I think there is a rational arguement for every ban on the list with the only idiotic ban being that of female ejaculation.
All sexual acts on the list are open to being taken to the extreme and i realise that sex can also be taken to the extreme however banning sex from porn production is well....... RIDICULOUS!!!!
Lets put a secnerio into play - a 16 year old male watches porn containing aggressive whipping, abusive degrading language, pentration with an object associated with violence as well as intercourse and watersports.
Now imagine that 16 year old male is dating your 16 year old daughter and they decide to have sex. The 16 year old male acts out his idea of sex from the porn watched previously. Could you imagine your 16 year old daughter being exposed to not only being whipped excessively but verbally abused while doing so and then a metal bar was using to pentrate her and to top it off he pissed all over at the end.......
I think the government are trying to stop these above instances from happening although sensible adults who trust each other can repsect when enough is enough others can't. Do i think its the right approach - No. But i understand the concept and perspective.
yeah i undertand their objective totally and see where you're coming from. but its the total wrong way to go about it. adults shouldnt be sensored in an attempt to sensor children. personally id have taught my son/daughter what they're watching in porn and why they're doing it and when you are and arent allowed to do it. if my daughter wanted to be pissed then good for her! but if she didnt and a lad did because of porn, then itd be his parents getting a bollocking and he'd get a sex education talk the way his parents should have done.
I agree with all of that apart from the female ejeculation. Saying that, I've seen some porn where the woman claims to be ejeculation but she's actually just pissing herself.
I think it's in a bid to control pornohraphy more, there's a surprising amount of this porn that's made where the female (usually) has been made to do it against her will and there's no way you can judge whether she's consenting or not in certain pornographies. I'm sure the figure was something pretty alarming like 30-35%, where "amature pornography" has been made but the females are non-consenting, and it's genrally the types of videos that show caning, whipping and "simulated rape". I personally would like to see all amature pornography banned and make sure people have a licence before distributing this online to stop this sort of thing happening.
I agree with all of that apart from the female ejeculation. Saying that, I've seen some porn where the woman claims to be ejeculation but she's actually just pissing herself.
I think it's in a bid to control pornohraphy more, there's a surprising amount of this porn that's made where the female (usually) has been made to do it against her will and there's no way you can judge whether she's consenting or not in certain pornographies. I'm sure the figure was something pretty alarming like 30-35%, where "amature pornography" has been made but the females are non-consenting, and it's genrally the types of videos that show caning, whipping and "simulated rape". I personally would like to see all amature pornography banned and make sure people have a licence before distributing this online to stop this sort of thing happening.
I agree there needs to be regulation on things, but this isn't affecting amature porn at all. It's only affecting the pay per view ones that already have the licenses, are far more regulated and less likely to be forcing women into things they don't want to be doing. It's not the legit producers that are the problem in the porn industry, yet they are the ones taking the hit for it. If these legit producers aren't able to produce the porn people want to see in a safe/consenting environment, there will be a rise of people producing it in less safe environments as people will always want to see it. So really this is not going to hit the mark at all in so far as trying to reduce the amount of non consensual porn being produced, as the non pay per view people can just keep on doing what they're doing.
I agree with all of that apart from the female ejeculation. Saying that, I've seen some porn where the woman claims to be ejeculation but she's actually just pissing herself.
I think it's in a bid to control pornohraphy more, there's a surprising amount of this porn that's made where the female (usually) has been made to do it against her will and there's no way you can judge whether she's consenting or not in certain pornographies. I'm sure the figure was something pretty alarming like 30-35%, where "amature pornography" has been made but the females are non-consenting, and it's genrally the types of videos that show caning, whipping and "simulated rape". I personally would like to see all amature pornography banned and make sure people have a licence before distributing this online to stop this sort of thing happening.
I agree there needs to be regulation on things, but this isn't affecting amature porn at all. It's only affecting the pay per view ones that already have the licenses, are far more regulated and less likely to be forcing women into things they don't want to be doing. It's not the legit producers that are the problem in the porn industry, yet they are the ones taking the hit for it. If these legit producers aren't able to produce the porn people want to see in a safe/consenting environment, there will be a rise of people producing it in less safe environments as people will always want to see it. So really this is not going to hit the mark at all in so far as trying to reduce the amount of non consensual porn being produced, as the non pay per view people can just keep on doing what they're doing.
this +1
the people who arent already following the rules about providing a safe enviroment arent going to follow these rules either but will gain more money out of it and put more pressure on their "actors"
The question regarding the 50 Shades of Grey film is an excellent one. I haven't read the books, but friends who have and are actively involved in the BDSM scene have all, without exception, condemned it as a portrayal of abuse rather than a realistic BDSM relationship. It will portray almost all of the acts on this arbitrary list. I can't imagine they are going to even suggest banning it from the UK. Why? If this is truly done to protect children, why the double standard?
If the books and films do indeed protray an abusive relationship, one could argue that the 50 Shades of Grey franchise has more potential to be more harmful than pornography involving the same behaviour, because it is more likely to be viewed by young impressionable girls. They're going to think this is the average relationship and will be less likely to speak out if a partner treats them in a similar way. And having faith in guidance ratings to prevent underage people from viewing it is naive. Still, if you suggested banning it altogether, most people would have the common sense to argue that censoring the habits of consenting adults isn't the right way to tackle it.
I understand the intent, and I actually think the intent is a good one. That's why these rules anger me - they will have no effect whatsoever, and nothing effective will be done, because those in charge will pat themselves on the back and see the issue as addressed.
i am a model and have worked for UK spanking sites where i have been spanked and caned and engaged in mild verbal abuse and watersports and i have worked with female models who make most of their money from face sitting. a lot of us do it because we enjoy it- we are being paid to do what we enjoy, how crazty is that!
all the sites i have worked for look after the models, pay us good wages and dont push our limets.
so, banning these acts could result in me and many of my friends loosing our jobs.
yes, children should be protected but the way to do it isnt like this.
my ex thought he had something wrong with him till he discovered BDSM porn and realized there were other people out there so it isnt all bad.
You don't need to apologise about that comment young and fun. I understood it. Every time I have heard the books mentioned on tv they have always been mentioned as a housewives favourite.
thanks stuburns, i thought it was just a normal comment :/ i think im just a little too jokey/brazen for some people here. but i apreciate your comment it was starting to feel a little lonely over here lol
My apologies, I didn't understand the jibe. I don't watch much TV either. I'll refrain from commenting further.
I was genuinely thinking about the film. I've read two of the three books and I probably won't watch the film but the ban made me consider the films credibility with the ban imposed.
totally agree as far as that is concerned, if its banned for porn it should be banned in film making too. its more likely to affect a kids perception of sex in something that is made to seem totally normal like a film at their local cinema that a porno they have to hunt for on the internet, if thats the governments reason behind this ban then the film hould be banned from UK cinemas.
Stuburns - "Omg, it continues on here too." Okay, I don't know what your problem is with me but can you please stop making out that I'm some sort of bully. This is the second time you've accused me of making personal attacks. The first time I voiced that a comment was hurtful to me (and it was to others too) and just because I asked why Y&F said the book was for housewives that means I'm taking part in some personal attack again?
You're singling me out for everything that I say and I just can't put up with it anymore, I'm afraid to write anything in case I get accused of something.
Your second comment - "People the book is always referred to as a housewives favourite. Calm the hell down. Looking for the slightest thing to have a go. Jeesh."
To be honest, I asked you very politely to stop doing it, you've said "is this happening here now" and then "looking for the slightest thing to have a go", please don't insult my intelligence by denying it. I was hoping for maybe an explanation, maybe even an apology at a push. But obviously that's not in your best interests so I don't see any need in discussing it further.