[Scarlett.]

Originally Posted by Firewire

Illegal content exists in almost an uninhabited place. It's hard to find (I've never went looking, but I've never came across it either) and it's shared through systems rather by websites. The blocking of all pornography will do more harm than good.

Pretty much this, the actual real perverts wont even have to turn their porn filters off to get their sick images, their stuff exists in an unpoliceabale area of the internet.

[Scarlett.]

Originally Posted by Lee.

In what way?

The effects of prohibition.

[BBfanUSA]

and this is why the revolution happened in 1776

[Niall]

Originally Posted by Lee.

In what way?

It will take money away from the big, and regulated porn studios and a lot of porn production will be forced underground, into the hands of dubious individuals who care only about the money rather than the safeguards and rules that the majority of the porn industry generally abides by.

Essentially it will do what censorship and banning things always does: force the thing on the receiving end to be produced in an unregulated and potentially dangerous manner.

[Lee.]

Originally Posted by Chewy

Pretty much this, the actual real perverts wont even have to turn their porn filters off to get their sick images, their stuff exists in an unpoliceabale area of the internet.

From what I gather, these measures aren't being taken to stop the perverts and paedophiles, but to stop children under 18 being able to view hardcore pornography?

How can that be a bad thing?

[In the Drunk Tank]

A good piece on why Cameron is misunderstanding the problem of child porn: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/technol...-the-internet/

Some of the main points

Google already works hard to eradicate this material and that most of it exists beyond its reach. Paedophiles operate through password-protected sites and peer-to-peer networks. Only the most feckless use mainstream search engines to facilitate their crimes.

The Prime Minister says the question he has put to firms like Google is clear: “If Ceop [Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre] give you a blacklist of internet search terms, will you commit to stop offering up any returns to these searches?” His talk is tough but it ignores the fact that Google and its competitors already do that. Specific terms are blocked but it is difficult to predict what slang sexual predators may use or develop; also, a blacklist could hinder individuals with genuine enquiries related to academic work or child protection charities. The request for a blacklist is about being seen to be doing something.

The “deep web” and the “dark net”, areas of the internet where robots.txt files are not in place for Google to crawl, are where sites like the Silk Road – an online market for illicit goods – hide. They are also where the bulk of illegal images are shared. The unpleasant fact is that the majority of child sexual abuse online is perpetrated beyond even the all-seeing eye of Google

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Lee.

From what I gather, these measures aren't being taken to stop the perverts and paedophiles, but to stop children under 18 being able to view hardcore pornography?

How can that be a bad thing?

It's a bad thing because it will be ineffectual and the government's true intentions are transparent, It's both a ploy for votes from parents and a way to test the water to see how much control over the internet they can get away with.

There's no real pros to this debate, it's all cons.

[ChristmasNeeve]

Originally Posted by Chewy

The effects of prohibition.

Why is this even being compared to prohibition, they're not making porn illegal

[Lee.]

Originally Posted by Niall

It will take money away from the big, and regulated porn studios and a lot of porn production will be forced underground, into the hands of dubious individuals who care only about the money rather than the safeguards and rules that the majority of the porn industry generally abides by.

Essentially it will do what censorship and banning things always does: force the thing on the receiving end to be produced in an unregulated and potentially dangerous manner.

But it's NOT BEING BANNED! you will still have the option to watch it, but you'll just have to prove you're an adult!

And to be honest I really don't think the proctoon companies are making a lot of money out of their films being shown for free on file sharing sites.

[Z]

I know not many people are going to even bother reading my wall of text but I think the most practical point is this:

This is sexual repression. In some ways it's good, in some ways it's bad. Let's look at a very real situation that is no doubt happening in households of people that you know right now:

Dad, mid 40s
Mum, mid 40s
Two teenage sons, for example

They all sit down to dinner tonight and mum brings up this proposed legislation. Everyone feels awkward about it because parents don't like to think of their kids as growing up and kids don't want their parents to talk about sex or masturbation. Teenage sons are watching it because they're full of hormones and they're not having sex, or perhaps they are but they're not having as much sex as they'd like to have, so they watch porn. Dad watches porn too because Mum's not got the same sex drive as he does and it's a lot better than having an affair.

Suddenly, opt out porn becomes a thing and Dad and sons either have to openly discuss that they watch porn, causing a variety of friction in the household, or they say "no of course we don't watch porn", a single button is clicked and that's the end of the matter. Or perhaps they don't even have the discussion and the Mum opts out of porn without discussing it with the family. Let's be honest, most men regularly watch pornography and there's an element of shame involved because... society tells us we're not allowed to be honest about sex. It's a covert activity. You'd be mortified if someone walked in on you having sex or masturbating. This is the government walking in on us having sex or masturbating. Either we hold our hands up and say "yes, I'm watching porn because I want to and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that" or we pretend we are deeply ashamed that we have been watching such filth and we'd never do it again and we don't know what we were thinking. We watch it because it turns us on! Would you rather your husband or sons were out mistreating women or disrespecting you, your daughters or your female friends? People are all too keen to blame porn for our "morality problem" rather than, you know, blame themselves. If you've got an unstoppable desire to go and rape someone, get help. Not being able to watch porn and have an outlet is going to give you less options for what you can do to dissipate your burning desire to go and rape and make you more likely to go and do it. I mean come on. Are we acting like every man in the country is a rapist in the making? Jesus Christ.

[Lee.]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

It's a bad thing because it will be ineffectual and the government's true intentions are transparent, It's both a ploy for votes from parents and a way to test the water to see how much control over the internet they can get away with.

There's no real pros to this debate, it's all cons.

There's a huge pro to this argument! Underage kids are not going to have easy access to pornography.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

It won't save lives though, like it's been stated multiple times in the thread it won't affect the methods in which child porn and such is circulated. It's just a pointless waste of time to grab some votes from ignorant parents.

There you go trying to insult parents again, do you really believe that is the whole reason this is coming into effect?...
However many times it's been stated in this thread doesn't make it a fact dezzy, we don't know what the outcomes are yet do we?

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Lee.

There's a huge pro to this argument! Underage kids are not going to have easy access to pornography.

Again, Filters and Parental Controls are your friends.

[Scarlett.]

Originally Posted by Lee.

There's a huge pro to this argument! Underage kids are not going to have easy access to pornography.

Parental controls already exist, any parent worth their salt should know they exist. Why should the rest of us suffer because some middle class family didn't realise tools to keep their kids from looking at porn already exist.

[Z]

Originally Posted by Lee.

There's a huge pro to this argument! Underage kids are not going to have easy access to pornography.

What about young adults? If I'm living under my parents' roof (which I am at the moment) and they choose to block it (which is their right - they pay for the internet) - suddenly I'm not allowed to watch something that is perfectly legal; despite being of legal age and wanting to watch legal content. And how are they going to regulate sites like Tumblr where people reblog porn and smut all the time? Is a 14 year old girl's blog going to be blocked because she reposted a topless picture of Channing Tatum dripping in baby oil? Where is the line here? Opt out is shaming people into disclosing information; opt in is allowing the pious, the concerned and the responsible to disable and those of us who aren't parents or religious or whatever the case are left with full access to porn. I watch porn, I'm not going to be ashamed to admit it because this legislation is going to provoke people into talking about sex either way and I think even in this thread there have been several jokes about "men are tossers" and comments about people being prudish. People's views on this will hinge entirely on their age, gender, libido, whether or not they have kids and what their religious views are - that much I can guarantee.

[Patrick]

Guess that means XNXX won't be around for much longer then.

The end of an era.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

There you go trying to insult parents again, do you really believe that is the whole reason this is coming into effect?...
However many times it's been stated in this thread doesn't make it a fact dezzy, we don't know what the outcomes are yet do we?

Ignorant isn't an insult when it's true, there's already tons of methods to prevent kids from viewing porn as well as monitoring internet usage. If these parents were so worried about their kids misusing the internet then they should already have Parental Controls and monitoring programs in place.

[Lee.]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Again, Filters and Parental Controls are your friends.

Yeah, not very reliable ones

[Patrick]

Originally Posted by Zee

What about young adults? If I'm living under my parents' roof (which I am at the moment) and they choose to block it (which is their right - they pay for the internet) - suddenly I'm not allowed to watch something that is perfectly legal; despite being of legal age and wanting to watch legal content. And how are they going to regulate sites like Tumblr where people reblog porn and smut all the time? Is a 14 year old girl's blog going to be blocked because she reposted a topless picture of Channing Tatum dripping in baby oil? Where is the line here? Opt out is shaming people into disclosing information; opt in is allowing the pious, the concerned and the responsible to disable and those of us who aren't parents or religious or whatever the case are left with full access to porn. I watch porn, I'm not going to be ashamed to admit it because this legislation is going to provoke people into talking about sex either way and I think even in this thread there have been several jokes about "men are tossers" and comments about people being prudish. People's views on this will hinge entirely on their age, gender, libido, whether or not they have kids and what their religious views are - that much I can guarantee.

Zee.

[jackc1806]

Originally Posted by Patrick

Guess that means XNXX won't be around for much longer then.

The end of an era.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Lee.

Yeah, not very reliable ones

Then find better ones or keep a closer eye on their internet usage.

[Z]

What about websites like Facebook? Say one of your mates gets his ass out and moons someone and someone else has filmed it and put it up online - are you going to be able to watch it? If your ISP has blocked porn, how can it detect nudity in every form? Will Michelangelo's David be blocked from Google images because it shows the naked male body; will modern photography with nude models be blocked because it shows the naked body? What if you post a picture on your friend's Facebook or tweet an image at them - and under your ISP settings, is fine, but under theirs, is blocked? Will they be prosecuted?! How on earth will this even be implemented? It's madness.

[Lee.]

Originally Posted by Zee

What about young adults? If I'm living under my parents' roof (which I am at the moment) and they choose to block it (which is their right - they pay for the internet) - suddenly I'm not allowed to watch something that is perfectly legal; despite being of legal age and wanting to watch legal content. And how are they going to regulate sites like Tumblr where people reblog porn and smut all the time? Is a 14 year old girl's blog going to be blocked because she reposted a topless picture of Channing Tatum dripping in baby oil? Where is the line here? Opt out is shaming people into disclosing information; opt in is allowing the pious, the concerned and the responsible to disable and those of us who aren't parents or religious or whatever the case are left with full access to porn. I watch porn, I'm not going to be ashamed to admit it because this legislation is going to provoke people into talking about sex either way and I think even in this thread there have been several jokes about "men are tossers" and comments about people being prudish. People's views on this will hinge entirely on their age, gender, libido, whether or not they have kids and what their religious views are - that much I can guarantee.

That's a different and difficult scenario, I do admit.

You'll just have to come clean with your parents and admit you like touching yourself whilst watching porn.. Aw Greg, you're life is one embarrassment after another

You'll be even more mortified when you realise you can watch poem freely and your ma and pa must have opted out

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Zee

What about young adults? If I'm living under my parents' roof (which I am at the moment) and they choose to block it (which is their right - they pay for the internet) - suddenly I'm not allowed to watch something that is perfectly legal; despite being of legal age and wanting to watch legal content. And how are they going to regulate sites like Tumblr where people reblog porn and smut all the time? Is a 14 year old girl's blog going to be blocked because she reposted a topless picture of Channing Tatum dripping in baby oil? Where is the line here? Opt out is shaming people into disclosing information; opt in is allowing the pious, the concerned and the responsible to disable and those of us who aren't parents or religious or whatever the case are left with full access to porn. I watch porn, I'm not going to be ashamed to admit it because this legislation is going to provoke people into talking about sex either way and I think even in this thread there have been several jokes about "men are tossers" and comments about people being prudish. People's views on this will hinge entirely on their age, gender, libido, whether or not they have kids and what their religious views are - that much I can guarantee.

Oh cum on.... that was a play on words zee
I was going to make a joke about this pun...
''The Porn Industry has strict rules and guidelines and you're screwed if you don't abide by them.''
But I won't bother now

[jackc1806]

Originally Posted by Zee

What about websites like Facebook? Say one of your mates gets his ass out and moons someone and someone else has filmed it and put it up online - are you going to be able to watch it? If your ISP has blocked porn, how can it detect nudity in every form? Will Michelangelo's David be blocked from Google images because it shows the naked male body; will modern photography with nude models be blocked because it shows the naked body? What if you post a picture on your friend's Facebook or tweet an image at them - and under your ISP settings, is fine, but under theirs, is blocked? Will they be prosecuted?! How on earth will this even be implemented? It's madness.

Will they block all the Tumblr porn sites that show GIFs and stuff? Who knows... Let's just hope they scrap it