Consultation on internet adult content measures

RomanNose · 4 May 2012 at 17:13

Nobody has given me a reason why porn is harmful to someone who wants to watch it.
I don't think teenagers "accidently" stumble across it, which is what the policy makers don't understand.

Deleted member 77746 · 4 May 2012 at 17:23

SubScape said:
You do realise you can go outside AND look at porn age 12? I did both, it really wasn't difficult.

Where do you get porn outside except shops or lads/lasses holding up some smartphone/magazine?

SubScape · 4 May 2012 at 17:28

mrbell1984 said:
Where do you get porn outside except shops or lads/lasses holding up some smartphone/magazine?

What you said suggests that Bhavv didn't go outside because he watched porn?

bhavv · 4 May 2012 at 17:32

Actually I didnt go outside at age 12 because I wasnt allowed to

So Pron. And there was no 'watched' in it either, it was crappy dial up pron.

Freakbro · 4 May 2012 at 17:34

RomanNose said:
Nobody has given me a reason why porn is harmful to someone who wants to watch it.

That's easy, it's because.....uhhh...

because....ummm....

because....err...

I give up

bhavv · 4 May 2012 at 17:35

RomanNose said:
Nobody has given me a reason why porn is harmful to someone who wants to watch it.
I don't think teenagers "accidently" stumble across it, which is what the policy makers don't understand.

Surely porn is less harmful than violent movies and video games.

12-14 is the legal age of consent in a lot of European countries too.

Deleted member 77746 · 4 May 2012 at 17:37

SubScape said:
What you said suggests that Bhavv didn't go outside because he watched porn?

What I said suggests he didn't go play with girls and expl...... oh never mind.

SubScape · 4 May 2012 at 17:39

mrbell1984 said:
What I said suggests he didn't go play with girls and expl...... oh never mind.

It's been a long day and I'm slightly confused, just ignore me

RomanNose · 4 May 2012 at 17:41

Mrs Cameron " David, I caught our son looking at porn, the internet is dangerous and our darling son would never think about it"
Mr Cameron " That's outrageous how can we allow this crime to happen under our house"
BAN ALL THE PORN!

Zefan · 4 May 2012 at 17:42

bhavv said:
Surely porn is less harmful than violent movies and video games.

Absolutely not. There's a huge social stigma with being violent towards others as it is generally a public thing and is discussed in the open, the same can't be said for sex.

What I'm trying to say is, a kid knows that being violent is wrong, so playing a videogame doesn't suddenly make him violent, but if he/she has no predisposed thoughts about sex - because it's one big secret at that age - then they can be set impressions that stay with them for life.

Cleeecooo · 4 May 2012 at 17:42

bhavv said:
Actually I didnt go outside at age 12 because I wasnt allowed to

So Pron. And there was no 'watched' in it either, it was crappy dial up pron.

meh, you can get the same stuff quite innocently using google.

eg, typing "devon" with safesearch off gets you some interesting results :eek:

Skillmister · 4 May 2012 at 17:43

Zefan said:
Absolutely not. There's a huge social stigma with being violent towards others as it is generally a public thing and is discussed in the open, the same can't be said for sex.

What I'm trying to say is, a kid knows that being violent is wrong, so playing a videogame doesn't suddenly make him violent, but if he/she has no predisposed thoughts about sex - because it's one big secret at that age - then they can be set impressions that stay with them for life.

So instead of making it even more hush hush it needs to be open and free for all.

bhavv · 4 May 2012 at 17:43

I would assume that a 'young teen' looking up porn has been thinking about sex.

grimm · 4 May 2012 at 17:44

I don't really mind as long as it doesn't get in the way of me getting pr0n.

Also if I have a kid as long as they're 11+ or whatever the pr0n filters will be off for them too, I don't see why they should suffer. I would just put in a conversation to let them know what is/is not appropriate viewing, time/place, cleaning up after yourself, keep it personal, these women are professionals and real women don't act like that etc. etc.

oliseo · 4 May 2012 at 17:45

I see it as

"The government wants to know what everyone is doing online so needs an excuse that no-one can argue against"

Terrorism or pedophilia fall nicely into that category.

Tyron · 4 May 2012 at 17:45

It wont get passed though as it will effect too many people.

SubScape · 4 May 2012 at 17:46

Cleeecooo said:
meh, you can get the same stuff quite innocently using google.

eg, typing "devon" with safesearch off gets you some interesting results

All I got was websites about Devon, and in images just maps of Devon, there are very occasionally some girls in skimpy-ish clothes but nothing you wouldn't find on a billboard or in a catalogue

RomanNose · 4 May 2012 at 17:46

Tyron said:
It wont get passed though as it will effect too many people.

It will though.
They seem to get away with anything these days.

bhavv · 4 May 2012 at 17:47

Cleeecooo said:
eg, typing "devon" with safesearch off gets you some interesting results

OMG I tried it :eek:

And I found this picture of nothing but pure divine orgasmic oral pleasure!

.....

DRRRROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLLLL!!!!! MUST HAVE, MUST LICK, MUST TASTE, MUST EAT, MUST DEVOUR!

And no there was nothing nekkid.

UncleRuckus · 4 May 2012 at 17:48

This should be opposed by anyone who doesn't want the state raising their children.

If a parent is concerned about their children looking at the smut on the web they should be monitoring them or using third party software to block it.