Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New Internet Porn Legislation in UK

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    New Internet Porn Legislation in UK

    Campaigners label bill targeted at online pornography a ‘prurient’ intervention that will take Britain’s censorship regime back to pre-internet era


    See link above:

    "Web users in the UK will be banned from accessing websites portraying a range of non-conventional sexual acts, under a little discussed clause to a government bill currently going through parliament.

    The proposal, part of the digital economy bill, would force internet service providers to block sites hosting content that would not be certified for commercial DVD sale by the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC).

    It is contained within provisions of the bill designed to enforce strict age verification checks to stop children accessing adult websites. After pressure from MPs, the culture secretary, Karen Bradley, announced on Saturday that the government would amend the bill to include powers to block non-compliant websites.

    In order to comply with the censorship rules, many mainstream adult websites would have to render whole sections inaccessible to UK audiences. That is despite the acts shown being legal for consenting over-16s to perform and for adults in almost all other liberal countries to film, distribute and watch.


    Free speech campaigners labelled the move a “prurient” invasion into people’s sexual lives. “It should not be the business of government to regulate what kinds of consensual adult sex can be viewed by adults,” said Jodie Ginsberg, chief executive of Index on Censorship.
    Pictures and videos that show spanking, whipping or caning that leaves marks, and sex acts involving urination, female ejaculation or menstruation as well as sex in public are likely to be caught by the ban – in effect turning back the clock on Britain’s censorship regime to the pre-internet era."

    Very worrying indeed-does this mean that UK members will not be able to access Abbeywinters!!!!!

    #2
    Originally posted by georgexxx20 View Post
    Very worrying indeed-does this mean that UK members will not be able to access Abbeywinters!!!!!
    No, only parts of it IF this law is indeed passed AND enforced to any degree

    It's somewhat amusing to read the BBFC wanting to control things outside the country, reminds me of the ACME (or ACMA?) in Australia. It must be frustrating to them to lose control over what their citizens can access, heh.

    Does make me wonder how many UK members AW has??

    Comment


      #3
      It makes me deeply sad. I am very proud to be British but such backwards thinking saddens me.

      It is too easy for people to blame others and for the state to block and target things that do not meet with the 'mainstream norm' to placate voters, when all that is really needed, is for families to engage with their children about what is a healthy sexual relationship and what is not.

      Do I think this law will change anything - not really. I do not consider myself good on a computer but even I know how to set up a proxy internet link that makes it appear my computer is not in the UK. The content will still be made and will still be viewed, the only thing this law is doing is pushing everything underground. Underground is a very worrying place for things to be. When industry is forced underground criminals get involved. When things like this become criminal, you are making perfectly normal functioning members of society criminals. When things are underground, if things go wrong, performers have no where to go to get help. I would argue that the more extreme ends of the industry are the ones that need the most regulation and this law is failing everybody and potentially putting people at risk.

      The thing that makes all this really 'funny' is that we as a nation go around sticking our nose in to other countries and telling them how their practices are breaching basic human rights.

      Think of the next generation. In the UK I hope we are reaching a point where it is no longer so hard to be gay (as an example). I am not saying it is easy and I am not saying I understand what it is like but it is a lot easier than it was, people are no longer vilified for their sexual preferences and their lives no longer forced into the shadows. When I was 15 I discovered my sexual imagination and that sexual imagination happens to involve elements of spanking and power play. How would my 15 year old self have coped with knowing the things that caused reactions in my body, were sick and wrong. Does that make me sick and wrong?

      If all people are of an age and mental level to legally consent, if no one is hurt to the point of significant long term damage, then I see no harm. This is only my personal view of course but for me it seems logical.

      Finally I was just listening to a BBC radio 4 show on the need for 'safe spaces' in unis and the rights to block speakers at unis if they are speaking about controversial topics that might offend. One of the speakers made this point 'Why on the one hand do we need to shield young adults from the more complex and unpleasant ideas of life in the class room, when they are going home to watch shows like the Wire when they get home?' Why is it one rule for one situation and another at home. This in itself is a huge simplification of the debate but seemed relevant. Or how about this. Whatever your view on smoking weed, it looks probable that the home use for adults will be widely legal in America over the next 10 years, taking 1000(possible more?) other wise normal people who as of right now are criminal and will take huge pressures off over crowded prisons etc. Gay marriage, freedom to live in the sexuality you identify with, trust from your state to manage your won recreational activities at home - if these things are progress what message are we sending by telling people which legal sexual practices they are allowed to watch performers do on camera?

      Pornography is not bad, it is not good, it is not evil it is just a description of work that has naked people in it for the sexual pleasure of the viewer. Guns do not kill people people kill people (with guns). Pornography is not the problem on its own, as with all things it is problems within society that create the issues that surround porn, it is just much easier to simplify things down and play the blame game.

      How anyone could not see the hard work that goes into abbywinters as a safe and ethical place for people to explore the freedom of knowing ones own sexuality is quite beyond me.

      Or so I think.
      Last edited by masie; 27 November 2016, 03:06 PM.

      Comment


        #4
        Very well said, Masie. Legislation like this is so transparently absurd that I can't believe it would even be introduced (don't U.K. politicians have more pressing issues to be addressing given recent events?). The idea that someone in the government would be responsible for watching porn to see if it contains "prurient" images that the common people should not be allowed to see would be laughable if didn't have the potential to harm AW and send the kind of hurtful messages you mention about what are "acceptable" sexual practices in the eyes of the government. The list of things being considered for banning is truly bizarre: who could possibly be the harm of seeing female ejaculation, which we know from AW is just the way some women's bodies react to pleasure? In a perfect world, it would never be a question that consulting adults should be able to do whatever they want on camera for the pleasure of viewers.

        Here's hoping this silliness falls by the wayside and that one day Abby Winters is recognized as just what you describe, "a safe and ethical place for people to explore the freedom of knowing ones own sexuality," which should be celebrated, not punished. Thanks for all you do and for your eloquence on this issue, Masie.

        Comment


          #5
          I'm in favour of free speech but I also find the way porn is going where every site is trying to "Out Extreme" the competition is leading to more and more pure crap. It's not erotic anymore and is more likely to elicit the gag response than any sexual arousal. Even AbbyWinters is going this way. AbbyWinters always had a variety of stuff in the past so there was something for every taste. But whereas it used to be 80/20 of good stuff vs extreme puke elicitation, it's reversing that ratio and its hard to find any good stuff anymore. Call me old fashioned but I just don't get the fascination of trying to stick the camera lens inside of an orifice. I just clicked on a video of a model I hadn't seen yet and it opened with a screen filling close-up of her shit hole spread wide by her fingers. It's enough to make a steel dildo turn soft. I hadn't been here in a while and I always liked the fresh amateurs who showed all but did it in a way that was erotic. Since re-subscribing, I can find very few of these, but instead more and more videos that seem designed more for shock appeal than eroticism.

          So if this new law encourages AbbyWinters to drop the crap and bring back the good stuff then I may just forget about my philosophical passion for free speech as it applies here.

          Comment


            #6
            I don’t think AW is any more explicit now than in the old days, e.g. when it was based in Australia. What makes AW unique is the slow time taken (the build-up-foreplay) in the videos leading to the rude stuff. This is like when you have sex-when non-aroused the thought of putting your mouth on a vagina or a penis or an arsehole might seem a bit disgusting but when fully charged up it’s the most beautiful thing in the world! When I watch the girl-girl or girl-boy I’m masturbating and I like to fantasize that I’m there for real, so the intimate explicitness is a turn-on and adds to my viewing pleasures. With the solo I usually end up wanking but not always. I like explicitness in these videos (I like watching a woman have a pee for instance because it’s slightly taboo and a bit naughty) especially an AW model pleasuring herself with a dildo/vibrator and the depiction of actual orgasms. But ‘soft-core’ is just as good, if not better sometimes in the solos.

            Basically it’s not the explicitness that’s wrong, it’s how it’s integrated into the whole thing and the skill, artistry and ethos behind it. All things that AW does brilliantly.

            As for this stupid up-coming legislation it will not stop the crap misogynist porn biz but affect those completely consenting adults with niche sexual tastes i.e. those who like spanking, power play or water sports. A porn stud with an oversized cock can spunk all over a woman’s face while calling her a bitch or a slut or give serious anal damage to an over-worked porn starlet (and this is considered normal sex in mainstream porno-land) but female ejaculation is a no-no. Masie was spot on when she says the main danger of this type of legislation is that it makes those teenagers with different sexual feelings feel guilty and dirty. Don’t forget homosexuality was still considered a perversion by most people in the seventies and when my parents were born (the 1920’s and 30’s) even oral sex and sex outside marriage.

            Comment

            Subscribe to our e-mail newsletter

             
            Sign up for the abby newsletter. Don't worry, we'll NEVER share your email address with anyone.
            Working...
            X