Scroll to see replies
Original post by AmericanDreamer
I do.
freedom of speech anyone? If you don't like them, don't watch it. It is already illegal to watch it if you are under 18?
Original post by john2054
freedom of speech anyone? If you don't like them, don't watch it. It is already illegal to watch it if you are under 18?
Yeah, but it's just a click of a button.
Someone who is 16 can click the button and enter the site.
Original post by AmericanDreamer
Yeah, but it's just a click of a button.
Someone who is 16 can click the button and enter the site.
Someone who is 16 can click the button and enter the site.
what do other people think??
Government should focus on real issues.
If 2 16 year olds can legally have sex then why is porn 18+
If 2 16 year olds can legally have sex then why is porn 18+
No. The alternative is illegal porn which could mean less regulation and protection. No one wants that.
Think of the Volstead Act.
Think of the Volstead Act.
Original post by AmericanDreamer
Yeah, but it's just a click of a button.
Someone who is 16 can click the button and enter the site.
Someone who is 16 can click the button and enter the site.
It's not 16 year olds I'd be particularly worried about; I do find it somewhat amusing that you can have sex at 16 but not watch it legally in the form of porn.
I do think that those younger than 16 should be discouraged from watching porn but at the end of the day it's always going to be difficult to put up sufficient barriers.
Why on earth you'd want to stop adults from watching it I'd have no idea. The government shouldn't be able to have that kind of power .
Original post by AmericanDreamer
Yeah, but it's just a click of a button.
Someone who is 16 can click the button and enter the site.
Someone who is 16 can click the button and enter the site.
Teenagers,boys in particular watch porn.Its what they do and thats normal and healthy.Children below puberty have no desire for sex so they dont go looking for it.So this idea of protecting children from porn is just basically a myth made up by over-bearing tories.
Trying to censor it would be like trying to stop the rain by catching individual raindrops.
Pandora has opened the box and what came out cannot be put back in.
If a kid is savvy enough to circumvent parental locks and controls on their internet access devices, they will do whatever they want regardless.
Making it forbidden is a guaranteed way of driving kids to seek it out. rather like underage alcohol or cigarettes.
Pandora has opened the box and what came out cannot be put back in.
If a kid is savvy enough to circumvent parental locks and controls on their internet access devices, they will do whatever they want regardless.
Making it forbidden is a guaranteed way of driving kids to seek it out. rather like underage alcohol or cigarettes.
Original post by AmericanDreamer
I do.
Why?
Original post by uberteknik
Trying to censor it would be like trying to stop the rain by catching individual raindrops.
Pandora has opened the box and what came out cannot be put back in.
If a kid is savvy enough to circumvent parental locks and controls on their internet access devices, they will do whatever they want regardless.
Making it forbidden is a guaranteed way of driving kids to seek it out. rather like underage alcohol or cigarettes.
Pandora has opened the box and what came out cannot be put back in.
If a kid is savvy enough to circumvent parental locks and controls on their internet access devices, they will do whatever they want regardless.
Making it forbidden is a guaranteed way of driving kids to seek it out. rather like underage alcohol or cigarettes.
This gentleman/lady has got a point. The more you try and stop horny lil peeps, the more they'll go looking for it. So don't waste time trying to censor stuff coz that ain't cuttin' the shi'
Porn is already censored to an unnecessary and unnatural degree since the 2014 Audiovisual Media Services Regulations were introduced, which bans UK-based producers from showing, amongst other things, an uncontrollable and natural reaction to pleasure in women. It also bans a lot of other acts which are both legal and regularly engaged in by a pretty high number of people. The UK's obscenity and extreme porn laws are hugely outdated and bear no relevance to current moral standards, or with recent case law. Censoring porn in the way that the government are now suggesting they'll do (the 2016 Digital Economy Bill) will also significantly compromise the privacy and potentially the identity of people, by storing personal information in insecure databases. It's also unnecessary. Pretty much every study that's been done that says porn harms young people is full of bad data and warped statistics with regards to reporting in the mainstream media.
It ignores the real issues: we don't teach sex ed properly in schools, so children aren't aware of the issues that surround porn, while at the same time are more likely to actively seek it out to fill the gaps left by their education; at the same time, it frames them as undiscerning consumers who need protecting, when research has shown that they are able to think and critically evaluate the material they're watching; it fails to protect small businesses, who are still major contributors to the UK economy but cannot function should further censorship come into place; these business often cater to minority or marginalised or stigmatised groups, from trans/queer communities to BDSM practitioners, where porn can be used in an activist sense to create communities amongst these groups of people or by others as part of self-exploration and identity cohesion.
If you don't like it, don't watch it. But don't impinge on others' rights to do so. It's bad for individuals, communities and the economy. The UK porn industry in total is worth over £1bn (this figure is lower than in 2014, before the regulatory act was introduced), and a great deal of that is from small, independent companies. Censoring porn is a pointless, expensive exercise which masks deeper-run societal issues as a result of a few people in power going, "ooh, I don't like this." The money could be far better used elsewhere. The NHS, maybe?
Most of this comes from Myles Jackman and Pandora Blake's evidence to the Digital Economy Bill committee, which is aiming to increase porn censorship at the moment in UK Law. If you like something more legally heavy, it's a good read.
It ignores the real issues: we don't teach sex ed properly in schools, so children aren't aware of the issues that surround porn, while at the same time are more likely to actively seek it out to fill the gaps left by their education; at the same time, it frames them as undiscerning consumers who need protecting, when research has shown that they are able to think and critically evaluate the material they're watching; it fails to protect small businesses, who are still major contributors to the UK economy but cannot function should further censorship come into place; these business often cater to minority or marginalised or stigmatised groups, from trans/queer communities to BDSM practitioners, where porn can be used in an activist sense to create communities amongst these groups of people or by others as part of self-exploration and identity cohesion.
If you don't like it, don't watch it. But don't impinge on others' rights to do so. It's bad for individuals, communities and the economy. The UK porn industry in total is worth over £1bn (this figure is lower than in 2014, before the regulatory act was introduced), and a great deal of that is from small, independent companies. Censoring porn is a pointless, expensive exercise which masks deeper-run societal issues as a result of a few people in power going, "ooh, I don't like this." The money could be far better used elsewhere. The NHS, maybe?
Most of this comes from Myles Jackman and Pandora Blake's evidence to the Digital Economy Bill committee, which is aiming to increase porn censorship at the moment in UK Law. If you like something more legally heavy, it's a good read.
Original post by Nadile
Why the hell would you think it's necessary to censor porn? I don't see a single reason for that
To stop teenagers from being exposed to it.
Yup. Should require actual verification to get into, not just 'Yes, i'm 18'.
Porn is bad for the mind anyway, so teenagers especially should not watch it, since we're all prone to developing dependency on it due to the neuro-plasticity we have whilst going through puberty.
I was exposed to porn at a very young age unfortunately (9), and it has definitely had a negative impact on my mental health.
Porn is bad for the mind anyway, so teenagers especially should not watch it, since we're all prone to developing dependency on it due to the neuro-plasticity we have whilst going through puberty.
I was exposed to porn at a very young age unfortunately (9), and it has definitely had a negative impact on my mental health.
Original post by clonedmemories
Porn is already censored to an unnecessary and unnatural degree since the 2014 Audiovisual Media Services Regulations were introduced, which bans UK-based producers from showing, amongst other things, an uncontrollable and natural reaction to pleasure in women. It also bans a lot of other acts which are both legal and regularly engaged in by a pretty high number of people. The UK's obscenity and extreme porn laws are hugely outdated and bear no relevance to current moral standards, or with recent case law. Censoring porn in the way that the government are now suggesting they'll do (the 2016 Digital Economy Bill) will also significantly compromise the privacy and potentially the identity of people, by storing personal information in insecure databases. It's also unnecessary. Pretty much every study that's been done that says porn harms young people is full of bad data and warped statistics with regards to reporting in the mainstream media.
It ignores the real issues: we don't teach sex ed properly in schools, so children aren't aware of the issues that surround porn, while at the same time are more likely to actively seek it out to fill the gaps left by their education; at the same time, it frames them as undiscerning consumers who need protecting, when research has shown that they are able to think and critically evaluate the material they're watching; it fails to protect small businesses, who are still major contributors to the UK economy but cannot function should further censorship come into place; these business often cater to minority or marginalised or stigmatised groups, from trans/queer communities to BDSM practitioners, where porn can be used in an activist sense to create communities amongst these groups of people or by others as part of self-exploration and identity cohesion.
If you don't like it, don't watch it. But don't impinge on others' rights to do so. It's bad for individuals, communities and the economy. The UK porn industry in total is worth over £1bn (this figure is lower than in 2014, before the regulatory act was introduced), and a great deal of that is from small, independent companies. Censoring porn is a pointless, expensive exercise which masks deeper-run societal issues as a result of a few people in power going, "ooh, I don't like this." The money could be far better used elsewhere. The NHS, maybe?
Most of this comes from Myles Jackman and Pandora Blake's evidence to the Digital Economy Bill committee, which is aiming to increase porn censorship at the moment in UK Law. If you like something more legally heavy, it's a good read.
It ignores the real issues: we don't teach sex ed properly in schools, so children aren't aware of the issues that surround porn, while at the same time are more likely to actively seek it out to fill the gaps left by their education; at the same time, it frames them as undiscerning consumers who need protecting, when research has shown that they are able to think and critically evaluate the material they're watching; it fails to protect small businesses, who are still major contributors to the UK economy but cannot function should further censorship come into place; these business often cater to minority or marginalised or stigmatised groups, from trans/queer communities to BDSM practitioners, where porn can be used in an activist sense to create communities amongst these groups of people or by others as part of self-exploration and identity cohesion.
If you don't like it, don't watch it. But don't impinge on others' rights to do so. It's bad for individuals, communities and the economy. The UK porn industry in total is worth over £1bn (this figure is lower than in 2014, before the regulatory act was introduced), and a great deal of that is from small, independent companies. Censoring porn is a pointless, expensive exercise which masks deeper-run societal issues as a result of a few people in power going, "ooh, I don't like this." The money could be far better used elsewhere. The NHS, maybe?
Most of this comes from Myles Jackman and Pandora Blake's evidence to the Digital Economy Bill committee, which is aiming to increase porn censorship at the moment in UK Law. If you like something more legally heavy, it's a good read.
Listen, the fact is, porn at the end of the day is nothing but video prostitution.
Original post by AmericanDreamer
Listen, the fact is, porn at the end of the day is nothing but video prostitution.
No, it's porn. It's a perfectly legal form of sex work.
Original post by OnePrettyFlyGuy
Yup. Should require actual verification to get into, not just 'Yes, i'm 18'.
Like a dental scan?
Original post by chazwomaq
Like a dental scan?
No, don't be so pedantic. Service provider could automatically block it, but you have to request a password to get through from your service provider or something.
Original post by clonedmemories
No, it's porn. It's a perfectly legal form of sex work.
It shouldn't be legal.
Pornis destructive.
it destroys the minds of it's viewers.
I am a man, you as a woman should be the first to be against porn as it objectifies women.
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
