Jump to content

UK new Censorship law


Jotari
 Share

Recommended Posts

This is rather big news we don't have a thread for. The UK is passing a bill people are calling the Porn Ban (while I think this content should be appropriate to discus here, I thought it wiser to leave that out of the title). People accessing porn sites from the UK will need to provide their identification via passport or credit cart in order to prove they're over 18. It's drawing a lot of criticism due to A)Being a major pain B)Being easily circumnavigated with a VPN (thus pretty pointless) C) Putting people's privacy at much great risk D)It being impossible to cover all porn sits leading a massive loop hole regarding some of the more actual dangerous content and E)General discontent with government control and dictating what people can and can't do.

I'm agree pretty massively with the critisisms and I'd add that I dont think teenagers watching porn is even necessarily that big a problem. I'm sure most people have has a teen and it hasn't messed any of us up. What do you think?

https://www.thesun.co.uk/tech/8569154/porn-uk-ban-block-when-unlock/

Edited by Jotari
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This reminds me of when the US government called such a "national health emergency". Although in typical American Conservative fashion, it was all just hot wind to align with their "religious" sentiment. They didn't do anything, nor did they really want to, because if they did something like this, the backlash from the more libertarian elements in the country would lead to many lost elections on either side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sex is a bigger deal than violence for some reason, and that always confuses me - not that I want violence to be overly censored either.

That being said, it's been pushed back several times now, as it was meant to go ahead at the beginning of this month and has failed once more. I hope it just dies out. I don't like or agree with it at all. I think it's a ridiculous dictatorship, and if any teens really want to access those sites, they will probably find a way around it easier than many adults. It also feels like you're being shamed for watching something like that, and I really don't like that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you know that the violence is just fantasy, it will not harm your mental health unless you are not well in the head.

If you know that the lewdness is just fantasy, you can still get in trouble depending on the situation and subject.

Of course, any problems caused by either violence and porn both have much more going on, it’s just in the head of the person doing it. More often, it’s the violence and not the negative effects of porn that comes out to harm others through that person not well in the head.

Yes, I have heard that porn can negatively affect people, but I may still need more info on that. And maybe all the other claims I have here if I am wrong.

Anyone good with that? Am I just talking big talk?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is making a mountain out of a molehill. Pornography is already considered socially unacceptable in public, no need to barge in on people's privacy. And with how broad the internet is it's not like you can effectively enforce this either. All it's doing is distracting people from the real societal issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, X-Naut said:

This is making a mountain out of a molehill. Pornography is already considered socially unacceptable in public, no need to barge in on people's privacy. And with how broad the internet is it's not like you can effectively enforce this either. All it's doing is distracting people from the real societal issues.

Given how much of a shit show Brexit's been, that might literally be their intention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bit naive but, is it just porn sites in general? What if I went on, say...AO3, and read a fanfic that was rated explicit?

I don't mind the ban, I don't use porn sites, but I'll admit I do read a lot of nsfw stuff. I also completely understand where the criticism is coming from, and agree with it - the internet is much too broad to monitor closely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's always a chance that this will change nothing, but I still think is good that they are at least trying to do something about the issue. Looking at porn is never okay, it doesn't matter how old you are or how mentally healthy you may be, porn is a disgusting industry that's making billions of dollars by striping people of their dignity to create a product and exploiting the addiction viewers develop when using it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, TheGoodHoms said:

There's always a chance that this will change nothing, but I still think is good that they are at least trying to do something about the issue. Looking at porn is never okay, it doesn't matter how old you are or how mentally healthy you may be, porn is a disgusting industry that's making billions of dollars by striping people of their dignity to create a product and exploiting the addiction viewers develop when using it.

Even taking that to be true (which I don't), there;s the issue of you need to do the right thing. This is like arming all the teachers to stop school shootings. It's not striking the heart of the matter and could easily make things worse. They can't monitor all of the sites, just the major ones. Which means the extra block will encourage people to go to different sites that could potentially be more harmful both to computers and with the type of content being put on display.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, TheGoodHoms said:

There's always a chance that this will change nothing, but I still think is good that they are at least trying to do something about the issue. Looking at porn is never okay, it doesn't matter how old you are or how mentally healthy you may be, porn is a disgusting industry that's making billions of dollars by striping people of their dignity to create a product and exploiting the addiction viewers develop when using it.

....please tell me that somewhere inside you there is a part that acknowledges some good does come out of porn/hentai. Because I can think of quite a few things and your statement doesn't reflect the small contribution porn/hentai does offer and it sounds like as if you think it all needs to go. I'm going to give you the benefit of doubt you aren't completely ignorant to the good side of porn/hentai.

 

On another note, you do all realize the intent behind laws isn't to restrict or control only right? If anything this gives the government more power in court because it is something more to pad certain cases with so they can add extra charges and punish people more. Right @Shoblongoo? Our local resident attorney.

Aren't laws written in a way that it also includes a reasonable punishment associated with violating whatever specific crime? 

Them passing this law to make it more difficult to access porn sites means they intend to make it legally okay to incur fines or jail time on guilty people. Does anyone from the UK have info on what you can expect if you are caught violating this law? I'd be less than shocked if they intend to have people do jail time simply for looking at porn. I'd imagine they want money so I'm sure they intend to incur penalty fees

Edited by Tediz64
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, this again.  Honestly, I think Brexit will happen first.  IMO, this is a privacy issue first and foremost (because short of the porn that's already super-illegal, it's none of anyone's business).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Armchair General said:

So does this applies to sites like Wikipedia?

Since it's uncensored and easily accessible ?

 

Wikipedia is "for the public good" by providing information I guess. Which, although I know nothing of law and the like, sounds like fair reasoning on the face of it to exempt it. Sexual arousal is not the primary purpose nor intention of the website.

Museums would probably get a similar pass, due to art being art and science being science, both for an ideal of human enlightenment. Although certain ones like the Museum of Sex would certainly skirt the controversy line.

And I say the museum statement having a fondness for staring at certain works with less-than-enlightenment in mind. >_>

Edited by Interdimensional Observer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

from my understanding, it was supposed to be based around a system that porn websites themselves would develop

https://www.ageid.com/why-ageid

with no offence meant to the developers of noted sites youporn and pornhub, it does not exactly instill confidence

evidently, giving over your details to a ID system developed by the company that owns porn websites (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MindGeek) may not be what the majority of people want to do, adults or not

at least I can get fucked in multiple different ways

17 hours ago, Tediz64 said:

Them passing this law to make it more difficult to access porn sites means they intend to make it legally okay to incur fines or jail time on guilty people. Does anyone from the UK have info on what you can expect if you are caught violating this law? I'd be less than shocked if they intend to have people do jail time simply for looking at porn. I'd imagine they want money so I'm sure they intend to incur penalty fees

I think the only penalty is to those porn sites that refuse to comply, actually. And that comes at a hefty fine of £250K. Although they might have some different expectation if people circumvent it via VPN, etc.

Edited by Tryhard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Armchair General said:

Well, I live in the US, so I'm good. But what gets me is that how this information will be securely stored, because ID theft is an thing.

For now. But if it can happen in the UK it can probably happen in the US too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Jotari said:

For now. But if it can happen in the UK it can probably happen in the US too.

Don't be so sure about that. It's very easy to argue that such a law as this infringes upon the 1st amendment, and that such a bill would be fought as far as it would need to in order to be struck down, if not shot down through a bipartisan "no". Yes, there are a lot of "Christians" and other prudes in Congress, but they will absolutely not put up or shut up when it comes to actually addressing this "issue."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hylian Air Force said:

Don't be so sure about that. It's very easy to argue that such a law as this infringes upon the 1st amendment, and that such a bill would be fought as far as it would need to in order to be struck down, if not shot down through a bipartisan "no". Yes, there are a lot of "Christians" and other prudes in Congress, but they will absolutely not put up or shut up when it comes to actually addressing this "issue."

The thing is that's it's less about Christian prudence and more about government control. The first amendment is great and I wish all countries followed suit in enshrining freedom of speech in their constitutions. But it doesn't exactly stop governments from spying on their own citizens. Having it so citizens need to provide their identification to view something (regardless as to what the content is) is one step closer to governments being able to control what people are and aren't allowed to see. Not saying it will happen in the US, but the possibility of it isn't impossible even with the first amendment.

Edited by Jotari
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Hylian Air Force said:

Don't be so sure about that. It's very easy to argue that such a law as this infringes upon the 1st amendment, and that such a bill would be fought as far as it would need to in order to be struck down, if not shot down through a bipartisan "no". Yes, there are a lot of "Christians" and other prudes in Congress, but they will absolutely not put up or shut up when it comes to actually addressing this "issue."

Considering the modern US governments ways of violating the constitution multiple times, including pursuing a law currently that would allow the government to crack down on independent contractors, companies or individuals for supporting BDS/pro-Palestinian viewpoints, and denying the leader of BDS into the country who is otherwise in good standing because they are afraid about speeches he is going to give in direct opposition of the first ammendment, I really don't think any constitution would be a deterrent if lawmakers cared enough.

Anyone who thinks that the US government upholds the US constitution well gets a hearty laugh from me.

It's unlikely that they would ever get close to winning, but the Rick Santorum types pledge to ban pornography in some form. However, for the case in the UK, it's not really because for religious morality reasons.

Edited by Tryhard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...