Proposals to block porn access in the UK!

Jono8 said:
This is one thing that has always perplexed me about modern day society. Sex and nudity (related to creating life) is frowned upon yet violence,torture,murder e.t.c (related to taking life) is more acceptable.

Has never made any sense to me.
Click to expand...

It doesn't make ANY sense and never will, randomly years ago(hundreds actually) random people decided to dislike one thing, when someone in power gets that idea then it because part of society and then you get people who have no problem with whatever it is, not wanting to speak up, and its just accepted. Then over time whatever it happens to be ends up being kept quiet, people aren't very open about sex, and think if they don't talk to their kids about it, they'll never do it, that kind of nonsense, people are stupid.

A VAST amount of beliefs in the world are simply statements people are TOLD and those people being too utterly stupid to think for themselves, just accepted as fact and passed on. So many crazy idea's about morality that have no basis in logic but are just accepted.

Porn/sex is kept quiet, people don't talk about it, its bad, because some prude wife of some politician 200 years ago decided she didn't like it, decided to try and ban it and no one wanted to be "that guy" who stood up and said he liked porn. People like to join, it's easier/better to join the prudes who hate everything than the group who are "for" something.

Sex, drugs, prostitution, certain types of music, people randomly decide to force the idea that these things are bad on society and most of society simply accepts it without question. Things the world thrived on and enjoyed for millenia randomly get shunned because of a few vocal people at some stage, and everyone else just slowly accepts these idea's.

If you ask someone to logically explain why they are anti porn, drugs, hookers(the good ones :p ), rap, whatever it is you get a general "because it is", never a real debate.
 
Porn in general shouldnt be banned its them sick sites that show deaths, and fights and all sorts of inhumane stuff that should be banned and focused on first.
 
No sites should be banned, because as soon as you start banning sites, it'll always start with the sites that deserve it, but will eventually spread to the sites that don't. I dread to think that one day we could end up living in a world where society (mumsnet) gets to decide what websites we can visit or not.

If you don't want to see sick and violent content, then stop searching for it.

If you don't want your children to see sick and violent content, then do your damn job as a parent and don't let them. Inept parents make me feel sicker than I do after watching 1 man 1 jar.
 
[TW]Fox;21618881 said:
One thing I've never really understood is why porn is such a big deal whereas violent movies don't seem to be? Murder, death and torture is fine and many parents will happily allow kids to watch 15 and 18 rated films but OMG?! IS THAT A NAKED GIRL?!?! TO THE DAILY MAIL!!!!
Click to expand...
For once I agree with you :p.

Nudity isn't as much as a big deal as people make out, I find it hilarious that we have government who are deeply concerned with the act of mating (a pleasurable practice) along with nudity (which is actually harmless in reality - just cultural attitudes) - but seem to think that bombing foreign country's is OK & dandy!.

Since when did the act of mating become worse than violence?.
 
On a side note,

I'm waiting for the hordes of people who complained about the mumsnet pandering Labour nanny state to voice up about this.
 
Energize said:
There's no way to identify most pornographic material. It would only work if every person in the world voluntarily marked every website and image/video uploaded as adult. Ridiculously ineffectual policy.

Pornography is the least objectional kind of content on the internet that you want to protect kids from anyway



It's completely incomparable, you're comparing censorship at the retailer level to the government level. It's like locking people in their homes rather than telling retailers not to sell porn to under 18's.
Click to expand...

Absolute tosh it isn't comparable.

Also absolute tosh that it is ineffectual. Soon pornography sites will be mandated to have an xxx TLD. Block them, and any IP addresses that resolve to one. Easy. Effectual.

Of course there will be some that don't comply, just like those shops that still sell booze, fags and grotty mags to younguns - there will be ways of handling those too, but for the mainstream it'll be working just fine.
 
Don't really see the need for this tbh there are other ways this can be achieved if needed.

My kids PC's run K9 i set an age limit so it only lets them access sites from a whitelist that are age appropriate. Anything else is blocked unless an exception is added (havent had to do that yet and its been in use for 2 years). So what is wrong with parents taking responsibility and installing something similar instead of expecting ISP's to babysit their children online?

The other thing in this thread is differing opinions on opt in / opt out , the article mentions that you would have to opt in to have the adult content where I personally feel you should have to opt in to the filtering it should never be the default.
 
I reckon that anyone who wants to have the porn available from their ISP should have to apply to do so. I am all for it to be honest. Get rid of the filth on the internet and make it subscription only if need be. :D

"Hides behind the door!!" :D
 
OcUK use it in their advertising!! Look at the advert at the top of the page!! How would they get business without it lol :D
 
Has anyone not thought that the second daddy phones up to activate porn if this goes through (which he will) child will then be able to access it... Or is he going to phone up twice a week and ask for them to unblock it for half an hour...

kd
 
Energize said:
There's no way to identify most pornographic material. It would only work if every person in the world voluntarily marked every website and image/video uploaded as adult. Ridiculously ineffectual policy.
Click to expand...

Actually I don't see how that wouldn't work if those given the power are responsible enough, you only have to look at the OCUK forums to see how people are easily manipulated into policing one another.

Post a naughty link or sweary on here and you immediately have 4-5 non-moderator jobsworths telling you to fix it before a moderator even arrives, I'm sure it could be implemented on a wider scale (reporting links to a central authority type of thing).
 
[TW]Fox;21620725 said:
Because they were attempts to have it legally blocked as there is no specific law to say 'thepiratebay is blocked'. This is an entirely different issue.
Click to expand...

It was blocked (legally) in Italy on two seperate occassions.

http://www.afterdawn.com/news/article.cfm/2010/02/08/the_pirate_bay_blocked_in_italy_a_second_time

My point is that even if a country blocks a specific website or a more general category of website (such as porn) then it is pointless. There is always a way around the block. The block is an internet chocolate teapot.
 
I'm all for them trying to block porn access.

Kids will have to learn different routes to get there daily fill on naked ****s. Hopefully the generation will become smarter for it.
 
It's all wrong and should be like this!

Internet service providers (ISPs) would be required to prevent customers accessing pornographic images unless those customers actively notify the ISPs that they want to censor the material if draft new UK legislation being proposed receives backing.
Click to expand...
Why should WE have to contact the isp to be able to watch porn?, why not have us contact them if we want it blocked, make it our choice not the isp. Again the power is in the isp hand and not the customer
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom