Violent porn to be banned?

[girl with sharp teeth]

.

[budda]

It really depends, is it just an acted rape or a real one? Is the woman willing or being forced into it?

If its between consenting adults then its fine, if its not then to me its incitement to violence because the makers make money from it.

Apart from the fact that censorship on the net has never worked and probably never will.

[Namaste]

I think snuff movies are sick and I don't think anybody who respects women (or men at times) would want to watch rape or strangulation. However... As Bongbudda said, it depends on whether they're concenting and also... What exactly is the definition of 'violent'?

Will they ban all BDSM material too?

[CptCoatHanger]

Just to echo other peoples thoughts really.

Anything with consenting adults is fine. Anything that contains non-consenual material isn't.

[Jim V]

The issues here are around violent porn, not non-consensual acts. Snuff movies and rape films are still highly unlikely to exsist on any wide scale and may in fact have more to do with urban myths than reality.

Based on what i know about censorship from my masters I'd imagine this is about consensual (though many would question how consenting someone may be - after all there is the famous Linda Lovelace contention that if someone could force her to fuck a dog, how hard would it be to make her sign a contract) sex.

So, are porn movies ever harmful; can they reinforce behaviour in disturbed people; do they reinforce it enough to be a problem; in a society with a shockingly low conviction rate for rape do we want material to be available that mimics such behaviour?

So I think the main issues are, is there anything people can do together that isn't acceptable and how exactly do you check who is verifying the consent involved.

[Mist]

I have no real strong opinion on this, but it does sound a little bit like the very tenuous link that sometimes pops up between realistic violent games and, eg. high school killing sprees. It's like, one person goes and commits an offence, and it's later found that they engaged in activity X, and all of a sudden there is an urge for activity X to be banned.

Having said that I can't really understand why people would want to look at violent porn, but just because I don't like it doesn't mean that someone else wouldn't, and if the people involved are all doing it willingly then I don't really see why it should be banned.

[Toadborg]

Well the point is made in the article that this stuff is already illegal in the UK, the issue is about control over foreign material.

because it is made abroard you cannot be sure of the regulatory regime their so you can't be sure over issues of consent etc, thus better to close it down completely surely, seeing as the making of such filth is driven by demand......

On a related issue people that get really pious about 'net freedom', such as the academic cited there really piss me off

"But I think the serious problem with it is the assumption that ordinary people cannot be trusted to make up their own minds about what they read, watch or see."

Lots of people are stupid and gullible, fact.............

[Kentish]

my masters
:chin:
So I think the main issues are, is there anything people can do together that isn't acceptable and how exactly do you check who is verifying the consent involved.
This 'violent porn' is just an extension of the major issue of the entire pornography industry: that is, why women (and men) make the choice to become involved in porn. I think it would be hard to deny that there is a link between poverty and the sex industry - people make their choice because of financial pressure rather than a true desire to become porn stars. So consent becomes much more complex and consumers of porn would not often consider this, whereas most would undoubtedly find simulated or actual rape videos to be repulsive.

[wheresmyplacebo]

bestality and necrophilis are slready illegal and not between consenting adults so thats okay, however providing the same punishment as child pornography is a seperate matter all together

but with other violent pornography - if the adults are consenting, even if it is not passed by british censorship (which shouldnt exist as a legal status setting body anyway) shouldnt be a criminal offence by prison punishment

for example lots of american pornography which in terms of consent is often perfectly fine, is censored when released in this country to remove asphixiation and times when they cant say no even they get a chance to afterwards which they dont, should someone get a 3year sentence for that!? i know ive looked at 'violent pornography' by their definition but i know i have seen consented pornography as it has passed american federal standards on consent and that the women involved were over 18 as well, should i have commited a crime punishable by prison?

[Kermit]

I really am torn on this.

The link between violent computer games and films and violence in real life is well-documented and confirmed. The United Nations are deeply concerned about violence towards women, especially sexual violence, in cinema to have set up various action and pressure groups to try and combat it.

The lack of objective control over what constitutes consent in the sex industry is also a huge concern. Consent can be gained in many ways, not all exactly ethical, and I doubt many women choose to get involved in hardcore pornography to fulfil their life's ambitions- although the major stars can and do earn significant money, I doubt most of the women on The Hun earn more than a couple of hundred quid for it. There is also the issue that money doesn't create informed consent- people will do anything if they're broke and their kid is hungry.

I don't like the idea that people's freedom to view what they want is restricted, though. Providing that consent is there then people should be free to do and view what they wish. There is a vibrant BDSM scene on the internet, which does not denigrate women or create violent people- would that be restricted? Some BDSM sites can be very intense.

Also much of this material is simulated anyway. The woman isn't really being raped or killed, and any bondage she is put into is usually carefully controlled and consensual.

On balance I am against banning this material, because people should be left to make an informed decision about what they wish to view. Images of child sex abuse are different, and the two should not be compared.

All this is because one nutter strangled a woman. He'd have probably done it anyway, if we're going to be honest. Why should everyone's freedom be restricted in such a cack-handed way just because one nutter decides to try it at home?

[Jim V]

:chin:

My Master's of Arts from Birkbeck - though I should have probably written that better :grump:

[Kentish]

My Master's of Arts from Birkbeck - though I should have probably written that better :grump:
:lol: Oh. I thought you had masters...

[Kermit]

My Master's of Arts from Birkbeck - though I should have probably written that better :grump:

I thought you meant Dom:p

[wheresmyplacebo]

I really am torn on this.

The link between violent computer games and films and violence in real life is well-documented and confirmed. The United Nations are deeply concerned about violence towards women, especially sexual violence, in cinema to have set up various action and pressure groups to try and combat it.

The lack of objective control over what constitutes consent in the sex industry is also a huge concern. Consent can be gained in many ways, not all exactly ethical, and I doubt many women choose to get involved in hardcore pornography to fulfil their life's ambitions- although the major stars can and do earn significant money, I doubt most of the women on The Hun earn more than a couple of hundred quid for it. There is also the issue that money doesn't create informed consent- people will do anything if they're broke and their kid is hungry.

I don't like the idea that people's freedom to view what they want is restricted, though. Providing that consent is there then people should be free to do and view what they wish. There is a vibrant BDSM scene on the internet, which does not denigrate women or create violent people- would that be restricted? Some BDSM sites can be very intense.

Also much of this material is simulated anyway. The woman isn't really being raped or killed, and any bondage she is put into is usually carefully controlled and consensual.

On balance I am against banning this material, because people should be left to make an informed decision about what they wish to view. Images of child sex abuse are different, and the two should not be compared.

All this is because one nutter strangled a woman. He'd have probably done it anyway, if we're going to be honest. Why should everyone's freedom be restricted in such a cack-handed way just because one nutter decides to try it at home?


or how about i'll be breaking the law in this case in all honesty, yet in private if i done this i wouldnt be, i dont mind acts that are privately illegal in this coutnry being added to the punishable by prison or psychiatric treatment like sex with animals for example - but to carry a 3year recomended sentence for something which done in private is perfectly fine, is just bollocks im afraid

im happy for the law to be tightened, not just this much though

yes its illegal but what im happy to 'enjoy' in private which is legal, should bear no difference to what i choose to watch either.... the only difference is watching and taking part...

yes how consent is gained in america is dodgy i saw a documentary on it, however the women did say yes, even if just for money, and strangely thats legal so shouldnt matter

ps - and i think 16 year olds should have legal access to pornography as well, even if i dont agree that they can take part cause under 18s cant agree to contracts etc which effectively it is when someone else sell a tape of you having sex

[Jim V]

The link between violent computer games and films and violence in real life is well-documented

link?

[Kentish]

yes how consent is gained in america is dodgy i saw a documentary on it, however the women did say yes, even if just for money, and strangely thats legal so shouldnt matter
I think you're missing the point.

[Blagsta]

See my posts on the BBC women thread about the commodification of people and relationships.

[Kermit]

link?
Open any newspaper.

[wheresmyplacebo]

See my posts on the BBC women thread about the commodification of people and relationships.


still a double standards law though you must agree?

and ill reiterate the fact im happy for things that are illagal to do anyway being enforced on video even if i dont think it should carry the same punishments as child abuse

if me and my gf were actually happy to practice bdsm privately, it wouldnt be illegal - why shouldnt i be allowed to watch it then? unless CONSENTED voyeurism is a crime then?

or the fact, the bbfc would be psychopathic rapist nutcases from the amount of explicit pornography they have to watch by what some people say about those who watch pornography?

and kermit i think youll find theres no causal link, which means it be simply that naturally aggresive people like watching violence - as level psychology had some uses then i guess :p and if i opened any newspapers id find out all asylum seekers are job taking benefit scroungers who commit all the crimes and rape our little girls and eat gooses from parks - damb the express would be stuck if they found a breed of asylum seeker if they ate paedophiles and diana haters

[Blagsta]

There's a massive difference between consenting adults doing things in their own home and the multi-billion dollar porn industry.

[Jim V]

As to the bbfc issue, I know they have now started to use trained counsellors to provide trained counsellors as many of the examiners felt the massive increase in porn they were watching was having a detremental affect on their lives. Certainly the examiners I've seen interviewed have never felt untouched by the experience of their work.

[Blagsta]

Does anyone think its healthy that a lot of kids get their ideas about what sex should be about from violent internet porn?

[Boozy]

Personally, I'd like all porn banned, starting with page 3 of the Sun. Of course there are the justified comments that it's the women that exploit stupid men and are well reworded for taking there close off, plus the issues about censorship, but the porn industry is so interlinked with drugs, organised crime and sex trafficing that it should all be banned.

[klintock]

Banning it is a recipe for making it even more hardcore. Using the law always makes things like this worse.

It'll just go underground even further. Criminalising won't stop it happening, it never ever does. It doesn't stop drink driving, it doesn't stop murder, it doesn't stop drug use. It won't stop violent porn being made and watched. It will bring more violence towards the women involved, because they will be threatened to keep quiet as well as battered about while shagging.

There's a massive difference between consenting adults doing things in their own home and the multi-billion dollar porn industry.

And because theres so much money in it, it's not going anywhere.

Does anyone think its healthy that a lot of kids get their ideas about what sex should be about from violent internet porn?

That's not a problem with internet porn though, is it?

About the issue of consent. If consent is invalidated by being poor, then few employment contracts are valid either. I have no argument with that though.

[Boozy]

Banning it is a recipe for making it even more hardcore. Using the law always makes things like this worse.

It'll just go underground even further. Criminalising won't stop it happening, it never ever does. It doesn't stop drink driving, it doesn't stop murder, it doesn't stop drug use.

Interesting argument there, do you think there would be more drink drivers if the police said, "hey it's ok drink as much as you like, were not going to procecute".

The problem is that there is a tolerant attitude towards soft porn generally and everyone knows where to find hard core porn on the internet, there are always going to be people who want to go further. How do you protect children, the stuff is everywhere, anyone who thinks there isn't a link between porn and violence against women is living in cloud cukooland.

You need rules and laws, lets say you run a company, a guy comes in 5 mins late every day this week, you as a boss so thats ok no problem, well next week he's 10 mins late every day, you say hey no problem, the third week he's 15 mins late, etc etc.

There are people out there who will want more extreme forms of pornography and there are people who are going to want to act out those fantasies.

[Kentish]

About the issue of consent. If consent is invalidated by being poor, then few employment contracts are valid either. I have no argument with that though.
Is pornography simply a job then? Is there not an inherent morality issue in pornography, prostitution etc?

[Teh_Gerbil]

How. Bloody. Stupid.

The vast majority is done with consent. Anmd what reasnoing? It just drives it furthur underground into unregulated territory, and real rape and scenes of brutality will be sought out. For fucks sake.

Stupidy.

[Kentish]

The vast majority is done with consent. Anmd what reasnoing? It just drives it furthur underground into unregulated territory, and real rape and scenes of brutality will be sought out. For fucks sake.
I don't follow the logic. :confused:

[Teh_Gerbil]

Right. So they can't get regulated stuff, right?

Sothey head into the illegal underground scene. No regulations. People will do it the easy way, right? Makes business sense. You got to pay models to do it. You haven't got to pay someone you just rape, just keep in locked up somewhere, hostage, and abuse them, take pictures, put 'em up. Costs you nothing, you get 100% profit. Why get 50% profit by paying a load of models when you can do that?

[Kentish]

Right. So they can't get regulated stuff, right?
It's not currently regulated, that being the whole point.
Sothey head into the illegal underground scene. No regulations.
:confused:
People will do it the easy way, right? Makes business sense. You got to pay models to do it. You haven't got to pay someone you just rape, just keep in locked up somewhere, hostage, and abuse them, take pictures, put 'em up. Costs you nothing, you get 100% profit. Why get 50% profit by paying a load of models when you can do that?
I don't understand why people would be 'raped, held hostage and abused' just because violent porn is banned. :confused:

[Teh_Gerbil]

Ugh... ok, lets try again.

So, say it is banned, right? Illegal. So if the women get done over, they have no real legal claim because they were indulging in illlegal activities anyway. As it is currently, legal, to porn stars have rights. Yes? See?

[Kentish]

See?
No, but never mind, I don't agree anyway.

[klintock]

Interesting argument there, do you think there would be more drink drivers if the police said, "hey it's ok drink as much as you like, were not going to procecute".

Sure, why should it? Drink driving never hurt anyone that I know of.

You need rules and laws, lets say you run a company, a guy comes in 5 mins late every day this week, you as a boss so thats ok no problem, well next week he's 10 mins late every day, you say hey no problem, the third week he's 15 mins late, etc etc.

I disagree with the first bit. What's the difference between "the law" and employer/employee relations? Consent.

This whole issue and many others like it revolve around consent, is it freely given, knowingly etc etc

There are people out there who will want more extreme forms of pornography and there are people who are going to want to act out those fantasies.

I picked a woman up in a club once who "needed pain" to get off and loved being verbally abused. If I gave her lots of verbal in public she would orgasm. It takes all sorts this crazy world, doesn't it. The assumption everyone is making here is that no woman would do "rough porn" voluntarily, which is bollocks.

Is pornography simply a job then? Is there not an inherent morality issue in pornography, prostitution etc?

No more so than for anyone else who does something they normally wouldn't just for cash. Which is pretty much everyone, last time I checked.

[Kentish]

No more so than for anyone else who does something they normally wouldn't just for cash. Which is pretty much everyone, last time I checked.
"something they normally wouldn't"?
Do you not think there is something fundamentally different?

[klintock]

Do you not think there is something fundamentally different?

No?

Different how?

[Kentish]

I suggest that most people wouldn't regard a career in the porn industry as equally desirable as another job filled by those desperate for money.

Would you just regard it as taboo then?

[klintock]

I suggest that most people wouldn't regard a career in the porn industry as equally desirable as another job filled by those desperate for money.

True. They also wouldn't regard a career killing pigs with a bolt gun as equally desirable as another job filled by thoe desperate for money. Or street sweeping. Or working behind a desk in a suit. All personal choices that we all do the best we can to muddle on with.

That's the issue, though, consent. If it's freely consented to, I have no problem with it.

Would you just regard it as taboo then?

For me, no. Other people have their own views of course. My only real concern is when those people are willing to use force to impose their views on me or others who don't share them.

Have a flash animation.

http://www.isil.org/resources/introduction.swf

[Blagsta]

Ignore klintock, everyone else does.

[klintock]

Ignore klintock, everyone else does.

Knock it off Blagsta, thanks.

[Kentish]

For me, no. Other people have their own views of course. My only real concern is when those people are willing to use force to impose their views on me or others who don't share them.
Interesting, but pornographic pop ups would probably be included in that. It works both ways. Aggressive internet pornography is hardly a harmless industry.

[Blagsta]

Klintock you completely ignore social factors such as economic coercion, damaged emotions (like your example of some women who could only get off on being abused. Its quite likely she's been severely emotionally traumatised somewhere along the way) because you think things like that don't exist or some such crap. Thats why I mostly ignore you - you're a fool.

[klintock]

Interesting, but pornographic pop ups would probably be included in that. It works both ways.

I agree. Lots of things work both ways and this could well be one of them.

Aggressive internet pornography is hardly a harmless industry.

I agree. I fail to see how making it outside "the law" will do anybody any good at all though, for the reasons already stated.

[Boozy]

Right. So they can't get regulated stuff, right?

Sothey head into the illegal underground scene. No regulations. People will do it the easy way, right? Makes business sense. You got to pay models to do it. You haven't got to pay someone you just rape, just keep in locked up somewhere, hostage, and abuse them, take pictures, put 'em up. Costs you nothing, you get 100% profit. Why get 50% profit by paying a load of models when you can do that?


Good logic except if it's illegal to access this stuff, to buy it to hold the material, then your market will be very limited, and you will always be in fear that there will be a knock at your door.

[Kentish]

I agree. I fail to see how making it outside "the law" will do anybody any good at all though, for the reasons already stated.
Do you not think paedophiles think twice now about downloading child porn after the publicity surrounding Operation Ore?

[klintock]

Do you not think paedophiles think twice now about downloading child porn after the publicity surrounding Operation Ore?

Do you not think it has helped create an underground community with even stronger ties than before to supply the demand that is still there?

Child porn, as disgusting as I find it will still be made and watched by those who enjoy it. Horrible and sad and awful as this is to think.

Child porn is also a different issue, due to the consent aspect not being there.

[wheresmyplacebo]

Child porn is also a different issue, due to the consent aspect not being there.


the sole issue here

what about a couple who produce bdsm videos then and put them on the net for free.... is that fine cause noones making a profit they just enjoy the exhibitionism?


you cant ban adults watching consensual activities, if theyre allowed perform the act in the 1st place surely?

[Boozy]

Child porn is also a different issue, due to the consent aspect not being there.

Do you think some of the people who get there fix on child porn arn't also drawn to adult porn, it's the same business.

Also what about the women who are forced into the industry, some women do it by choice but by no means all of them are.

[Kentish]

Do you not think it has helped create an underground community with even stronger ties than before to supply the demand that is still there?
When was paedophilia ever 'overground'?
Child porn is also a different issue, due to the consent aspect not being there.
That's not in dispute. Although the consent issue has still not been answered to my satisfaction.

[wheresmyplacebo]

Do you think some of the people who get there fix on child porn arn't also drawn to adult porn, it's the same business.


your logic defies erm logic, some people who watch porn also watch child porn, that DOES NOT MEAN most people who watch porn are wrong, in fact id probably argue that the people into child porn were probably abused as children, or have some other serious issues in their life that cause them to like children

child porn is so wrong its unbelievable, and im happy for all people who are into that, to be erm dealt with as the law sees fit

people who watch regular hardcore porn, well it's consented to, and has informed consent as well, thus is perfectly fine, the issue surrounding censorshop is slightly different, as thats a bureaucratic issue, if a bbfc person can see every type of porn under the sun and still be 'normal' then i can watch consensual pornography of what i like to see, which if i was to do in my home would be legal, yet would be illegal for me to record with the women's consent and then put on the internet jsut to show people (if i was going to that is)

[klintock]

Also what about the women who are forced into the industry, some women do it by choice but by no means all of them are.

What about the people forced to work in an abbatoir or behind a desk? Or doing something else they don't like?

Do you think some of the people who get there fix on child porn arn't also drawn to adult porn, it's the same business.

At the production end, maybe that's the case. I don't know if it is or it isn't. Any evidence for this?

When was paedophilia ever 'overground'?

When you could just download it like you said i would consider it reasonably out in the open.

That's not in dispute. Although the consent issue has still not been answered to my satisfaction.

As things stand, many women are forced to work in "porn" or as waitresses or whatever for money. In effect economic prisoners. I don't see being forced to work in the porn industry as any different to working in any other.

[wheresmyplacebo]

That's not in dispute. Although the consent issue has still not been answered to my satisfaction.


mind if you repeat your consent point cause i cant find it, and ill try to answer it :)

[Kentish]

This 'violent porn' is just an extension of the major issue of the entire pornography industry: that is, why women (and men) make the choice to become involved in porn. I think it would be hard to deny that there is a link between poverty and the sex industry - people make their choice because of financial pressure rather than a true desire to become porn stars. So consent becomes much more complex and consumers of porn would not often consider this, whereas most would undoubtedly find simulated or actual rape videos to be repulsive.
And others have made the same point, much more elegantly.

[Boozy]

What about the people forced to work in an abbatoir or behind a desk? Or doing something else they don't like?


They are not generally raped or drugged before hand, there are lots of cases where women from african and East European countries have been abused like this as a way to persuade them to make porn.

[klintock]

They are not generally raped or drugged before hand, there are lots of cases where women from african and East European countries have been abused like this as a way to persuade them to make porn.

So, because some people have been abused to make porn, all porn is bad?

This is exactly what I have been saying. Consent is the issue here, and as you point out with your example when their is no consent you can easily see it's wrong.

All steps should be taken to make sure that it IS made by consent.

[Boozy]

So, because some people have been abused to make porn, all porn is bad?

This is exactly what I have been saying. Consent is the issue here, and as you point out with your example when their is no consent you can easily see it's wrong.

All steps should be taken to make sure that it IS made by consent.


No, my points are that the industry as a whole is a pretty nasty one, financed by pretty dodgy people.

How can you prove consent.

Two guys having a fight outside a pub, they both want to fight, they would willingly give consent to fight, but they will get arrested for fighting.

As far as I know you can't give concent to be abused sadomasochistically, in law if I put a hot iron on my wifes breasts, even if she asked me to, I could be charged with assult.

Women who go into the "sex industry" freely, generally would prefer to be able to get a good job in another area of work, what we need is for other opportunities to be available to them.

Guys who get them kicks off seeing girls being abused or humiliated are in my mind pretty dam sick, and are potentially more likely than "normal" guys to act out their fantisies i.e. rape and assult women.

[wheresmyplacebo]

No, my points are that the industry as a whole is a pretty nasty one, financed by pretty dodgy people.

How can you prove consent.

Two guys having a fight outside a pub, they both want to fight, they would willingly give consent to fight, but they will get arrested for fighting.

As far as I know you can't give concent to be abused sadomasochistically, in law if I put a hot iron on my wifes breasts, even if she asked me to, I could be charged with assult.

Women who go into the "sex industry" freely, generally would prefer to be able to get a good job in another area of work, what we need is for other opportunities to be available to them.

Guys who get them kicks off seeing girls being abused or humiliated are in my mind pretty dam sick, and are potentially more likely than "normal" guys to act out their fantisies i.e. rape and assult women.


what about gay porn then

or porn where its the men who are subs?

[klintock]

No, my points are that the industry as a whole is a pretty nasty one, financed by pretty dodgy people.

So are most industries, when you get down to it. It still doesn't mean anything or change my point in any case.

How can you prove consent.

Contract law, tort law?

Two guys having a fight outside a pub, they both want to fight, they would willingly give consent to fight, but they will get arrested for fighting.

The "law" is wrong, i quite agree.

As far as I know you can't give concent to be abused sadomasochistically, in law if I put a hot iron on my wifes breasts, even if she asked me to, I could be charged with assult.

No evidence, no case. I assume your wife wouldn't be testifying in such a case or course.

Women who go into the "sex industry" freely, generally would prefer to be able to get a good job in another area of work, what we need is for other opportunities to be available to them.

At the same $per hour as the sex industry? What about those who still prefer to go make porn?

Guys who get them kicks off seeing girls being abused or humiliated are in my mind pretty dam sick,

I quite agree. I have seen the other side of the fence though, and while I admit it's pretty rare, masochists and others who get off on humiliation do exist. If they consent, let the chips fall where they may.

and are potentially more likely than "normal" guys to act out their fantisies i.e. rape and assult women.

Potentially means nothing. Only actions count for anything.

[morrocan roll]

1 my points are that the industry as a whole is a pretty nasty one, financed by pretty dodgy people.


2Two guys having a fight outside a pub, they both want to fight, they would willingly give consent to fight, but they will get arrested for fighting.


3Women who go into the "sex industry" freely, generally would prefer to be able to get a good job in another area of work, what we need is for other opportunities to be available to them.

.
point one ...true.

point two ...usualy only one guy wants to fight ...thre other has little choice.

point three ...utter bollox!

[Boozy]

point one ...true.

point two ...usualy only one guy wants to fight ...thre other has little choice.

point three ...utter bollox!

Even if both guys put there signatures to a document saying they want to fight and hand it to a waiting police officer, it would make no difference, if punches are thrown they would both end up in police custody facing charges.


It's well documented that whether its prostitution or porn, most women who are in the business without cohersion are only in it because its good money, if theyu were offered the same money to do something else the vast majority with down condoms and dildo's faster than a guy watching hard core porn can cum.

Some women say it gives them power over men and say they enjoy it, but they are in a minority according to published research.

[Skive]

Good logic except if it's illegal to access this stuff, to buy it to hold the material, then your market will be very limited

Just like the drug market then?

[Boozy]

Just like the drug market then?

Not quiet the same, drugs are a physical commodity, where as the majority of hard core porn now is internet based.

You don't buy cocaine with your credit card, if you buy porn you do, there is an instant audit trail.

[Skive]

Not quiet the same, drugs are a physical commodity, where as the majority of hard core porn now is internet based.

Porn didn't exist before the internet then?

The point is prohibition only serves to push things underground. It happened with drugs, alcohol in the States, and it would happen to porn.

[Boozy]

Porn didn't exist before the internet then?

The point is prohibition only serves to push things underground. It happened with drugs, alcohol in the States, and it would happen to porn.

Of course it exsisted before the internet, but what did we have mucky mags and porn videos. It was a cottage industry then.

Now any 14 year old boy can get access to as much porn as he can jerk off to on the internet, and those who want more "specialised material", they know where to look and what groups give acces to the stuff they need.

The reason why prohibition didn't work was because a great many people thought it was an unjust law, people made a lot of money through the ilegal trade, a lot of people were brought off and a lot of law enforcement officers turned a blind eye to the illicit trade.

Your not going to get a large proportion of the population saying it's unjust to ban explicit porn, you wont get many enforcement officers brought off and there is no where near as much money involved as there was in the booze trade.

[Skive]

Of course it exsisted before the internet, but what did we have mucky mags and porn videos. It was a cottage industry then.

Now any 14 year old boy can get access to as much porn as he can jerk off to on the internet, and those who want more "specialised material", they know where to look and what groups give acces to the stuff they need.

I'm sorry but when I was a kid we were still able to get hold some pretty serious porn videos and I only live in the sticks.

[Boozy]

I'm sorry but when I was a kid we were still able to get hold some pretty serious porn videos and I only live in the sticks.

Well going to school in West London, all we ever saw was a soggy copy of hustler or similar.

[Teh_Gerbil]

I could get hold of Porn LONG before we got the net...

So I am guessing anyone can still do so, without the net.

[klintock]

Even if both guys put there signatures to a document saying they want to fight and hand it to a waiting police officer, it would make no difference, if punches are thrown they would both end up in police custody facing charges.

Yes. Stupid, isn't it? What the state is saying is that they have a higher claim on your life than you do. This is wrong.

It's well documented that whether its prostitution or porn, most women who are in the business without cohersion are only in it because its good money, if theyu were offered the same money to do something else the vast majority with down condoms and dildo's faster than a guy watching hard core porn can cum.

But that's true of a great many jobs. I happen to agree, forcing people to do things they normally wouldn't is wrong whichever method you use to get them to obey your whims. Be it force or fraud or threat of poverty. I don't see how this is different to any other job that some people like and others don't.

A blanket ban on porn would still get in the way for those people who do make it consensually and knowingly and for dare I say it, for fun.

Some women say it gives them power over men and say they enjoy it, but they are in a minority according to published research.

Ignore ir, most statisitics are fudged, and on an issue like this I would be amazed if it wasn't outright fabrication. And again we have this weird idea that women don't like sex for it's own sake. Where the hell did you get that idea from, I wonder?

[Boozy]

And again we have this weird idea that women don't like sex for it's own sake. Where the hell did you get that idea from, I wonder?

And women enjoy being raped as well.


I'm well aware that women have a huge sexual appetite, well as long as they don't have a headache at the time, but women working in porn and the sex industry generally, don't seem to like what they are doing.

I'm waiting for an interview with either a prostitute or porn star, who actualy says "I physically cum with a lot of my clients or with the guys onthe shoot".

[klintock]

And women enjoy being raped as well.

?

If they enjoy it and consent to it, it isn't rape, despite it's apparent violence.

I'm well aware that women have a huge sexual appetite, well as long as they don't have a headache at the time, but women working in porn and the sex industry generally, don't seem to like what they are doing.

I'm waiting for an interview with either a prostitute or porn star, who actualy says "I physically cum with a lot of my clients or with the guys onthe shoot".

So if a woman has an orgasm during a sex scene then it should be allowed? I don't follow your logic here I am afraid.

[Kermit]

Keeping these things in the open is the way to make sure that the women who partake in the pornography are protected. This is something else that is well understood by those who help sex industry workers, which is why they are campaigning for "green light" districts where prostitutes can work safely without getting arrested. The same principle applies to both.

Just as in the drugs industry, prohibition does nothing. All it does is endanger those who work in the industry even more, and cause widescale gangland conflict between different suppliers.

My understanding is that most of this violent pornography is simulated anyway.

The only issue is consent, especially given Jim V's comments about Linda Lovelace. But a lot of people do consent to partaking in pornography or prostitution- tempted by the wages quite often, especially with "escorts"- and this consent should be respected, regardless of why it is given. Economic coercion isn't enough to negate consent, as few of us do our jobs for the love of it.

All this has come about because one psychopath decided to rape and strangle a woman, and happened to have viewed violent porn in the past. It's not like men haven't raped and strangled women since forever, is it? It has nothing to do with protecting the women in the porn industry, and has everything to do with New Labour trying to score cheap tabloid points whilst burying a load of bad news.

FYI, Operation Ore hasn't worked either. All it does is catch the odd dirty old man, the people who absue the children and make money from the abuse don't get caught. Most serious paedophiles wouldn't go anywhere near a pay website or Kazaa, and so wouldn't get caught anyway.

[wheresmyplacebo]

FYI, Operation Ore hasn't worked either. All it does is catch the odd dirty old man, the people who absue the children and make money from the abuse don't get caught. Most serious paedophiles wouldn't go anywhere near a pay website or Kazaa, and so wouldn't get caught anyway.


actually true as well - most child abusers are family members not dirty old strange men in parks


and as you said lots of jobs are unethical, investment banking for one, i would never do it, whilst i know plenty of people who would do it cause it pays well

[Namaste]

The psycho who killed that woman... If violent pornography had not existed he could still have the intention and copy something from a horror film, or a story. The problem with this society is that we don't take responsibility for our own actions and we won't admit that there are things wrong with the way things work... Instead we look for scapegoats such as media icons or videogames.

I agree with Kermit that pushing the industry underground wouls only lead to worse working conditions for women and I am all for the legalisation of prostitution if the brothels were maintained, the women's rights not taken away and if there was regular testing of both clients and women/men. It's the same with pornography, yet sadly there's a taboo on sex.

I actually know somebody who works in pornography and she earns herself quite a bit in wages, it's easy to see why women go in to it.

[Iknowyourmum]

Two guys having a fight outside a pub, they both want to fight, they would willingly give consent to fight, but they will get arrested for fighting.

They wouldnt be arrested for assult, just for breatching the peace, wouldnt they.
I know you can arragne a fight with two guys and sell tickets under rules of boxing if the gloves are 6 oz or more,
If you give your consent to a fight its not assult, If I go to a karate class and ask to spa I cant comlain if I get hit to the police can I ?

[wheresmyplacebo]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4198302.stm

slightly biased with very selective language i noticed, with words like 'depraved' to be fitted in without describing what is 'violent pornography'

i have the urge to start singing soad's song
It's a violent pornography!
Choking chicks and SODOMY!
The kinda shit you get on your TV!

Everybody, everybody, everybody livin' now.
Everybody, everybody, everybody sucks.
Everybody, everybody, everybody livin' now.
Everybody, everybody, everybody fucks.

Everybody, everybody, everybody livin' now.
Everybody, everybody, everybody dies.
Everybody, everybody, everybody livin' now.
Everybody, everybody, everybody cries.

It's a non-stop disco
Bet you it's Nabisco,
Bet you didn't know.


ps - MMORPGs are far worse for RL social interaction anyday - "im on the world of warcraft forums waiting for them to pur the server back on after some downtime "

[Kermit]

They wouldnt be arrested for assult, just for breatching the peace, wouldnt they.

Depends on what they did, really.

I'd expect them to be done under a section four affray, really. Especially if its a big street brawl.

[Skive]

I'd expect them to be done under a section four affray, really. Especially if its a big street brawl.

Fighting is a public order offence and they could be found guilty of Affray or Violent Dissorer etc - but unless somebody pressed charges they wouldn't have to worry about being charged with Assault or GBH etc

[satehen]

Slightly relevent has anyone heard that song by System Of A Down- violent pornography? Find the lyrics here: http://www.songmeanings.net/lyric.php?lid=3530822107858542723

Personally i think its shit though and i agree violent pornography should be banned. I believe it incites people to rape.

[girl with sharp teeth]

.

[Iknowyourmum]

If its "rape pornography" than that might make people who are turned on by that sort of thing, more inclined,,

But I d never say it causes rape,

[girl with sharp teeth]

.

[Iknowyourmum]

If you were turned on by womens shoes, would you suddenly start sniffing every shoe you see after watching shoe porn? Would you not be able to control yourself?

It might make me more likely to try the odd sniff occasionaly such as pretending to tie my laces on the train ( a technique I currently use for filming up skirt) (only joking) (Iv got a shoe camera)

It would probablt make me think about it more, so that alone would infulence actions