Turn on thread page Beta

'Online porn to be blocked by default' watch

  • View Poll Results: Yes, or no?
    YES, filter for ALL porn
    14.29%
    NO filter for ANY porn
    43.96%
    SOME porn should be filtered
    41.76%

    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HopefulMidwife)
    Please tell me you're a troll.

    Either that or you're just a ridiculous person. Sexist too.
    So you think Pornography has a had a positive effect on society?

    Just to add, i'm not sexist i'm just tired of all the guys who are a burden on society. There's plenty of nice guys out there but unfortunately at times the apes have a louder voice.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SuicidalFeminist)
    So you think Pornography has a had a positive effect on society?

    Just to add, i'm not sexist i'm just tired of all the guys who are a burden on society. There's plenty of nice guys out there but unfortunately at times the apes have a louder voice.
    1. That's subjective. I have nothing against people watching porn.

    2. Your post contained elements of sexism.

    3. What about the women who are a burden to society? Why do you have to discriminate based on gender? Why not talk about the PEOPLE who are a burden to society, as opposed to a specific gender?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SuicidalFeminist)
    So you think Pornography has a had a positive effect on society?

    Just to add, i'm not sexist i'm just tired of all the guys who are a burden on society. There's plenty of nice guys out there but unfortunately at times the apes have a louder voice.
    Is this not just a little bit sexist?

    Someone prefixing their statement with 'I'm not sexist/racist, but" doesn't make the bigoted tripe that follows any less bigoted.

    cf. "I'm not racist, but I'm tired of all the [insert racial group] who are [insert negative slur]
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    In short, stock up on the porno brothers.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    this is stupid. It's punishing the rest of the world because some lazy ****ing parents would rather complain than get off their fat arses and monitor what their kid's doing. As for the child pornography, that's already illegal and in all my years of browsing the net (since 1998 or 1999) I have never come across any of it, not even a single pop-up. If people want to pass that stuff around on the deep web then there's really no stopping them anyway.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SnoochToTheBooch)
    this is stupid. It's punishing the rest of the world because some lazy ****ing parents would rather complain than get off their fat arses and monitor what their kid's doing. As for the child pornography, that's already illegal and in all my years of browsing the net (since 1998 or 1999) I have never come across any of it, not even a single pop-up. If people want to pass that stuff around on the deep web then there's really no stopping them anyway.
    They always trot out these murderers and other perpetrators of heinous crimes as though looking at porn caused them to do what they did.

    Well, look at Thompson and Venables. They always make the link that one of them was caught with illegal porn and sent back to prison, and claim it made them the monsters they are today.

    But they could not possibly have had any access to such internet pornography - at the time of their crime, the internet was in its infancy.

    As far as we can tell, there has been no massive surge in heinous crimes that correlates in the slightest with the increasing proliferation of internet pornography that followed the rise of the digital age.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by fallen_acorns)
    simulated rape brings up many questions..

    As its only simulated, and takes place between 2 fully consenting adults, meerly playing out a fantasy.. in its self it harms no one, and is mearly consentual kinky sex..

    But.. it may have bad implications.. if they can show that it can (in certian cases) be a gateway into actual rape.. (when the fantasies stop becoming fullfilling).. or that it helps normalise rape culture.. etc.

    Then should it be illegal?

    Should something which, in itself is perfectly ok --- but may lead to something which is very much not, be illegal?
    GTA isn't illegal and you can rob and murder people in it for god's sake. It's all prudishness against sex. Depictions of extreme violence - okay. Depictions of extreme sex - not okay. Remember the "Hot coffee" controversy in San Andreas? You could rob shops and shoot up a busy high street but the minute someone unlocked a live sex scene everybody started screaming "but think of the children!" Ridiculous. Watching rape porn is no more likely to cause a rape than watching violent murders in a film is likely to cause a murder.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    The worrying thing about this ISP block (apart from the blocking innocent websites and general censorship issues) is that some people genuinely think this is a 'fix all' and that it will be impossible to access pornography once this is in place. If anything, this will put children at risk, because their parents will naively stop supervising them as much once the filter is in place. And there WILL be ways round it.

    Meanwhile, Melanie Phillips is going on about chld abuse images, as if this measure is going to have ANY effect on the distribution of abusive images at all. Anyone who WANTS to access abusive material will just opt out of the filter. And that's assuming they were using the surface web to access things in the first place. It's like trying to stop a criminal from leaving a city by setting up roadblocks on all the roads. Everyone else in the city will be inconvenienced while the criminal happily catches a train.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Child pornography should of course be stamped out and frowned upon but that is already illegal (rightly so), but I don't see why consenting sex between two adults should be censored any more than it already is. By all means have filters for children, but these already exist so shouldn't be forced upon everyone. If people are willing to produce porn, and others want to watch it, then when looking at it in the cold light of day that is no different to producing any other kind of media, which equally shouldn't be subject to extreme censorship. It's not like it would have an effect anyway, anyone who wants to watch it would find a way around.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    The issue is, did you ever hear people up in arms and making complaints about this? It might be because I don't know many parents but I don't think this issue is at the top of people's concerns.

    Conspiracy alert: is this not a test by the gvt. to see how cencorship stands with the public? (remember that they apparently wanted to block social media and bbm during the riots).

    We've also seen the recent blocking of sports streaming sites.

    I remember in Amsterdam there is a science type museum and there was a sex section with examples of sex positions, old porn vids and pics etc and parents were encouraged to show their children around (and loads were).

    Why do we have to be so prudish as a country.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    I don't like the way all of this has been reported. There are two very separate policies here related to porn, but they are always reported as if they're part of the same thing.

    One is making a law against "rape porn" (which apparently was already the law in Scotland). No problem with that law in principle, but I wonder where they draw the line. After all there is a lot of porn that features rough sex, how do they determine whether or not the actors are pretending to be non-consenting?

    The other is the default-on ISP porn block. I think people have blown that out of proportion a bit. It's just a tick box when you sign up. "Default-on" just means you have to untick the box if you want the filter off. Although I would prefer it if it was off by default and you have to tick to turn it on. The other concern with that is the effectiveness of the filter. How much non-porn stuff will it filter out? How much porn will it fail to filter out? Ultimately I think it's a good thing to have optional ISP side filters, but people need to be educated about them so they know it's not a fool proof solution.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Basically, download your favourite videos, brothers and sisters!
    FOR THE REBELLION IS UPON US!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by marcusfox)
    Scunthorpe council are going to get their website blocked...
    It is North Lincolnshire council not Scunthorpe council.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Darren96)
    It is North Lincolnshire council not Scunthorpe council.
    I know there isn't a Scunthorpe council currently, but there are plans for one.

    In any case, I'm referring to this.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scunthorpe_problem
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by marcusfox)
    I know there isn't a Scunthorpe council currently, but there are plans for one.
    Yes there is Scunthorpe Town Council, I don't see the point in it, we are the biggest town in North Lincolnshire and North Lincs is small anyway also the more area the mp and council members have the better so they don't focus on one place, (Don't know how to put that so sorry if you can't understand what I mean)
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Jakal)
    Conspiracy alert: is this not a test by the gvt. to see how cencorship stands with the public? (remember that they apparently wanted to block social media and bbm during the riots).
    I am somewhat wary about the conspiracy element. The initial aim of this may or may not be to open the door to censorship, but it could certainly lead there.

    At the least, it sets a precedent that ISPs block and filter large amounts of content by default. Accessing the entirety of the net no longer becomes the norm, and other parts of the Internet are seen as additions.

    It's happened in so many other avenues in the past, in businesses and governments. A change is made, and the change becomes the normal.

    That said, the more the government pushes, the more the Internet will push back. The Internet's freedom is supported by pretty much the world's population of experts with all things I.T, which have the combined capability to build a non-ISP related infrastructure for a free Internet. If the ISPs no longer become a viable manner in which to connect to the Internet, another way will simply become the default option.
 
 
 
Poll
Were you ever put in isolation at school?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.