UK Government to 'Ban' Porn
 

http://rt.com/news/cameron-pornography-uk-ban-416/

The Daily Mail of course has championed this...so, Draconian Laws 1 - Liberty 0?

When are conservative governments going to realise prohibition of anything doesn't really work?

Just to give everything the tl;dr version:

+ People will have to ask their ISP's to unblock porn sites
+ Porn links will be taken of Google
+ Rape videos are going to be illegal to watch...so I'm supposing that means there's going to be some degree of snooping going on?

I kinda feel like most importantly, porn is really hard to classify...when does nudity become pornography and how the hell does the government expect to regulate this?

e: I agree that blocking child porn and actual rape is a damn good thing, I just wanted to clarify that.

STM makes the first point that jumped into my head when I heard about this. How do you define porn? I'm sure everybody has their own idea of what pornography is, and that alone indicates so clearly to me that this is a following a slippery slope which will lead to further censorship of different types of "undesirable" information (also bear in mind this is the same government who closed a plethora of libraries - perhaps the only place any regular person can go and educate him/herself and made a good education much less accessible to an average proletarian). I personally find the entire affair deeply disturbing (and there is some sickening bias in the media - the first report I saw actually made the focus an abused dead child and put emphasis on the child pornography aspect - the first report I read which focused on the actions of the Government was on the Independent website) and strongly fear for how easily an ordinary person (especially one unable to afford a university education) is going to be able to access whatever information he/she likes.

And the true intent of these actions is made even more clear to me when I hear the argument (from Cameron, the ratbag serpent himself) "pornography is corroding childhood" (which alone insults parents across the country, as it suggests that they are unfit have responsibility over their own childen. Also, another argument could be that it apparently absolves parents of responsibility over their children). Clearly, the government wants an excuse to regulate the information people consume, and (as with the war on terror) want an excuse to more closely monitor people's behaviour, which they attempt to achieve by placing the words "child" and "pornography" in the same sentence to elicit a strong reaction from the less intellectually endowed individuals and reactionary among us who are unable to see the wider implications and the kind of repression this kind of thing is inevitably going to lead to.

And it's people like the conservatives who condemn socialism and people like Fidel Castro, trying to paint a picture of censorship and suppression. This is not the amusing kind of irony (and bear in mind that the conservative paper Daily Mail was supportive of Hitler until the prevailing consensus was that he was a bad man - I don't like to drag the nazzies into my arguments, but fact of the matter is that the attitudes the conservatives have are the foundation for more extreme measures against ordinary working people).

EDIT: Shit! Tirade over.

I couldn't giveany less shits about politics, but the porn?
We'll be able to use proxies to get it, though... Right?

That will be such an awkward phone conversation...

I was reading the headlines about this earlier today, it was funny to read about.

It's a slippery slope. Since most porn on the internet is user-generated content and not made by the porn industry, where would it stop? Would we have to opt in for "porn access" so that we could also still access social media sites or anywhere that allows user-generated content, even if we had no intention of searching for porn?

Yay for politicians who don't know the first thing about how the internet works - Sounds like a lousy excuse for another attempt at censorship. I mean Cameron doesn't want to ban the porn on Page 3 of The Sun (national newspaper), believing it "should be up to consumers whether to buy The Sun" or not, yet he wants the 'net censored... That speaks for itself. Talk about double standards.

Fortunately what Cameron wants is impossible without curbing free speech and breaking the internet in a way that pisses the majority of the population off (see the comments to the articles about this on various news sites - People are VERY aware of the shenanigans), and that votes are important to them, so they'll probably U-turn on this like they've done on alcohol pricing and other stuff.

As a side note, I'm all for banning child pornography, but if they were serious about doing that then they'd chase down and prosecute the paedophiles who were uploading this shit on the internet and curb this crap at the source, rather than attempting to blanket ban everything that the government deem "questionable" in ways which won't actually stop the paedophiles or change a damned thing except further inconvenience people who already obey the law. Using this as an excuse for internet censorship is insulting to those who have been harmed by child abuse.

Yet another example of our government's incompetence. How depressing.

Well if MM's article is right maybe it won't be a problem...

e: DH you not so speedy shit.

Porn is great. I've enjoyed every one I've made.

Me too!
E: You see, it's funny because...

God damn you for reminding me of the existence of these.

I'm surprized they haven't banned sex yet.

Nothing should ever be blocked because a government says it should be. I don't care if it's a child porn site or a terrorist website recruiting people or a serial rapist sharing pictures of his victims. The moment you place that kind of power with the government there is no stopping it.

Besides, anyone who knows anything about the internet would know that the majority of high risk stuff, such as child pornography, is located in places where it can't be blocked or traced to begin with. The only thing ISP's are going to do is ban certain site addresses. Which is cute, but won't do jack shit. It certainly won't make a dent in any form of illegal activity. It only regulates what the general public is allowed to view. Which damn scary.

Maybe you should tell that to the prime minister.

The only answer for them is to make ISPs use a whitelist system.

It will happen one day. I promise.

If this thing happens it's going to make it incredibly awkward for a lot of people who wish to view porn. If you still live with your parents or live at home part-time then you're not exactly going to go up to your parents and be like "can you unblock the porn please?" Also university accommodation.

Exactly, but luckily it's unlikely it will happen.

Except as I was saying earlier, and as OddjobAbe is saying, how do you define porn? Especially since it's so clumped together with other things. It's the nature of the internet.

Many ordinary and popular sites would also probably fall under the "porn" category because they allow the upload of user-generated content. Yeah most of them have rules which state you aren't allowed to upload anything "explicit" but many of them rely on users to do their content screening for them. And this is just one problem in a myriad of them with the government's proposals.

Considering the amount of porn on sites like facebook and tumblr, it makes me worry to think of what would happen to those sites if this thing happened.

why is Cameron being a stupid fucking bell end again? why is our shitty joke of a government embarrassing itself like the archaic, dumb decrepit cunts they are, again? why haven't i shot myself through the face yet due to such unfathomable, almost comedic, ignoramus goddamn fucking bullshit?

WHY? seriously. i give up. how ridiculous.

i am no longer British. i now come from my own country called Not Moronicland. population: 6 billion if you include the ants.

my good god.

EDIT: on a related note, has anyone ever seen that series In The Thick Of It? bunch of politicians making dumb decisions trying to further their own prerogatives, it's kinda funny. this shit is identical to it. actually, they may well have written an episode where they tried to ban porn, i'm not sure. if so i'd piss myself laughing at the sheer lunacy of it all. British government being akin to a fucking comedy show. sounds about right.

You just gave up on Britain now? I gave up on it way back when The Only Way Is Essex won all those awards.

i was a kid when they suddenly legalized/declassified weed. i was a kid when they reillegalized it a few weeks later, give or take. my brain jumped out the back of my head with a suitcase and parachute that day. since then i've been driven only by a will to bomb those mothers. kind of like Guy Fawkes, only i'm not made of straw.

MA, when the government is all but telling you that they watch what you do on the Internet, talking about bombing them may not be the smartest thing you do today. Just saying.


Isn't it true, though, that the person who has to watch all the porn to decide what is obscene and what is permissible is the person most likely to become debauched?

If they ban porn...aren't rape cases going to go up any way because of all the pent up teens? =o

I also want to start up a new country, MA. No fucking political parties though, you just elect individuals to positions. Also the government can do jack shit to influence other people's lives over personal matters like this. Oh and I fucking love In the Thick of It. I just assume that's how UKgov 'works'.

The Thick of It's more tragedy than comedy, for the same reasons it's funny. It's so on the mark it's scary.

And they always pull this sort of shit when there's something else to distract the general public (this time around, it's that spawn of them there rich people, when it was in the news about the money-fiddling tory MP in 2010 (I think), they whipped out that wedding thing. I swear I'm becoming more and more anti-monarchy. A real-life soap drama to distract from real-life problems).

i know, right? but i don't mean it literally. it's a fucked up expression.

but the reason why i make inflammatry remarks about the circus of clowns running the country is simply because they've put us in a position where retaliation seems like suicide and moral is in the gutter, that's aside from all the other shit they've fucked up like the great, bumbling fannies they are. in short: they fucking started it.

if they say i can't pass comment on the horseshit they produce then that's just gonna make me scream it even louder. i show nothing but total defiance towards anything that infringes or makes a mockery of human rights. that's what i was taught.

also viva la revolution and all other associated bollocks. i don't know. i'm a rebel without a cause, i think.

Actually yes. A research paper I read yesterday leaned heavily in that direction.

Seriously? No porn = rape? You don't HAVE to watch porn to jerk off you know.

Well it's not exactly a clear cut thing, but visual and audio stimuli definitely makes for a better release.

Seriously?! Can you please send me a link to that?

Yeah, I get that much. But I can't picture a teenager going "Oh my orgasms just haven't been the same since they banned porn. Think I'll go rape someone...". That's going a bit extreme. Individuals who escalate to raping someone would have gone there with porn or without. In fact, I think those rape simulation videos would only encourage them instead of keep them contained. But that doesn't mean they should get banned.