British Government Proposes Universal Ban on Net Porn
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
I kinda like this idea as I am sick and tired of getting deluged with porn when I am not looking for it. But I only kinda like it. A tiny bit.
In the end this is purely what it looks like when it is derezzed to 8-bit: censorship. The idea may seem noble but it is a bad slippery slope to making excuses at censoring other things all the easier.
I don't know the other companies on that list that got invited to the soiree except for Virgin Media, and I am fairly certain that Virgin will listen, grant that there is some thought to this, and then present the fait accompli: NO. With many good reasons to tack on.
What makes this even worse is the Conservative MP Claire Perry is taking the short road to trying to solve an issue. Which is not only weak but damaging in its own right. I would ask why isn't she approaching the porn providers themselves and finding a solution where porn-lookers can have their fun while those not looking for porn can be spared the deluge of sites. It may be a bit of an act of futility but it would be a mature act of a productive government that serves all its citizens. Instead it takes the easy route which is slimy and hurts all of its own citizens.
Now don't get me wrong, I am all for seeing boobs myself. But not all the time. When I feel like Googling on the web I would rather not have the first five pages be nothing but porn sites that used every word in the dictionary just to get their site referenced. It is a waste of my time. Also, quite a few of those sites are a bit on the ugly side and some even use malware in their content. Bad apples all around.
Addendum:
In the end this is purely what it looks like when it is derezzed to 8-bit: censorship. The idea may seem noble but it is a bad slippery slope to making excuses at censoring other things all the easier.
I don't know the other companies on that list that got invited to the soiree except for Virgin Media, and I am fairly certain that Virgin will listen, grant that there is some thought to this, and then present the fait accompli: NO. With many good reasons to tack on.
What makes this even worse is the Conservative MP Claire Perry is taking the short road to trying to solve an issue. Which is not only weak but damaging in its own right. I would ask why isn't she approaching the porn providers themselves and finding a solution where porn-lookers can have their fun while those not looking for porn can be spared the deluge of sites. It may be a bit of an act of futility but it would be a mature act of a productive government that serves all its citizens. Instead it takes the easy route which is slimy and hurts all of its own citizens.
Now don't get me wrong, I am all for seeing boobs myself. But not all the time. When I feel like Googling on the web I would rather not have the first five pages be nothing but porn sites that used every word in the dictionary just to get their site referenced. It is a waste of my time. Also, quite a few of those sites are a bit on the ugly side and some even use malware in their content. Bad apples all around.
He has quite the argument there but he leaves one important detail out....there would also be The Escapist as well!drbarno said:
Addendum:
Interesting. Either way my bets are Virgin is thinking more of their customers than "as a mother"'s own thoughts on the matter. TBH most porn doesn't need to be on portables out where anyone can see. But in the privacy of your own home I really have no issue against.Andy Chalk said:
Anytime a woman says "As a mother..." I immediately ignore them, already knowing they intend to shove their belief(s) either down my throat or where the sun doesn't shine.
I view this ban the same way I view that Tokyo manga ban - ridiculously stupid and it will only make things a heck of a lot worse. If people can't sexually gratify themselves via internet porn, they may be inclined to make a victim out of someone, if you know what I mean.
You know why it's different, Perry? Actually, it's not different, as this goes for everything: You, as a mother, are responsible for regulating what your children are exposed to, as are all parents. The parents of the day are to lazy to take on these responsibilites when they put a child into this world. It's not ISPs job to regulate what your children are exposed to, neither is it Game Studios, news papers, movies, etc. It is YOUR responsibility, and yours alone.
Sigh... If this happens then this is the beginning of the end of the internet we know and love, soon the government will prevent any unauthorized or un-registered websites from being on the internet and will have free reign to remove or alter any information published on registered sites. That may be a bit neurotic and conspiracy theory-ish but it is a really possibility.
Not ignoring everything else, this would be the first reason I oppose this legislation. First it's "for the children", then it's for "national security", then "for the companies" and then just plain, "cos we say so". The shameful thing is that there would always be someone thinking each step was a good idea.Andy Chalk said:
When I was 10, me and my friends got in to a garbage...idk the huge things you dump garbage in to that the garbage trucks pick up. Anyway we found about 20 porn magazines. As long as these things are out there, children will find them.Mana Fiend said:
This line never gets old when it comes to these articles.Andy Chalk said:
OT: This is about control, not pornography. The "think of the children!" crowd is never thinking of the children, they are thinking of the most knee-jerk, successful (sadly) excuse they can find to convince ignorant family men/women that whatever they deem needs to be controlled is "morally degrading" and should be banned. Perhaps if these parents actually did more parenting than lobbying government in order to do the parenting for them, they might actually find the right kind of success!
..Unfortunately, most of these people are just vocal, fundamentalist, self-righteous assholes, so that'll probably never happen.
Edit:
Ah, indeed?RobCoxxy said:
ISP's get a high five for sticking it to the ban-happy fucktards.
I think the government need to realise that they are Elected representatives meaning they should represent what the majority of their constituency wants, and thus represent what the country wants as a whole, not do what the bloody hell they want, someone needs to educate them in democracy.
But on a more serious note they wont be able to block Marks and spencers lingerie page so their plan will fail!
But on a more serious note they wont be able to block Marks and spencers lingerie page so their plan will fail!
NOT MY SWEET PORN!
The annoying thing about this is it can't be good PR for one of these networks to not ban porn because then they'll be associated with the porn and then they'll lose people who are all going "won't somebody please think of the children"...But then they'll get loads of people going to that network because hey...They've got the porn!
The annoying thing about this is it can't be good PR for one of these networks to not ban porn because then they'll be associated with the porn and then they'll lose people who are all going "won't somebody please think of the children"...But then they'll get loads of people going to that network because hey...They've got the porn!
Wow.... If you are doing this "as a mother" why the hell arent you home watching your kids? Instead your off to harrass everyone else. Also, who came up with the idea that sex is a bad thing? I seriously want to know how this preconception made it into society and how to get rid of it....
If you don't want your kid looking at porn, use a net nanny. When they're old enough to disable the net nanny, they're old enough to masturbate. I think a lot of kids around puberty would benefit from their birds & the bees talk including a brief mention of how most porn is about as realistic as as the WWE.