Proposals to block porn access in the UK!

It amazes me that all these 'so-called' worried parents who have done absolutely nothing to protect their kids haven't actually looked into the options available. If I was so worried about it to the point where it required legislation I would have, already, exhausted every avenue possible.

There are, literally, tons of products out there that will do it for you, there are hundreds of guides on making a user account and not an admin account, etc, etc, etc.

I can't believe how backwards people are who require legislation for everything - if you keep giving the government the right to make all of these changes then you really are pushing it towards a nanny state and the only people responsible are those who agree with it on the basis that they can't be bothered to do something for themselves.

Power relinquished is power lost - you're never going to get it back. Once a tiny bit of the power is given more and more will be added. In this case it may start with pornographic websites but then it will be torrent sites then, etc.



M.
 
Dear isp... I love boobies, please please don't take them away from me!

Would rather some 16 year old kid be attacking his own **** than attacking someone in the street, especially if said teenager is sex starved! Not pretty! Lol


My Pro slogan
Porn... Keeps your teenager off the streets!
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Already put a few comments on this in the Daily Mail orientated thread.

In a nutshell, it shouldn't be blocked, the internet has just replaced going in the Private shop or bringing back a couple of jazz mags from a trip to Amsterdam or Copenhagen.

Anyway, the biggest single deterrent from looking at internet porn is not knowing what nasties might be downloading along with the flv clip, or embedded scripts looking for your cc details after you click on a link...

(Oh, or the missus catching you... "I've no idea how that page just appeared, dear!" :D:D:D).
 
Originally I was against this, but tbh if there were loads of shops in a highstreet, all with their doors unlocked/open, and a good number of them contained women being gagged on **** (male chicken) and being gang-banged by groups of men, then I'm pretty sure people wouldn't object to having those doors locked so kids couldn't just walk in.

People seem to have this idea that the internet is different to 'real' life, that it should be anonymous and completely open. Times are changing, it is no longer purely the realm of slightly nerdy men, everyone has access to it, so imo, some of the dodgy parts of it should be behind closed doors (as it were). I'd have no problem making the call to BT and asking for my porn to be switched on.
 
godinman said:
Originally I was against this, but tbh if there were loads of shops in a highstreet, all with their doors unlocked/open, and a good number of them contained women being gagged on **** (male chicken) and being gang-banged by groups of men, then I'm pretty sure people wouldn't object to having those doors locked so kids couldn't just walk in.
.
Click to expand...

a better analogy would be that every item posted to your house will first be opened and inspected and the contents kept on record.

your analogy in RL terms would suggest going to the ISP hosting the web site and asking them to shut it down...
 
edscdk said:
a better analogy would be that every item posted to your house will first be opened and inspected and the contents kept on record.

your analogy in RL terms would suggest going to the ISP hosting the web site and asking them to shut it down...
Click to expand...

To be fair, I've only read the headlines, I assumed it is simply that somehow they plan on getting ISP's to block porn unless you opt in and ask for access to be allowed, if that's the case, or similar, then I'm happy with it. If they are indeed planning on somehow looking at everything you do, then I would oppose it.

My RL analogy doesn't mention these establishments being closed down, but simply being behind locked doors, that can get access to if you have the correct key/knock on the door.
 
edscdk said:
a better analogy would be that every item posted to your house will first be opened and inspected and the contents kept on record.
Click to expand...

This + having your name on a database that will be accessible by our beloved Government.

godinman said:
To be fair, I've only read the headlines, I assumed it is simply that somehow they plan on getting ISP's to block porn unless you opt in and ask for access to be allowed, if that's the case, or similar, then I'm happy with it. If they are indeed planning on somehow looking at everything you do, then I would oppose it.
Click to expand...

It's flawed. Technologically it wont work and it risks danger of making the situation worse as parent will think little Johnny is safe.

I object to having to ask for the 'morality' filter to be removed just so I can help 'protect' some ****less parents.

Plenty of ISP level and computer/router level opt-in filters exist. Even ones that the Daily Mail mouthbreathing readers could figure out.
 
edscdk said:
a better analogy would be that every item posted to your house will first be opened and inspected and the contents kept on record.

your analogy in RL terms would suggest going to the ISP hosting the web site and asking them to shut it down...
Click to expand...

I think a better way to sum up what he's saying is, rather than the people shagging and closing their own doors, we pay the government to go around and close all the doors for people. People CAN and currently do shut the doors for themselves, helping yet another parental responsibility fall to the government is a terrible, horrific idea.

Kids are worse, less responsible with less common sense because parents do less parenting, nothing more or less, should the government implement yet another plan to take the responsibility for being a parent, off the parents, no.
 
drunkenmaster said:
I think a better way to sum up what he's saying is, rather than the people shagging and closing their own doors, we pay the government to go around and close all the doors for people. People CAN and currently do shut the doors for themselves, helping yet another parental responsibility fall to the government is a terrible, horrific idea.
Click to expand...

Well, no, my original analogy was a street with various shops, some of which contain people performing hardcore sex acts on each other, the governments plan seemed to me like just saying, "Okay, close the doors to the throat ****ing amputees, if you want to go in, knock".

I think we're possibly viewing the internet in a different way, I see it as a public domain, where people have the same social responsibilities as they do 'IRL', and as such must close their hardcore sex shop door, but also teach their kids not to open them/ensure they're supervised so that they don't.

I still haven't read the legislation, as I mentioned earlier, so I may still be against it. But if it's as I describe above, then I'm happy with that.
 
Yes, the key part is the parents either teaching their kids to not open the door, or shutting the door to prevent their kids. The legislation proposes the parents have to do nothing, its another thing the government will do for them.

The problem is its vitally important that the parent do it, its the parents job, it TEACHES the child, either boundaries, or the parents have a chance to teach their kids THEIR OWN views on porn, personal responsibility.

The problem is NOT that the government does it for the parents especially, its that the parents don't teach their kids yet one more thing. Teaching your children how to be, who to be and why is the most fundamental thing a parent can do in their life, and with every lesson you either pass off to someone else(school/government) or every lesson you bypass by letting someone simply take the decision away.... a kid loses, its that simple.

Being a parent is the SUM TOTAL OF EVERYTHING you do involving your kids, every decision you pass off is part of this total, every lesson someone does for you is part of this sum total, every time a kid is taught about something important, like condoms and sex from a teacher rather than their own parent, you let someone else turn your child into who they want them to be(or most often, the loudest most ignorant parents who dictate what is taught in school and how, and that is the most dangerous thing).

Really its not even the government teaching kids, its a problem but, as said before its the loudest most ignorant parents who make up what your kid ends up taught.

People might not think that simply ignoring porn and never talking about it is parenting, it is, its BAD parenting. Because kids will still find porn, no question the difference is a parent won't have told a kid what it is, why its right, wrong, or inbetween(you can teach your kid what you want). A kid that is told nothing and stumbles across all the bad(if you think porn is bad) things in the world will have more of a problem with porn in this case, than a kid who isn't kept in the dark.

This is one more in a long line of simply bad parenting decisions.
 
Indeed, define "porn"!

There are already a couple of mainstream movies which supposedly featured real actors doing it. Then there's the various "Lover's Guide" type videos and DVD's. Programmes like Spartacus and Game Of Thrones are sailing pretty close to what can be defined as "simulated" sex on mainstream TV and I found the last episode of Spartacus with the graphic beheading far more distasteful than watching a FLV clip of a couple going at it for five minutes.
 
This seemed like a good place to post the story on Newsnight tonight.

Apparently there is a 40,000 strong petition to ban page 3 girls from newspapers...

Porn is under attack from all sides atm, eh? :p What's a guy to do? :p
 
Castiel said:
Indeed....make your own porn and stick two fingers up to The Man, while sticking the others elsewhere....;)
Click to expand...
wpI6s.png


And thanks, at first I read that post minus the 'to', before the man... :(
 
all goverments in the world getting more conservative including the uk,they should be work on solving economical problems,not peoples special lifes...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom