Goooooogle blocks 100,000 search terms for kiddyporn!

Qitarah said:
As for who is being harmed in a SEXUAL cartoon of children. No one is being directly harmed. But as described in my post above, if people are watching and masturbating to cartoon of children having sex with other children, they enjoy it it gets them off. If they keep watching it maybe a few of those people WILL want to go further on and watch more hardcore stuff.

Maybe that will save one life?
Click to expand...

You're probably just as likely to go on a real-life killing spree after playing BF4. Ie, one person in ten million might go on to do it. Maybe.

But there is no causal evidence as others have said, that watching any amount of anime rape cartoons will eventually lead to real life sexual assault.

So either looking at cartoon abuse is a serious enough crime in and of itself to lock people up (won't somebody think of the imaginary children!), or we're firmly in the realm of preventing FutureCrime.
 
Obviously its not the porn it self but its the act. However its the same outcome is it not?

As for studies related to people viewing child pornography vs how many go on to be child abusers there are plenty.

"According to the Mayo Clinic of the U.S.A., studies and case reports indicate that 30% to 80% of individuals who viewed child pornography and 76% of individuals who were arrested for Internet child pornography had molested a child,"

As for people those who fantasize over imaginary cartoon of young children and "get off to it" and that maybe leading onto watching real child pornography. I'm sure that some sick individuals will continue on to more hard core things. Regardless of if that is my assumption or not, I find it disgusting that grown men would find that attractive.

Either way you're welcome to your views and I am welcome to mine.
 
desires said:
Well cameron is already tell ISPs to get rid of porn by default and have an opt-in system. Next it will be anything relating to drugs, then the internet will simply be the number 10 website and BBC iPlayer.
Click to expand...

The filter is already blocking more than just porn, btw.

Will the filters only block pornography?
No. The filters will block all sorts of websites. Open Rights Group has spoken to the Internet Service Providers who would be responsible for implementing Cameron's plan.

If you are in a household with filters turned on, you would be unable to access websites that fall into categories such as web forums, violent material, alcohol, smoking, web blocking circumvention tools as well as suicide related websites, anorexia and eating disorder websites and pornography.
Click to expand...
various sources, but see:
https://www.openrightsgroup.org/blog/2013/a-quick-guide-to-camerons-default-internet-filters
 
Qitarah said:
Obviously its not the porn it self but its the act. However its the same outcome is it not?

As for studies related to people viewing child pornography vs how many go on to be child abusers there are plenty.

"According to the Mayo Clinic of the U.S.A., studies and case reports indicate that 30% to 80% of individuals who viewed child pornography and 76% of individuals who were arrested for Internet child pornography had molested a child,"

As for people those who fantasize over imaginary cartoon of young children and "get off to it" and that maybe leading onto watching real child pornography. I'm sure that some sick individuals will continue on to more hard core things. Regardless of if that is my assumption or not, I find it disgusting that grown men would find that attractive.

Either way you're welcome to your views and I am welcome to mine.
Click to expand...

Thank you for clearing that up.

I now have some new factual evidence that there was never a single case of child pornography before the internet.
 
Qitarah said:
As for studies related to people viewing child pornography vs how many go on to be child abusers there are plenty.

"According to the Mayo Clinic of the U.S.A., studies and case reports indicate that 30% to 80% of individuals who viewed child pornography and 76% of individuals who were arrested for Internet child pornography had molested a child,"
Click to expand...

I question those results. Firstly I'd suspect the Mayo Clinic's target group were known paedophiles and that they are known because a large number of them have been caught in the act.

If they did poll the general public, then I highly doubt anyone who's not known the the police would ever admit to viewing it and therefore fall out of the results.
 
Qitarah said:
Obviously its not the porn it self but its the act. However its the same outcome is it not?
Click to expand...

Absolutely. In the one case the on-screen image of the imaginary, drawn child is closed and nothing more happens. In the other case a real person/child has been physically and mentally damaged, and may be completely unable to trust people or live a normal life ever again.

Oh wait... that's not the same at all, is it?
 
Foxeye, we were talking about masturbation to porn. Nothing to do with children.

sven256:

Trafficking of child pornography has increased exceptionally in recent years. Maybe actually in line with the availability of internet and literacy of internet users. ow hmmmm...


As for more studies the lowest figure quoted i'v seen is up to 30% of those found (and charged) with viewing child porn have gone on to be child molesters, all the way up to 80%.
 
Last edited:
Didn't Australia ban porn which featured girls with small breasts because they looked younger than 18? At least that's what I heard.

Is this what this government is heading towards? Especially with that "rape" porn legislation, if something looks illegal, they will be able to prosecute you if you watch it, regardless of it's legal or not. Where do you draw the line? If a girl looks 16, yet she's 19 for example, will they prosecute you for "fantasizing" over her in porn, because she looks younger even though she's of legal age? Same with cartoons or anything else, how can you differentiate sometimes between illegal or legal? There are obvious cases where if it is clearly meant to be a child in them, then of course, there's no mistake about it, but there will be parts which cross-over closely between illegal and legal, and it seems like you'd have to prove your innocence, which is impossible in some cases.
 
I agree Aedus, there is for sure a point where you simply cant restricting certain things until there are no liberties left.

However making a stand and expressing a opinion about the right to view material about children because it is not "real" wouldnt get you any where except on the internet maybe :| (aimed @ foxeye et al)
 
Mark A said:
So would that also make owning the many films that have rape scenes in them also a crime? Last house on the left and spit on your grave are two films with fairly brutal rape scenes.

I thought prisons were already overcrowded enough as it is without jailing decent people for no reason.
Click to expand...

Apparently rape and bestiality are ok if there is a BBFC certificate. :rolleyes:

It is a sign of the totalitarian government that has imposed itself upon on the UK unfortunately.

The general public's defence strategy against the governments extremist laws is formed primarily from three components. Firstly, anonymity services to bypass the censorship net, protect network traffic and obscure the source and end-points of said traffic. Secondly, symmetric encryption to thwart the governments attempts to gain access to content held on an individuals computer. And thirdly, plausible deniability techniques such as nested encryption to defeat attempts to force individuals to give the government access to private data held on their computer.
 
Last edited:
Qitarah said:
Foxeye, we were talking about masturbation to porn. Nothing to do with children.
Click to expand...

j74SykU.gif


So we're just talking about fapping now? Your argument is that fapping to cartoons is the same outcome as child abuse... because... there's a mess at the end?

I have no idea where you're going with this, now :D
 
nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo silly.

at this particular point we were discussing the average person and positive reinforcement to fapping to porn. i.e. the more u fap, the more u want to fap but u need to fap harder to more hardcore porn!

anyways im done, was fun. girlfriend got angry at me for talking on a forum for 2 hours on the downside though.

nn!
 
An interesting quote from Google:

these changes have cleared up the results for over 100,000 queries that might be related to the sexual abuse of kids
Click to expand...

Note "might be". While it's nice that Google aren't lying like the politicians are, it doesn't stop the fact that people are being flagged as probably being witches based solely on searching for any one of over 100,000 terms that might or might not be related to witches.

Oh, did I write "witches"? Same attitude, wrong century.
 
I do wonder what is next. Maybe 4OD because it has "adult programmes" cleverly making way for the BBC to monopolise on internet TV like it does normal TV.
 
I thought pedos were all on the tor network now, or that's what all the shady internet people lead me to think.

Anyway, I don't use google, ask jeeves, I'm stuck in the 90's baby.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom