Forums / Discussion / General

BBC

Thoughts?

"Good Luck"
- General Pepper

the whole point was mainly aiming at child pornography and preventing children from accessing it, but we all know that if someone wants to get something, they're going to get it.

That's outrageous! It does nothing to "protect the children".

Could anyone who has grown up viewing porn tell how it has negatively affected their childhood or subsequent years?

Yep, I know this. They have talked about this almost non-stop on the radio and I have to say this really just proves even further that David Cameron and the government in general are crap; "Oh no, there are terrible things happening on the internet like child porn and that leads to child abuse and whatnot so to fix the problem as we have no idea about the dark depths of the internet e.t.c. we are going to ban porn completely to fix the problem!"

I'm just surprised that this has happened, as I once wondered if it ever would and yet it was the last thing I thought would happen on the internet thanks to the government.

All I can say is it isn't as bad as SOPA and PIPA and all that… They were hundreds times worse IMO…

Although, I have to say if they were going to block it all, doing so by default is probably the fairest option.

"And how, in the darkest corners of the internet, there are things going on that are a direct danger to our children, and that must be stamped out."

Lol, Cameron doesn't even know the correct terms.

You know what I think. That taboo on porn is a relict from bygone eras with no real practical purpose. Remember how masturbation was demonized during middle ages?

You think taking away our porn will stop us?? We'll just go straight to the source, mwahahaha!

Humongous overreaction if I ever saw one.

1. If parents are doing their job right then no child whatsoever is going to porn sites of any kind.
2. Guy looking at those porn sites and the hosts of said porn sites do not and should not bear the responsibility of parents
3. Even if kids are finding porn sites, there's currently no evidence that it actually destroys their well being, future and "innocence"

Case in point: I remember when I was a toddler, my mother let me follow her into the womens changing rooms at swimming pools. There I saw gratuitous amounts of female sexual organs…at age 2. But I didn't know what I was looking at so nobody cared. To this date, I can confirm that I had quite a childhood with no ill effects stemming from that. Later they put me through sex education at age 11. Still not ruined.

4. Has anyone ever seen what happens if a kid sees a sex scene? They'll wonder what it is at first and later they'll think it's gross. But they don't exactly curl up and die. They'll forget it the next morning. There's no need to act as though porn is going to murder them unless it's stopped. Shouldn't we be more worried about teens taking drugs?
5. This will have absolutely no impact whatsoever on accessibility of porn. It will get through regardless. No government is above the porn industry and the sheer human determination to find porn. This is a waste of resources

And I haven't even touched upon the subject of child porn, which I think this ruling is supposed to crack down on. The reason I haven't done that is because this does not resolve the problem of child porn at all! All this does is bring the 5% chance of your kid finding porn on the internet down to about 4% while wasting everyone else's time. But it won't help those exploited children still out there because illegal child porn will continue going under the black market no matter what happens to legit porn. Saving exploited children requires a different method: going after the source. Attacking that which appears on the surface will only scratch just that

Isn't most of the child pornography circulated offline?

But seriously, this is a very slippery slope. I mean, blocking child porn and rape porn is one thing, but all porn? Soon, it might be all "amoral content", followed by all content that the government disagrees with. I know it sounds like I'm a conspiracy theorist, but it can happen, and has happened. Government censorship is nothing to trifle with.

As soon as they started discussing doing more about tackling child porn I was suspicious. Now they shifted the focus from child porn to porn.
I wonder what else they will block, torrent sites? KYM has some NSFW content, will it be blocked too? This is very very very worrying. Default censorship is a bad idea, when most browsers, operating systems and ISP's already provide parental blocking tools. Workplaces have them and schools have them.

Although I do not know what other types of censorship this will lead up to (As I myself believe the Internet should be free and open for all types of people within lawful bounds), but I think that if this makes the Internet a better place for everyone, then I am okay with it.

Besides, nobody uses their imaginations anymore…

Trying to filter child abuse and rape is a noble intention, certainly, but this initiative is not at all confined to that. Indeed, there are already measures in place to deal with child pornography. But I agree with many others in that blocking all porn is a step too far. There are already plenty of options to censor pornography should you wish to do so, without the government doing it for us. And yes, I believe it could lead to bigger problems, since the government would have an opening to block many other things that they deem offensive.

The bad guys will still find ways around such filters and I've already had enough of big brother breathing down my neck. So who wins here, exactly?

I think it's cool. I'm a Forever Alone but when I was on a Nofap run, I was a fucking player.

Examples, please.

And this whole "The parents should be responsible for their kids" is bull too.

What exactly are you gonna do when you have a 15 year old son of 1st generation Nigerian immigrants living in Tower Hamlets on the 8th floor of the crummiest council estate tower block in the area, with no dad to be seen and a mum that cares fuck all for her kid.

What exactly are you gonna do when he's stuck in a crap comprehensive with gang pushers up the wazoo, overstretched teachers, and a police force that's more likely to arrest the kid on sight than help in a crime.

Tell him it's his parents fault?
To say that a childs upbringing is down to the parents forget why the British welfare state was established and expanded upon in the first place, because there has to be some kind of safety net for people when the resources around them fail.

The only thing it came to my mind:

Also, it seems that Cameron doesn't know how Internet works…

The whole shindigs been in the news lately, the girls themselves are either name changed or Anoned.
Unfortunately my best source is the Times, which has decided it's a great idea to make there whole articles on a payed basis.
Will be looking for more of those sources elsewhere tho'

"shit for brained BFs" And bad parenting is where the problem lies, not porn.

You only have to look at cases such as James Bulger to see that even without the internet horrible people will do horrible things.

The funny thing is that children have been "playing doctor" long before Internet pornography. So much about "protecting the childhood".

Well, if its to protect children, then it must be a good idea. After all, no one every harmed or exploited a child before Al Gore invented the internet, right?

But the internet does unfortunately make things a hella lot easier

Making it harder for teenage toys to access hardcore porn helps, but I struggle to find a proper stopping measure without a whole societal upheaval.

Take sex-ed for instance, say you have 30 or so girls in a classroom, and they're talked to by this 40 year old woman about the usual, and includes stuff like what goes in a relationship, and what . Half may listen on account of the second part, because they know there'd be repercussions for them otherwise.
Boys on the other hand, you have 30 or so boys there being taught the same thing by a 40 year old man, and they may just forget it, I don't know why, but they'll think themselves above it all because doing so is manly and cool and yadda fucking yadda.

Hi my names Hugo and I don't know how to format

Hugo, your conclusions seem to stem entirely from wild speculation and anecdote. Lets talk facts & stats before stating anything positively, ok?

Ok, so it's not banning porn outright, but why does there need to be a mandate that one must request their ISP for access to porn?

How does it solve the problem anyway? Why not just throttle access to known CP sites?

I think they do know about CP requiring .tor and such, it's just that the news doesn't cover it lest it encourages prospective paedos to find it and get jiggy with the Tor servers and whatnot.
Same principle as to how the Evening Standard (London-wide evening freesheet) doesn't write about people deciding to "one under" at Tube stations when a train approaches. It tries to not inadvertently encourage it.

The less coverage the press does, the less ideas the people get.

Oh God that actually sounds terrifying and 1984ish in my head

The problem is is that my knowledge comes from The Times; which has done the most coverage on the subject with all the interviews and stats etc etc.
Unfortunately that was all print from 3 weeks back, and to get it online I have to PAY for it.
So fuck
I can't contribute
I blame Murdoch

You can't blame Rupert Murdoch for all of your problems in life. Most, yes, but you still have to accept responsibility for the handful that he didn't directly cause.

That's ok Hugo cause I have facts from a primary source, my psychology professor who was an expert in human sexuality (a bit more trained than your average Times writer). She told us that studies show that places with easier access to porn have lower rates of sexual crimes. The theory goes that people who are get off on porn are less likely to act out on their desires. Everyone is into porn. Its like a fact. Blocking it won't do much other than sexually frustrate hormonal kids who are still fully capable of having unprotected sex now that their porn outlet is gone

Well, sucks to be a teenager in England

… This topic just makes me want to fap.

… You know, to celebrate my freedoms as an American.

… Yeah.

I expect them to be rich enough to buy a golden yacht in, i dunno, a hour tops.

These folks can. Obviously not representative of everyone, but you wanted an example.

That's not how you spell New Zealand.

I SAY!

Exactly what I was thinking! How awkward could that be?

@BSoD's first post

Yeah, just saying, but are you certain of that as gospel? This is the UK you're talking about. Not forgetting the government is terrible anyway (the tories in particular, surely…) and-

Well… whatever. I'm being a bit harsh as after all, you have a very good point. For example, you present the point (that I made too) of how banning porn completely won't really do much and technically will be a generic inconvenience to whomever uses it. Besides, there is probably no good evidence to support David Cameron's actions towards this, BUT I must mention that my first sentence is the argument there: Britain is a confusing place to the government… they have no idea how we live really, they haven't experienced life in a lower class than theirs, and therefore I wonder if they even know how many children have their childhoods destroyed with porn…

Then again, maybe he's referring to those children involved in the child porn? Even then it isn't a good excuse…

Meh, whatever, it's 12am here now and I'm just spouting my opinion when I should be in bed. :I

That’s outrageous! It does nothing to “protect the children”.
Could anyone who has grown up viewing porn tell how it has negatively affected their childhood or subsequent years?

Errr, yes. Certainly, actually. It's been posted earlier in this thread.

So I'm guessing this came on TV

And some British politicians were all

And then decided to try to ban all porn.

What are politicians going to try next? Ban computers to try to stop online gambling- oh wait…

excuse the comparison but is not the same deal as with weapons in the US? i mean a thief will never get a weapon legally so why would a pedo be buying cp with a real name and such? also and separating this from the weapon's example, most PCs and Browsers, let alone internet providers allows you to block pron and nsfw websites, isn't more responsibility of the owner of the pc to watch over this kind of things?

moral groups complain that their families are exposed to the worst of the world and want the government to do something, the ones in the government have raisins for brains so they just do what they think it will work causing only more people to complain against measures and the right of their liberty, not to mention the implications of their measures, pron is not only sites with ".xxx" or ".pron", even browsing through the galleries of KYM you can find porn, Blogs and sites and stuff everything can contain porn so the only thing these measures do is affecting legally established (perhaps?) industries and sites while doing truly nothing.

I have a problem with them censoring anything on the internet, so I find this a horrible overreach of censorship power. The only thing good is that the filter can still be turned off.

The thing that troubles me the most is this:

Mr Cameron also called for some horrific internet search terms to be blacklisted, meaning they would automatically bring up no results on websites such as Google or Bing.
…he hinted that if search engines like Google didn't agree to a blacklist of search terms, he would legislate.

That's what China does, that's what dictatorships do, not democratic countries.

It's funny because the UK thinks it can control the internet.

>tfw you live in the land of the free
>tfw nobody's gonna block your porn

>tfw somebody's always going to be monitoring you accessing it

I feel sorry for future generations in the UK. Living in a world without pornography.

Jfc, can we get an NSFW warning button before we click the button?

Oh come on, we all know that British porn is the Queen waving with her glove off.

Living in a county without pornography. Big difference.

Here is few things to think about with all this

1. The British (and most of the world) don't have the same stigma on nudity that they have in the US. So when they say "porn" they may be thinking ACTUAL PORN and not just nudity. But it's whatever they deem to be porn and they are "doing it for the children" so it could be anything.

2. They can deem whatever they feel as porn. So that can include searches for hentai, loli, tentacle rape, etc. but also the filters may bleed into other perfectly safe areas of anime. Take Sailor Moon as example there are panty shots and sorta nude silhouettes of a schoolgirl so could be banned for that.

3. Pedos have to know some serious hacking skills to do things online. They have to do more than just proxies to keep themselves safe from the law. You can't find real hardcore child porn on the web that you and I search. This Porn Ban will do nothing to stop CP, curb CP, or even catch anyone distributing CP. Even for the pedos that don't have hacker skill there is still plenty of ways to fap to kids on the internet legally. Do a google image search on kids swimwear and tell me a pedo can't or won't fap to that and that will not be a banned search filter.