|
|
|
On July 23 2013 21:48 i zig zag around you wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2013 21:46 Aeroplaneoverthesea wrote:On July 23 2013 21:45 i zig zag around you wrote:On July 23 2013 21:41 hzflank wrote:
The thing that bothers me about this is that simulated rape porn will be illegal. Who decides what is simulated rape and what is not? If a guy handcuffs his wife and films it, is that simulated rape porn?
The other problem is that it is too easy to get around ISP filtering anyway. Things like child porn are already blocked by British ISPs. Pedophiles do not just start Chrome and watch child porn on Youtube, which is what the filtering would block. ...wat? What exactly don't you understand? i don't know what to think. apparently some people can't tell what rape is.
I'd say that a lot if not most bdsm porn is essentially showing rape, it's just not the classic man attacks woman in a park/alley/car park depiction of rape.
|
On July 23 2013 21:49 hzflank wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2013 21:45 i zig zag around you wrote:On July 23 2013 21:41 hzflank wrote:
The thing that bothers me about this is that simulated rape porn will be illegal. Who decides what is simulated rape and what is not? If a guy handcuffs his wife and films it, is that simulated rape porn?
The other problem is that it is too easy to get around ISP filtering anyway. Things like child porn are already blocked by British ISPs. Pedophiles do not just start Chrome and watch child porn on Youtube, which is what the filtering would block. *edited* if post is serious, then i don't know what to say. Why? It is not about whether I like to watch that sort of thing (I don't). It;s about me not wanting to accidentally possess material that could lead to me becoming a convicted sex offender.
does watching "simulated rape porn" make you a sex offender in england if this law passes through?
|
On July 23 2013 21:51 i zig zag around you wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2013 21:49 hzflank wrote:On July 23 2013 21:45 i zig zag around you wrote:On July 23 2013 21:41 hzflank wrote:
The thing that bothers me about this is that simulated rape porn will be illegal. Who decides what is simulated rape and what is not? If a guy handcuffs his wife and films it, is that simulated rape porn?
The other problem is that it is too easy to get around ISP filtering anyway. Things like child porn are already blocked by British ISPs. Pedophiles do not just start Chrome and watch child porn on Youtube, which is what the filtering would block. *edited* if post is serious, then i don't know what to say. Why? It is not about whether I like to watch that sort of thing (I don't). It;s about me not wanting to accidentally possess material that could lead to me becoming a convicted sex offender. does watching "simulated rape porn" make you a sex offender in england if this law passes through?
I presume so as they're now grouping simulated rape porn and child porn into the same category.
|
as long as its opt out then I guess i dont see the problem.
should be opt in imo though.
|
On July 23 2013 21:52 Aeroplaneoverthesea wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2013 21:51 i zig zag around you wrote:On July 23 2013 21:49 hzflank wrote:On July 23 2013 21:45 i zig zag around you wrote:On July 23 2013 21:41 hzflank wrote:
The thing that bothers me about this is that simulated rape porn will be illegal. Who decides what is simulated rape and what is not? If a guy handcuffs his wife and films it, is that simulated rape porn?
The other problem is that it is too easy to get around ISP filtering anyway. Things like child porn are already blocked by British ISPs. Pedophiles do not just start Chrome and watch child porn on Youtube, which is what the filtering would block. *edited* if post is serious, then i don't know what to say. Why? It is not about whether I like to watch that sort of thing (I don't). It;s about me not wanting to accidentally possess material that could lead to me becoming a convicted sex offender. does watching "simulated rape porn" make you a sex offender in england if this law passes through? I presume so as they're now grouping simulated rape porn and child porn into the same category.
well rape and sex with minors are both illegal, so i'm pretty sure i understand why they put these two types of porn into same category. however, i don't think that *watching* this makes you a convicted sex offender, lol. this kind of filter is to prevent *some* people to get teh wrong ideas.
|
On July 23 2013 21:51 i zig zag around you wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2013 21:49 hzflank wrote:On July 23 2013 21:45 i zig zag around you wrote:On July 23 2013 21:41 hzflank wrote:
The thing that bothers me about this is that simulated rape porn will be illegal. Who decides what is simulated rape and what is not? If a guy handcuffs his wife and films it, is that simulated rape porn?
The other problem is that it is too easy to get around ISP filtering anyway. Things like child porn are already blocked by British ISPs. Pedophiles do not just start Chrome and watch child porn on Youtube, which is what the filtering would block. *edited* if post is serious, then i don't know what to say. Why? It is not about whether I like to watch that sort of thing (I don't). It;s about me not wanting to accidentally possess material that could lead to me becoming a convicted sex offender. does watching "simulated rape porn" make you a sex offender in england if this law passes through?
We don't know yet. Possessing rape porn does. Who decides what is simulated and what is not?
With child porn it is easy. If the person is under the age of 18 then it is illegal. With rape it is more difficult. In professional porn shoots the models have to sign a contract, so that is fine. But what about people who film themselves and post the video online? That do not sign anything to say that they are not being raped.
|
How about the idiots that can't control what their kids do are the ones that manually have to disable it instead of putting the normally gifted individuals at a disadvantage? I feel for you britain
|
On July 23 2013 21:54 i zig zag around you wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2013 21:52 Aeroplaneoverthesea wrote:On July 23 2013 21:51 i zig zag around you wrote:On July 23 2013 21:49 hzflank wrote:On July 23 2013 21:45 i zig zag around you wrote:On July 23 2013 21:41 hzflank wrote:
The thing that bothers me about this is that simulated rape porn will be illegal. Who decides what is simulated rape and what is not? If a guy handcuffs his wife and films it, is that simulated rape porn?
The other problem is that it is too easy to get around ISP filtering anyway. Things like child porn are already blocked by British ISPs. Pedophiles do not just start Chrome and watch child porn on Youtube, which is what the filtering would block. *edited* if post is serious, then i don't know what to say. Why? It is not about whether I like to watch that sort of thing (I don't). It;s about me not wanting to accidentally possess material that could lead to me becoming a convicted sex offender. does watching "simulated rape porn" make you a sex offender in england if this law passes through? I presume so as they're now grouping simulated rape porn and child porn into the same category. well rape and sex with minors are both illegal, so i'm pretty sure i understand why they put these two types of porn into same category. however, i don't think that *watching* this makes you a convicted sex offender, lol. this kind of filter is to prevent *some* people to get teh wrong ideas.
Possessing child porn (and soon rape porn) is illegal, and if you are caught you can be convicted and have to sign the sex offenders register. You do not have to be involved in filing it, simply having a video or pictures on your computer is enough.
|
On July 23 2013 21:54 hzflank wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2013 21:51 i zig zag around you wrote:On July 23 2013 21:49 hzflank wrote:On July 23 2013 21:45 i zig zag around you wrote:On July 23 2013 21:41 hzflank wrote:
The thing that bothers me about this is that simulated rape porn will be illegal. Who decides what is simulated rape and what is not? If a guy handcuffs his wife and films it, is that simulated rape porn?
The other problem is that it is too easy to get around ISP filtering anyway. Things like child porn are already blocked by British ISPs. Pedophiles do not just start Chrome and watch child porn on Youtube, which is what the filtering would block. *edited* if post is serious, then i don't know what to say. Why? It is not about whether I like to watch that sort of thing (I don't). It;s about me not wanting to accidentally possess material that could lead to me becoming a convicted sex offender. does watching "simulated rape porn" make you a sex offender in england if this law passes through? We don't know yet. Possessing rape porn does. Who decides what is simulated and what is not? With child porn it is easy. If the person is under the age of 18 then it is illegal. With rape it is more difficult. In professional porn shoots the models have to sign a contract, so that is fine. But what about people who film themselves and post the video online? That do not sign anything to say that they are not being raped.
i don't know what you think rape is, but rape looks nothing like "simulated" rape on video. i've never thought about this before, but now that i am, i can see why the government wants to remove access to "simulated" rape porn and child porn since it, apparently, does turn on a percentage of people.
it's just a thought, but really, if someone is turned on by rape and sex with children, aren't they *more likely* to become the ones who do this? i mean, that's just what i think, lol.
|
On July 23 2013 21:02 Aeroplaneoverthesea wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2013 20:55 BBS wrote:
So, U.K. does not only spy on others with Tempora, but also blocks, what people are not supposed to have on the other hand side. Long live the Empire ... Indeed. It's starting to look like George Orwell was right, we was just 40 years or so to soon on the dates. The world is going to be a scary place in a few decades time.
On one hand you could be right, but I'm still trying to be optimistic, a few decades on all the older generation with these stupid ideas will be dead or dying off, hopefully this generation will be able to pull us out of whatever shit we get in to.
On topic though, not a completely stupid idea, just a really really dumb way of executing it. If they do want to do this then they should at least make it so that you have to opt-in to the filter, that way concerned parents can phone up.
|
If you have to opt out by contacting your ISP, will there be an administration charge? I can really see that happening.
Its like the TV license for porn.
|
I don't know what rape looks like. I am sure that rape can look like many things, that is the problem.
|
People need to stop pretending that 12 year olds (or any year olds) being exposed to porn scenes is some gigantic problem the society needs to deal with, when in truth it is blatantly harmless and doesn't leave "scars" of any variety.
|
On July 23 2013 22:05 Talin wrote:
People need to stop pretending that 12 year olds (or any year olds) being exposed to porn scenes is some gigantic problem the society needs to deal with, when in truth it is blatantly harmless and doesn't leave "scars" of any variety.
the fact that it does stimulate some people is what bothers me, lol.
|
On July 23 2013 22:06 i zig zag around you wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2013 22:05 Talin wrote:
People need to stop pretending that 12 year olds (or any year olds) being exposed to porn scenes is some gigantic problem the society needs to deal with, when in truth it is blatantly harmless and doesn't leave "scars" of any variety. the fact that it does stimulate some people is what bothers me, lol.
Porn? Fulfilling the purpose of why it was created? How shocking!
|
On July 23 2013 21:57 i zig zag around you wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2013 21:54 hzflank wrote:On July 23 2013 21:51 i zig zag around you wrote:On July 23 2013 21:49 hzflank wrote:On July 23 2013 21:45 i zig zag around you wrote:On July 23 2013 21:41 hzflank wrote:
The thing that bothers me about this is that simulated rape porn will be illegal. Who decides what is simulated rape and what is not? If a guy handcuffs his wife and films it, is that simulated rape porn?
The other problem is that it is too easy to get around ISP filtering anyway. Things like child porn are already blocked by British ISPs. Pedophiles do not just start Chrome and watch child porn on Youtube, which is what the filtering would block. *edited* if post is serious, then i don't know what to say. Why? It is not about whether I like to watch that sort of thing (I don't). It;s about me not wanting to accidentally possess material that could lead to me becoming a convicted sex offender. does watching "simulated rape porn" make you a sex offender in england if this law passes through? We don't know yet. Possessing rape porn does. Who decides what is simulated and what is not? With child porn it is easy. If the person is under the age of 18 then it is illegal. With rape it is more difficult. In professional porn shoots the models have to sign a contract, so that is fine. But what about people who film themselves and post the video online? That do not sign anything to say that they are not being raped. i don't know what you think rape is, but rape looks nothing like "simulated" rape on video. i've never thought about this before, but now that i am, i can see why the government wants to remove access to "simulated" rape porn and child porn since it, apparently, does turn on a percentage of people. it's just a thought, but really, if someone is turned on by rape and sex with children, aren't they *more likely* to become the ones who do this? i mean, that's just what i think, lol.
Rape is as old as mankind itself. It has been going on for thousands upon thousands of years, it has nothing at all to do with internet porn.
On July 23 2013 21:54 i zig zag around you wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2013 21:52 Aeroplaneoverthesea wrote:On July 23 2013 21:51 i zig zag around you wrote:On July 23 2013 21:49 hzflank wrote:On July 23 2013 21:45 i zig zag around you wrote:On July 23 2013 21:41 hzflank wrote:
The thing that bothers me about this is that simulated rape porn will be illegal. Who decides what is simulated rape and what is not? If a guy handcuffs his wife and films it, is that simulated rape porn?
The other problem is that it is too easy to get around ISP filtering anyway. Things like child porn are already blocked by British ISPs. Pedophiles do not just start Chrome and watch child porn on Youtube, which is what the filtering would block. *edited* if post is serious, then i don't know what to say. Why? It is not about whether I like to watch that sort of thing (I don't). It;s about me not wanting to accidentally possess material that could lead to me becoming a convicted sex offender. does watching "simulated rape porn" make you a sex offender in england if this law passes through? I presume so as they're now grouping simulated rape porn and child porn into the same category. well rape and sex with minors are both illegal, so i'm pretty sure i understand why they put these two types of porn into same category. however, i don't think that *watching* this makes you a convicted sex offender, lol. this kind of filter is to prevent *some* people to get teh wrong ideas.
Except this isn't rape, the is simulated rape, hence IT'S NOT FUCKING REAL. Just like Saw is simulated torture, 100% of action films have simulated murder, Harry Potter has simulated witchcraft, WWE is simulated bare knuckle/no rules fighting and Chess is simulated regicide.
None of those things are illegal because they're not real, they're fake and it's fucking retarded beyond all fucking measures to censor something which is fake.
|
Isn't it the parents' job to make sure their children aren't exposed to what they don't want them to be exposed to? Kind of a waste of effort and money in my opinion.
|
I don't understand why Cameron is doing this given how much of a wanker he is.
Seriously though, I truly do not understand the point of this at all.
|
On July 23 2013 22:11 Aeroplaneoverthesea wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2013 21:57 i zig zag around you wrote:On July 23 2013 21:54 hzflank wrote:On July 23 2013 21:51 i zig zag around you wrote:On July 23 2013 21:49 hzflank wrote:On July 23 2013 21:45 i zig zag around you wrote:On July 23 2013 21:41 hzflank wrote:
The thing that bothers me about this is that simulated rape porn will be illegal. Who decides what is simulated rape and what is not? If a guy handcuffs his wife and films it, is that simulated rape porn?
The other problem is that it is too easy to get around ISP filtering anyway. Things like child porn are already blocked by British ISPs. Pedophiles do not just start Chrome and watch child porn on Youtube, which is what the filtering would block. *edited* if post is serious, then i don't know what to say. Why? It is not about whether I like to watch that sort of thing (I don't). It;s about me not wanting to accidentally possess material that could lead to me becoming a convicted sex offender. does watching "simulated rape porn" make you a sex offender in england if this law passes through? We don't know yet. Possessing rape porn does. Who decides what is simulated and what is not? With child porn it is easy. If the person is under the age of 18 then it is illegal. With rape it is more difficult. In professional porn shoots the models have to sign a contract, so that is fine. But what about people who film themselves and post the video online? That do not sign anything to say that they are not being raped. i don't know what you think rape is, but rape looks nothing like "simulated" rape on video. i've never thought about this before, but now that i am, i can see why the government wants to remove access to "simulated" rape porn and child porn since it, apparently, does turn on a percentage of people. it's just a thought, but really, if someone is turned on by rape and sex with children, aren't they *more likely* to become the ones who do this? i mean, that's just what i think, lol. Rape is as old as mankind itself. It has been going on for thousands upon thousands of years, it has nothing at all to do with internet porn. Show nested quote +On July 23 2013 21:54 i zig zag around you wrote:On July 23 2013 21:52 Aeroplaneoverthesea wrote:On July 23 2013 21:51 i zig zag around you wrote:On July 23 2013 21:49 hzflank wrote:On July 23 2013 21:45 i zig zag around you wrote:On July 23 2013 21:41 hzflank wrote:
The thing that bothers me about this is that simulated rape porn will be illegal. Who decides what is simulated rape and what is not? If a guy handcuffs his wife and films it, is that simulated rape porn?
The other problem is that it is too easy to get around ISP filtering anyway. Things like child porn are already blocked by British ISPs. Pedophiles do not just start Chrome and watch child porn on Youtube, which is what the filtering would block. *edited* if post is serious, then i don't know what to say. Why? It is not about whether I like to watch that sort of thing (I don't). It;s about me not wanting to accidentally possess material that could lead to me becoming a convicted sex offender. does watching "simulated rape porn" make you a sex offender in england if this law passes through? I presume so as they're now grouping simulated rape porn and child porn into the same category. well rape and sex with minors are both illegal, so i'm pretty sure i understand why they put these two types of porn into same category. however, i don't think that *watching* this makes you a convicted sex offender, lol. this kind of filter is to prevent *some* people to get teh wrong ideas. Except this isn't rape, the is simulated rape, hence IT'S NOT FUCKING REAL. Just like Saw is simulated torture, 100% of action films have simulated murder, Harry Potter has simulated witchcraft, WWE is simulated bare knuckle/no rules fighting and Chess is simulated regicide. None of those things are illegal because they're not real, they're fake and it's fucking retarded beyond all fucking measures to censor something which is fake.
i don't think you understand what i'm trying to say. the problem is not the fact that "simulated" rape porn is not real, it's the fact that it does stimulate *some* people. just like how violence in movies, games, animal abuse, etc. helps stimulate *some* people and ultimately motivates these people to do things to others in the real world. that's all i'm saying.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/jHm9jME.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/RFTBD3e.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/UM3T7xk.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/juLm4zD.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/UFKhn9m.jpg)
