Steve Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 Extreme pornographic and sexually violent images on the Internet are to be banned outright by the Government under new proposals being announced today.LINK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rygon Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 yeh i read about this..its just another nanny state thing theyve come up with..prsonally im not into this sort of stuff but i can imagine why others r (s&m, dominatrix etc) as its an escape from the norm and a fantasy which they can re-enact/watch without any1 being violated..they get there enjoyment without harming others...its a win win situation so why stop it...next thing you know is that al sexual activities r going to be stopped as the woman may get pregnant which will cause her pain in childbirth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dextrous Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 http://forporn.ytmnd.com/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nimrod Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 http://forporn.ytmnd.com/<{POST_SNAPBACK}> is that worksafe mate? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dub-Se7en Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 yes, probably Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dextrous Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 Depends on your bosses. Work safe for me. There's no actual porn in it. it's a song. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
decisive Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 It looks as though the ban is on *actual* violent acts, rather than fantasy reenactments- I have the same opinion as you rygon, but I think simulated rape is gonna be okay but actual rape and snuff will be illegal to possess... which I don't have a problem with... c Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dextrous Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 but actual rape and snuff will be illegal to possess... which I don't have a problem with... c<{POST_SNAPBACK}> Surely it is already??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nimrod Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 cool well my pc at work doesnt have sound so i wont bother, lol! yeah, actual rape films should be illegal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
decisive Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 Surely it is already???<{POST_SNAPBACK}> from what I read on Steve's link it's currently illegal to distribute but not illegal to possess/source... kinda like class c drugs I suppose! The new law will change this though, that's the crux of the matter... c Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snuff Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 snuff will be illegal to possess... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> i'm a fairly respectable chap once you get to know me...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 I think rape re-enactments should be illegal. In real life, rapists have to make a mental jump from fantasizing about rape to actually committing it. Rape re-enactments should be illegal because they specifically fuel that fantasy. I think the "damage" to the rape-reenactment community is far outweighed by the likelihood that rape re-enactments encourage rapists. Even if rape re-enactments act as an outlet for some people's personal fantasies, I think that weighing personal outlets against the likelihood/possibility that it encourages rape easily gives favor to making the stuff illegal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
decisive Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 Fair point max, but if it were banned for that reason, we run a very slippery slope into a big brother state, whereby a few people decide what is good for the masses. Where do you draw the line for instance... Grand Theft Auto? Boxing? Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles? It might seem worlds apart but the concept is the same- censorship so as not to warp impressionable minds. This is just my humble opinion however c Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2ndhand Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 Where do you draw the line for instance... Grand Theft Auto? Boxing? Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles? ironically, teenage mutant ninja turtles were known as teenage mutant HERO turtles in the UK, first time around back in the late 80's the word ninja was censored because it was too violent Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
decisive Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 Really? Wow I always thought that it was the distinction between the films and cartoons... I was never allowed to watch it anyway, they had weapons and that was good enough for my mum :s c Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 I think rape re-enactments should be illegal. In real life, rapists have to make a mental jump from fantasizing about rape to actually committing it. Rape re-enactments should be illegal because they specifically fuel that fantasy. I think the "damage" to the rape-reenactment community is far outweighed by the likelihood that rape re-enactments encourage rapists. Even if rape re-enactments act as an outlet for some people's personal fantasies, I think that weighing personal outlets against the likelihood/possibility that it encourages rape easily gives favor to making the stuff illegal.<{POST_SNAPBACK}> I agree completely. Although this should be judged by context: rape portrayed in cinema can sometimes be -I don't believe this should be made illegal. Surely under that kind of blanket legislation, then even films like Pulp Fiction would be made illegal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 Fair point max, but if it were banned for that reason, we run a very slippery slope into a big brother state, whereby a few people decide what is good for the masses. Where do you draw the line for instance... Grand Theft Auto? Boxing? Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles? It might seem worlds apart but the concept is the same- censorship so as not to warp impressionable minds. This is just my humble opinion however c<{POST_SNAPBACK}> I think there is a line, however fuzzy, that can be drawn between artistic work and sexual violence that serves no other purpose but to satsisfy violent sexual fantasies. I'm of the opinion that sex crimes are far more reprehensible than strictly violent crimes. I wouldn't move to censor any sex, violence, or a combination of the two in any sort or artistic venture. However, I think that people and businesses that promote rape and child pornography should be disallowed from producing either the act itself or its reenactment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 I wouldn't move to censor any sex, violence, or a combination of the two in any sort or artistic venture. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Werd to that, It totally agree... but unfortunately I think we're going to open a very old and stale can of worms here: what is art and where do you draw the line? It's a very difficult issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
x2k Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 I the office block where I work there are these people giving volenteers GPS systesm so the can track you traveling about over a week or so then overlaying you route over everyone elses root...apparently that's art if it makes any difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 I wouldn't move to censor any sex, violence, or a combination of the two in any sort or artistic venture. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Werd to that, It totally agree... but unfortunately I think we're going to open a very old and stale can of worms here: what is art and where do you draw the line? It's a very difficult issue.<{POST_SNAPBACK}> How about we start with what we know: artistic content on the web isn't going to have tons of pop-up sex advertisements or be hosted on servers that specifically allow pornography. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
decisive Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 The problem is that because art is subjective it is not reasonable to give an individual power to govern what can be classed as art. Some people are bad, and it's a sad truth of the world. It's up to the good people to rise above them. This is what I think anyway. Whilst watching reenactments for gratification is morally questionable, I don't think it is morally wrong and so I don't think there should be a law against it. Just to set the record straight however, I'd just like to say I'm a fairly clean cut guy and none of the stuff we're talking about is an interest of mine whatsoever! c Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lorn Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 Lots of things are banned. Who's to say the vast majority will abide by those rules? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
decisive Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 Lots of things are banned. Who's to say the vast majority will abide by those rules?<{POST_SNAPBACK}> exactly- it's not whether they'll abide by them, it's whether there's a chance of em getting locked up (and hopefully raped themselves) if caught... not that i'd say this is fair for smokers and others in a similar vein, but this specific thing we're talking about... c Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.