popular.

[Munrova]

Uh huh, so there go a lot of TV shows and movies. It may be censored but there's lots of sex on TV.

So why is that bann-able but any animated cartoons that display any hint of nude women okay? I mean, kids might get some sort of sexual arousal if they watch Outlaw Star anytime Melfina is on screen.

What about images of feet in any context, or videos? It's not an outright sexual video, but people have foot fetishes and that can cause a sexual response?
What about written erotica? No images outright, but the words can generate rather salacious images in somebodies head, does your ban have providence on that?

More importantly... what makes your authoritarian views and personal squeamishness any more applicable in any? Why do we have to give your moral compass more regard when there are plenty of individuals out here in couples of varying commitment that have lots of safe consenting sex in their own fashions but keep the rest of us out of it? What if erotica enhances their sex lives, why do you want to punish them because the idea of something makes you, personally, squeamish?

Too bad, that's part of why TV is shit these days. They put more emphasis on sex than the actually story.

I don't have issue with nudity (live or animated) per se, more the sex. Nude dudes, nude women, big deal its the sex that I find objectionable. Nor do I have issue with written erotica, it'd fall under my fake porn rule just like Hentai.

I'm not "squeamish", I'm morally opposed to much of the pornographic media, it isn't some childish "eww, coodies" routine. I could ask you the same thing, why should I be willing to allow people to commit acts of sheer objectification and sexual deviancy? You believe people laying about fucking all day is healthy, and I believe it isn't.

You should do that because it's their right. You have no reason to barge into what they choose to do if they are not harmed doing it. If they were all forced to do what they do, then it'd be a different story. But they choose to do it. You can't force people to be 'healthy'. They have to want it.

[Khadgar]

So, porn stars are acting out a sexual act for the gratification of others which is deviant. Hentai VAs are acting out a sex act for the gratification of others and that's totally kosher.

Da fuq?

The VA's aren't themselves committing sex acts, pornstars are.

So it is sex that bothers you.

[Imperializt Russia]

What about boyfriend and girlfriend, separated by distance and circumstance, "engaging" with each other via skype?

Personally, my girlfriend and I are pretty conservative when it comes to our bodies and the relationship we share. You would honestly do that over Skype? -shudder-

Regardless this is again another example of definitions and fine lines. Legislation would fail miserably in regulating something like this.

I've never had the opportunity, so no idea.
One of my housemates has a girlfriend who is spending the next academic year in Portugal however, so I'm wondering how he may cope...

What about boyfriend and girlfriend, separated by distance and circumstance, "engaging" with each other via skype?

That's a bit...odd, but they're in a relationship, and not physically having sex, so meh.

So basically, you feel cool to preserve all the "sologirl" porn on the web, just so long as there's not some bloke ramming her one?

Coolio.

[Luveria]

What about boyfriend and girlfriend, separated by distance and circumstance, "engaging" with each other via skype?

Personally, my girlfriend and I are pretty conservative when it comes to our bodies and the relationship we share. You would honestly do that over Skype? -shudder-

What's wrong with that? You have a problem with two people mutually enjoying something?

[The Blue Wolf Federation]

The VA's aren't themselves committing sex acts, pornstars are.

So it is sex that bothers you.

Uh, they didn't say that. Don't read into it. She already said earlier that the topic of sex didn't make her squeamish.

[Khadgar]

So it is sex that bothers you.

Uh, she didn't say that. Don't read into it. She already said earlier that the topic of sex didn't make her squeamish.

He. The only difference is that two people are physically having sex. Both are sets of actors, neither is realistic, and neither tends to offer depictions of healthy sexual dynamics. The only thing at issues is that Alaje doesn't like people having sex.

[The Blue Wolf Federation]

Personally, my girlfriend and I are pretty conservative when it comes to our bodies and the relationship we share. You would honestly do that over Skype? -shudder-

What's wrong with that? You have a problem with two people mutually enjoying something?

My girlfriend and I enjoy watching star trek together. Yup, nerds. We also write stories together. It's great what we have in common. But THAT? You are engaging in the process of having kids and aren't even in a position to raise them as a result of your actions? I know there are contraceptives but it's the principle for me as and individual.

That as well is something that just startles me as wrong. Personal thinking only however. No legislation that hinges on belief should be passed.

[Zweite Alaje]

The VA's aren't themselves committing sex acts, pornstars are.

So it is sex that bothers you.

.....

Yes, I said that earlier, dear. I don't have a problem with nudity itself.

Too bad, that's part of why TV is shit these days. They put more emphasis on sex than the actually story.

I don't have issue with nudity (live or animated) per se, more the sex. Nude dudes, nude women, big deal its the sex that I find objectionable. Nor do I have issue with written erotica, it'd fall under my fake porn rule just like Hentai.

I'm not "squeamish", I'm morally opposed to much of the pornographic media, it isn't some childish "eww, coodies" routine. I could ask you the same thing, why should I be willing to allow people to commit acts of sheer objectification and sexual deviancy? You believe people laying about fucking all day is healthy, and I believe it isn't.

Really? Are you refering to all entertainment media or just specific programs that are designed as cheap entertainment? Last I checked the most titillating Pacific Rim got was a shirtless moment for the hero and even then there was context.

... so you'd ban "fake" porn, but then not? I'm terminally confused. and there is no "real" or "fake" pornography. The broad definition of the word "pornography" according to Webster-Mirriam is as follows:
"1
: the depiction of erotic behavior (as in pictures or writing) intended to cause sexual excitement
2
: material (as books or a photograph) that depicts erotic behavior and is intended to cause sexual excitement"

So by that definition, anything designed to cause sexual excitement is pornography regardless of the medium or portrayal of the individuals involved. That includes your hentai and your literotica and any sort of phone sex or cybersex or non-artistic nudes or foot fetish sites along with video images of one or more live human being engaged in sexual acts. And if you're going to ban that, then why not ban any sort of suggestion in regards to attraction between individuals, since any sort of attraction can lead to sex?
You see how slippery that slope gets? By blaming pornography for societiy's ills you basically blame any sort of relationship for the same in one way or another.

And I would certainly argue that people engaged in various forms of sexual gratification, with full legal participatory status and consent of course, is far more productive and enjoyable than being a busybody concerned with what people do in their own homes by themselves or with each other that involves a simple normal part of human existence. Sex isn't a bad thing, it's a good thing. The only deviant thing in regards to sex is poking your head into what other people do and wagging a finger without being explicitly invited, that's sexual harassment.

I don't blame porn itself exactly, more the whole idea of sex positivity that emphasizes it and its emulation by the general populace. There are forms of it I believe have negative impact on society, especially the more fetishistic variants.

[Luveria]

What's wrong with that? You have a problem with two people mutually enjoying something?

My girlfriend and I enjoy watching star trek together. Yup, nerds. We also write stories together. It's great what we have in common. But THAT? You are engaging in the process of having kids and aren't even in a position to raise them as a result of your actions? I know there are contraceptives but it's the principle for me as and individual.

That as well is something that just startles me as wrong. Personal thinking only however. No legislation that hinges on belief should be passed.

...
You do realize some people have same-sex relations don't you?

So when there's no risk of pregnancy such as over skype, or in person same-sex relations, then there's no wrong in it according to your logic. Makes sense.

[Zweite Alaje]

Uh, she didn't say that. Don't read into it. She already said earlier that the topic of sex didn't make her squeamish.

He. The only difference is that two people are physically having sex. Both are sets of actors, neither is realistic, and neither tends to offer depictions of healthy sexual dynamics. The only thing at issues is that Alaje doesn't like people having sex.

So it is sex that bothers you.

Uh, she didn't say that. Don't read into it. She already said earlier that the topic of sex didn't make her squeamish.

Look people just refer to me as "they", ok? I don't have a definite gender identity currently.

[Strana Mechty]

That's ridiculous.

I find it ridiculous that the lawmakers think that this will solve an issue that has nothing to do with porn. Its kinda like chain sawing someones face for bumping into you. Watching violence on TV does not make you a murderer. Just like watching the iron chef will jot make you a chef.

[The Blue Wolf Federation]

Does anyone remember the beginning of "Brave New World"? The kids engaging in sexual play in the park? The fact that that was a dis-utopia? The guy was a socialist some say. I don't know or care. The point is that sixty years ago this was considered wrong. A child engaging in this sort of thing as a result of exposure and culturing in acceptance.

[The Blue Wolf Federation]

That's ridiculous.

I find it ridiculous that the lawmakers think that this will solve an issue that has nothing to do with porn. Its kinda like chain sawing someones face for bumping into you.

Ditto

[Northern Dominus]

So it is sex that bothers you.

.....

Yes, I said that earlier, dear. I don't have a problem with nudity itself.

Really? Are you refering to all entertainment media or just specific programs that are designed as cheap entertainment? Last I checked the most titillating Pacific Rim got was a shirtless moment for the hero and even then there was context.

... so you'd ban "fake" porn, but then not? I'm terminally confused. and there is no "real" or "fake" pornography. The broad definition of the word "pornography" according to Webster-Mirriam is as follows:
"1
: the depiction of erotic behavior (as in pictures or writing) intended to cause sexual excitement
2
: material (as books or a photograph) that depicts erotic behavior and is intended to cause sexual excitement"

So by that definition, anything designed to cause sexual excitement is pornography regardless of the medium or portrayal of the individuals involved. That includes your hentai and your literotica and any sort of phone sex or cybersex or non-artistic nudes or foot fetish sites along with video images of one or more live human being engaged in sexual acts. And if you're going to ban that, then why not ban any sort of suggestion in regards to attraction between individuals, since any sort of attraction can lead to sex?
You see how slippery that slope gets? By blaming pornography for societiy's ills you basically blame any sort of relationship for the same in one way or another.

And I would certainly argue that people engaged in various forms of sexual gratification, with full legal participatory status and consent of course, is far more productive and enjoyable than being a busybody concerned with what people do in their own homes by themselves or with each other that involves a simple normal part of human existence. Sex isn't a bad thing, it's a good thing. The only deviant thing in regards to sex is poking your head into what other people do and wagging a finger without being explicitly invited, that's sexual harassment.

I don't blame porn itself exactly, more the whole idea of sex positivity that emphasizes it and its emulation by the general populace. There are forms of it I believe have negative impact on society, especially the more fetishistic variants.

So you don't object to porn, you object to what you call "fetishistic vairants". Again, you're making a general statement and stereotyping a broad overarching genre for the actions of a few subsects.

This is again like banning all animated movies because some are pornographic or outlandish and might be objectionable to some people. And even then, unless these "Fetishistic variants" of pornography (which again is an overarching term and suspiciously broad rather than naming specific issues) are patently illegal in the first place, nobody is forcing you to view them outright, are they?

Here's the thing: pornography isn't serious, and it isn't meant to be "great". It's an adult cartoon, full of idiotic one-liners and highly unrealistic and sometimes complicated depictions of sex. Yes it's not for anyone under the age of (X age of majority by jurisdiction), but it is not the failing of the actors, animaters, cameramen, directors, or producers if somebody doesn't understand that or if certain parents are so unfit that they let their under-aged kids gain access to it when it was their job not to in the first place.