Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options

another day another dodgy law passed in parliament....

Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
So the government has again decided it knows what's best for us, and decided to criminalise possession of violent porn, punishable by 3 years in jail no less.......Story.

Now I'm no fan of violent porn and what happened is grim but I don't see how this law will prevent something like this happening again, and to me this just seems like the latest in a string of dodgy legislation that appears to be harmless and on the surface with good intentions, but this quote sums it up for me:

Shaun Gabb, director of the anti-censorship organisation the Libertarian Alliance, said: "If you are criminalising possession then you are giving police inquisitorial powers to come into your house and see what you've got, now we didn't have this in the past."

So what does everyone else think? Don't give a shit because you don't own violent porn, or like me a bit worried that this is the thin end of the wedge? I mean how long before they ban animal/anal/ gay porn .....? :nervous: *joke* But seriously, these kinds of laws mean the authorities can come into your house on any dumb pretence and do what they like, to me that's wrong....
«134

Comments

  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    \
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Children aren't old enough to give consent. Adults have all kinds of weird and wonderful sexual ideas.

    Don't get me wrong - I'm prim and proper, dull and boring. But each to their own - people are allowed to enjoy violent sexual activities, so long as both parties consent, aren't they?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    sophia wrote:
    I don't really get why you're objecting to this law tbh. Do you think it should be illegal to possess child pornography? If so, how's this any different?
    Because a lot of 'violent' porn is in effect nothing more than simulated strangulation fetish videos. Or real BDSM for that matter. So long as it is conducted between consenting adults and that nobody gets killed I don't see why it should be banned.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Who decides what's 'violent'?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    \
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    budda wrote:
    Who decides what's 'violent'?
    Well obviously some sort of 'official' who is completely uncorruptable by watching all this violent stuff, but then decides that no-one else will be able to watch it without instantly feeling the need to imitate it for real. It's bullshit really. There's never been any conclusive evidence of causality between the watching of violent images and the carrying out of violent acts. If everyone involved is consenting, no-one has the right to say what people can and can't watch. If it's legal to do it, it should be legal to record it and let other people watch it.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    sophia wrote:
    If it was possible to produce pornographic images of children without actually abusing children in order to make them - using photoshop or whatever (sorry my computer knowledge is very poor) to produce images of children being raped, would that be ok? If no children were harmed in the production of the image, should it be legal to possess images of children being raped?
    It is, as far as I'm aware. Anything which is a cartoon, or computer generated is entirely legal I think.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I prob don't have a problem with something like mild bondage, but to be honest I'm not against porn which simulates rape and murder being illegal being banned.

    As an aside i think under UK law child pornography includes digitally 'enhanced' pictures of adults which are altered to look like children.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    sophia wrote:
    Yes but clearly the consequences of this go far further than the individuals involved in the production of the images...the guy likes to get off to pictures of women being strangled, gets some good ideas about how best to do it, and then goes out and kills someone. There wasn't much consent on the part of the woman he murdered, was there?

    so what about a kid who watches violent films, plays violent games, and then goes into his school with a machine gun and starts killing his classmates......? of course the kids didn't give their consent to be murdered that's completely irrelevant, should we now go and ban all the violent games and films out there, because it influenced the kid to kill people? that's what your saying really......some people are fucked in the head and get off on sick things then act on that, and no amount of laws will change that, other people will just watch that kind of stuff out of curiousity, and BB is right, who decides what's violent? All this law does is open the door for more extreme "moral" legislation in the future, that's why I'm against it.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    \
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote:
    Because a lot of 'violent' porn is in effect nothing more than simulated strangulation fetish videos. Or real BDSM for that matter. So long as it is conducted between consenting adults and that nobody gets killed I don't see why it should be banned.

    I concur. What happened to the woman is tragic, but to it just seems that something is being used as a scapegoat to blame it on. (See Also: Violence in Video Games)
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    sophia wrote:
    I don't believe that watching violent porn can make you violent if you're not already...but I would have thought it could exacerbate the urges, and normalise them in your own head, not to mention giving you all sorts of useful pointers as to the best way to rape and butcher people if that is what you like to do.
    The thing is that normal films do exactly the same thing. Just because the sex in it is real doesn't make it any different. The only difference is that usually a proper film usually puts sexual violence into some sort of context.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    \
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Just as a side note. It's nice to see that police resources will be diverted away from looking for child pornography, to millions of other websites that are in violation of the new law. They really are fucking retarded sometimes.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    sophia wrote:
    It seems to me that if you're going to allow any images whatsoever, so long as no one was hurt in the production of them, then you do have to allow computer generated child pornography, which makes me feel more than a little uncomfortable.

    I get where you're coming from and I'm not comfortable with the idea either, but you have to look at it realistically, this law will not stop this kind of thing happening will it? think about it.....of course normal people will be disgusted and disapprove of this sort of stuff, but we don't need laws telling us what we can and can't do, if it's not hurting anyone else then people should be free to do what the hell they like, what makes me more uncomfortable is feeling more and more restricted each day, people can't even run around naked anymore because they're "disturbing the peace" ffs, bit of a tangent I'll admit but all this stuff is linked (personal freedoms etc....) and it pisses me off.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    \
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    sophia wrote:
    So, should computer generated child pornography be legal? Including brutal images of children being raped, abused, mutilated, whatever? If no children were harmed in its production, then following the logic of the consensus of opinion on this thread, we should allow it, because who are we to say what's an acceptable fetish?
    Exactly, who are we to say what's an acceptable fetish? Of course it should be legal. It isn't exactly something I'd like to see, but no-one is being harmed in the making or watching of it.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    sophia wrote:
    So, should computer generated child pornography be legal? Including brutal images of children being raped, abused, mutilated, whatever? If no children were harmed in its production, then following the logic of the consensus of opinion on this thread, we should allow it, because who are we to say what's an acceptable fetish?

    It might in a strange way be a good idea, there seems to be a market for child porn, and if it could be filled in this way it would be an improvement.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    TBH its not really an argument about censorship is it? Its an argument whether its alright to have 'material featuring violence that is, or appears to be, life-threatening or is likely to result in serious and disabling injury' or stripped of the legal jargonese is it right to allow people to have pictures of men brutalising women.

    I'd say its not alright to have these type of pictures and if the only way to stop it is to make it illegal well so be it.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    budda wrote:
    It might in a strange way be a good idea, there seems to be a market for child porn, and if it could be filled in this way it would be an improvement.
    Can't see that happening to be honest. I can't say I know much about the mind of a paedophile, but if it's anything like normal porn, realism seems to be the thing that people go for.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    sophia wrote:
    So people should be allowed to possess really brutal images of children being raped then, so long as no children were actually hurt in their production?

    I'm just trying to pin that point down, because I think it's quite important.

    well as long as they keep it to themselves and don't act on it and noone's getting hurt, then my answer is yes. completely. let them do what the fuck they like and get on with it, if they start touching kids then lock em up but i don't give a fuck either way what people want to do with their lives is their choice, we are autonomous, able to think independently, and i don't need to be told by some higher power what is morally acceptable and unacceptable, i'll make that choice for myself thanks.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    \
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    sophia wrote:
    So, should computer generated child pornography be legal? Including brutal images of children being raped, abused, mutilated, whatever? If no children were harmed in its production, then following the logic of the consensus of opinion on this thread, we should allow it, because who are we to say what's an acceptable fetish?
    its not ideal but i would rather that, than actual children being abused.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    sophia wrote:
    Bollocks, that's crazy talk. Call me a fascist if you want, but I think to get your kicks by fantasising about raping, mutilating and torturing other people is fucked in the head, and no, it's not acceptable. It's utter nonsense to say, hey, whatever gets you off, that's fine, because when it comes to fantasising about inflicting pain and suffering on people, I think it's reasonable to define that as unhealthy and slightly deviant tbh.

    fascist :p personally i don't think any person in this world is completely sane so who are you to go passing judgement on people......? there are no absolutes in this world, morals are subjective as are your views, so what entitles you to inflict your views on me, if it doesn't affect you in anyway? (i am of course talking about the govt here.....)
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    sophia wrote:
    Bollocks, that's crazy talk. Call me a fascist if you want, but I think to get your kicks by fantasising about raping, mutilating and torturing other people is fucked in the head, and no, it's not acceptable.
    Why? Who's being harmed by someone fantisizing about these things? Who's freedoms are being infringed upon? As far as I'm concerned, unless someone acts on any of these sorts of urges or fantasies, they're doing nothing wrong and are responsible for their own actions. We're getting dangerously close to deciding what is and what is not acceptable for someone to think now.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    \
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    \
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    sophia wrote:
    I'm happy to state my opinion to be that if you get your kicks out of watching porn of women or children being raped, tortured, mutilated or murdered then you're a sick bastard who needs psychological help.
    I agree with you. But I don't think we have the right to lock anyone up unless they actually do any of these things. ETA: And watching real child porn or real rape counts as 'doing' these things because you're helping create the demand that causes these offences to take place in the first place.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    sophia wrote:
    Yeah, I am tbh :D When it comes to stuff like this I am. I'm all for sexual freedom and permissiveness and stuff, but not if it means we have to accept ANYTHING that turns people on as normal, healthy, whatever floats your boat, because I think it's bollocks. I'm happy to state my opinion to be that if you get your kicks out of watching porn of women or children being raped, tortured, mutilated or murdered then you're a sick bastard who needs psychological help.

    :yes:

    We don't live in air trapped bubbles completed cocooned from the world around us, but in a society which gives us freedoms and also obligations. and frankly sometimes society needs to say that this action is so wrong that we need to put barriers up and prevent it.

    Now sometimes I think these barriers are wrong, but in this case I'm all with Parliament and think that the Libertarian Alliance and other right-wing pressure groups are barking.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    sophia wrote:
    Yes but clearly the consequences of this go far further than the individuals involved in the production of the images...the guy likes to get off to pictures of women being strangled, gets some good ideas about how best to do it, and then goes out and kills someone. There wasn't much consent on the part of the woman he murdered, was there?
    Like others have said, you simply cannot ban an entire renge on the actions of one individual.

    Otherwise there would be no horror movies. No action movies. No erotic movies. No war drama movies. No rap songs. No action video games. Etc etc.

    You simply cannot do that. Not unless it is obvious it is mass-corrupting media capable to driving the population at large to do violent/illegal acts they wouldn't otherwise do. And I don't think that has been achieved even once in the history of mankind.
    If it was possible to produce pornographic images of children without actually abusing children in order to make them - using photoshop or whatever (sorry my computer knowledge is very poor) to produce images of children being raped, would that be ok? If no children were harmed in the production of the image, should it be legal to possess images of children being raped?
    Good question. If it was done by CGI or animation, no, I don't think it should be banned at all. Disgusting as you, me and most people think such things might be.

    In fact, they could actually help cut the number of real child porn movies being produced.
Sign In or Register to comment.