Online pornography to be blocked by default, PM to announce

all this comes out when it was announced the goverment is borrowing more than ever before .
good way to hide the news five year olds will get around the isp blocks .

reply to post by geobro


You mean you can't just read minds?! I thought we were all psychic on this site!

Originally posted by teachtaire
reply to post by geobro

 

You mean you can't just read minds?! I thought we were all psychic on this site!

psycohtic more like i know my spelling skcus

reply to post by geobro


You mean I'm the only one who had to play dumb for years after leaving high school, intentionally failing subjects, due to signing a contract after leaving high school? All because I was deemed "of interest," based on abnormal intellect and had to sign a contract with the Federal Government allowing them to monitor my activities for X amount of years after graduation? Naw, 116% of the posters on this site will make up such a claim.

Psychotic? No.

Prone to making up # to make ourselves feel special? Yes.

But maybe some of us aren't making up #. DUHN, DUHN, DAAA!

But seriously, psychotic isn't the same as "prone to fantasy."

reply to post by teachtaire

i have never felt the need to use porn it is ok for the poor sods that were not blessed with looks or that but for a normal looking person i find it a bit weird .

a bit like drugs you start on the soft ones and before you know it you are on to the snuff movies .

excellent time to bring this out by our leader when they are cutting billions from the poor and borrowing billions more than the last lot .

ps they could not get rid of me quick enough in school [ pure dafty ] and proud off it

Originally posted by Laykilla

I don't think this has to do with sex crime as much as it has to do with online porn addiction and the adverse affects it has on people who abuse it over long periods of time.

These are meaningless terms.

1. "Porn addiction" is pseudoscience at best and a flat out lie at worst.

2. As a libertarian, I don't give a damn. And even if "porn addiction" wasn't a bogus excuse for (blatantly obvious) anti-porn zealots and feminist sex nazis to push their putrid agenda. But what we see here is the inevitable slippery slope results of allowing authoritarians to go so far as to ban the consumption of intoxicating plants on the excuse that they are "mind altering" "addictive" and so forth. Invariably when this type of agenda succeeds at one thing, it will move on and try to take things to the next level. It will go as far as it can.

Porn addiction induced erectile dysfunction

What?

This is not something that existed in grand scale before the internet.

Nonsense. There is a reason why sex nazis have been persecuting people throughout the ages for being too sexually free.

As long as they aren't removing your right to watch it if you want -- I don't think there is anything wrong with this.

And when they eventually do remove that right, there will be nothing you can do about it? Nothing. You'll be lucky if you can even voice your disapproval by that point. The way these people operate is that you can never prove they're doing anything drastic until it's over with and done. And even after it's done, you can't really point to the exact moment it happened because they build their policies a piece at a time and no one piece is ever going to be the definitive piece.

You know why they do this? Because they aren't stupid. They know people don't want censorship. They know if they instituted the kind of censorship they really want overnight it would wake millions of people up with a jolt and there would be outrage. They're too smart for that. They know little subtle baby steps like this will fool a lot of people and won't really alarm many of the people they aren't exactly fooling.

People are natural collectivists. If the vast majority of people aren't alarmed enough to protest, it will deter pretty much everyone else too. If there's any protest at all, it will be so quiet virtually no one will hear it or care. It will be forgotten soon enough and then they'll be ready for the next baby step.

This is the way they do everything. They have learned from decades of trial and error and they have continually refined and streamlined their techniques and propaganda where they needed to. They're not going to make it easy to foil their plans. Who do you think we're dealing with here? You think a censorship agenda in 2013 is going to be unsophisticated and completely obvious?

It's not removing free will or choice.

Exactly. Not yet.

This is also something that can only really effectively be done at the ISP level.

Nonsense. Every operating system I'm aware of comes with filtering software.

For all those people that say the parents should moderate this -- it can't really be moderated. It's very easy to circumvent parental control filters, and I can assure you, a child that wishes to learn, will learn.

How is the government going to do any better unless they are monitoring everything that gets posted everywhere on the internet? This is not a civil rights violation?

When it's blocked by ISP by government request, it'll only be accessible through proxy -- getting reliable and fast/working proxy servers is not easy, and often times requires payment if you wish for a "high speed" result.

Isn't that just wonderful for oppressive governments like the one that's developing daily in the UK?

I don't feel like this is a case of "nanny" state.

You are just simply wrong.

I feel like they are leaving the parenting up to the parents

You have some strange feelings. To say the least.

providing a solid system in which the parents can almost guarantee a desired outcome, be they supportive of porn, or against.

This sounds like the kind of mealy mouthed crap Obama would spew.

Will this hurt the porn industry? Not likely.

The porn industry is all but dead. This is not the point.

It can take up to a year or two to undo the changes the brain makes as a result to such abuse.

I have no idea what you're talking about. Abuse? What planet are you on? Describing freedom as abuse is about as classic as "freedom is slavery"

reply to post by BrianFlanders


Nu?

NU!

Originally posted by BrianFlanders

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07


I have met women that are kinkier than men and that drop guys because they are not good enough in bed. Tell me this doesn't happen.

So have I but we need to be honest and admit this is fairly rare. Again, porn exists for a reason. Generally, there are FAR more men who are FAR more interested in kink, fetishes and the kind of hardcore sex depicted in porn than there are women interested in same.

Well my first cousin had to get a divorce because his wife was cheating on him for 5 years. The wife would openly call him all kinds of derogotary terms in front of the kids and even in front of strangers.

It reached a point were the kids would make fun of him. Really sad. She wasn't even that good looking although on a scale of 10 I would say 7 easy. Very outgoing and domineering personality matched with my cousin who was serene and patient. I guess it was "a disaster" waiting to happen from the beginning.

reply to post by BrianFlanders


You have been more reasonable than one-eyed psych trigger black puppy of death.

Any-who, posting something similar which addresses this... in part... :

"I came up with a belief during a brief thought experiment regarding psychology:

Non-linear relationships must exist between supraliminal and subliminal stimuli, such relationships must also exist between the stimulus and response cycle as well.

To date, all I've found on this particular subject is "Critical Importance of Stimulus Unawareness for the Production of Subliminal Psychodynamic Activation Effects: An Attributional Model"

which I'm unable to read (any working links for a full text that is free would be appreciated.)

I'm casually interested in such things but have yet to take psychology. It seems that this line of inquiry leads into research on psychodynamic activation.... tbqh the first thing I think of when I think of this is Dr. Malmuth and his (sorry doctor, no offense,) extremely poorly construed and monetarily motivated papers on the effects of pornography on male aggression.

Besides the Malamuth research (again sorry,) is there any critical reading which I should read? The majority of the research seems to focus on the human sexual response cycle, probably because neuroendocrine/sexual brain organization is fairly well known and is able to be altered epigenetically quite easily.

Then again, maybe I should go back to the Pavlovian response? It seems related but distinct from what I'm talking about, i.e. linear vs. non-linear relationships between stimulus and response.

Perhaps there is a particularly good area of study in the sister field of sociology as this deals with a large group rather than individuals?

I've asked my profs. about this, but they just give me a confused look and excuse themselves to go eat lunch. And please, use small words."
*******************************

TLDR: NEIL MALAMUTH = critical BASIC reading for analysis of the topic. Notice funding/grant trends & year. And then compare that to similar data regarding non-direct relationships.

Or, if you want to use plain talk: analyse any areas that have HIGH levels of sex/gender civil/public/domestic/&&unresolved reports + the projected data off of Facebook and other websites vs. the relative size/demographic of the population.

The only problem is that some people intentionally skew information. But I've been saying that for a while. You may think I'm talking about myself (I'm not.) I'm in fact referring to Neil Malamuth and people of similar schools of thought who continue to lay the foundation for the acts of politicizing trivial issues that are solved internally with positive information cascades and feedback.

The MSM then uses this information as a focal point & all else follows. Mostly, what you're talking about.

ALL THINGS BEING SAID!!!! Even though his thoughts are very primitive, the play out in certain situations more than others.

Using psychology, I'd cite flight/fight situations.

Like, say during times of severe political unrest/'social disturbances'. Like, idk, riots or protests or whatever.

Any-who... that seems to be the minimalist version of the opinion of ATS? *As a whole with certain reservations*

I guess I posted that independent thread too early. My bad. 鐵 分戈!!!

Not once have I said porn should be banned or that I believe all Men that watch porn become violent rapists. It's not easy to debate the pros and cons about porn, especially if your a woman. Only one person even acknowledged the film I provided, and even then I was left with the impression many men believe that porn stars become rich and famous, that just isn't true for most of them, lol, and ironically it is probably the "feminist" types that take control of their destinies be it in porn or any other profession.

I gave my honest opinion and shared a very sad and personal story. The fact is 1 in 4 women have been sexually assaulted in some way. My daughter screamed and fought like hell when she was abducted and thrown into a car by 2 men at knife point 2 blocks from her Fathers home in a middle class neighborhood, I have written about this in more detail in another thread, these guys are now in jail. I will openly admit that what happened to her, as well as my life experiences has influenced my feelings and although many men feel porn has nothing to do with this, I would have to respectfully disagree, the escalation of extreme porn seems to speak for itself IMO.

Not once did I disrespect other members rights or their opinions, other then to disagree that porn can be harmful, for that I have been directly and indirectly accused of being a feminist, Nazi, liar, uptight, angry "fugly" woman with some sort of agenda.....one member even went as far as to say " I made them sick"......talk about "bully tactics" to shut down my rights to have an opinion without fear of judgement, that quite honestly really has "hurt" me here and in real life.

The OP's original point was that blocking porn in the UK was a good thing, I disagree for the reasons we have discussed, but I think to deny the negative effects some porn has on some people is as insane as trying to regulate porn.

p.s. I don't believe in banning guns either since that was brought up, but I personally don't own any either because I know what my personal limits are......

Porn is extremly popular, more than most imagine/admit.

Compare that with sex related crimes you find a MASSIVE ratio different.

How about comparing those who watch porn and those that dont of people who commit sex crimes. I wonder if the ratio is the same as everyone elses ratio.

reply to post by MountainLaurel


Pardon me?!

I was referring to the politicization and confirmation process that is encouraged.

Which you JUST contributed to, thank you very much for your defensive rant after BLATANTLY ignoring what I had written.

Originally posted by teachtaire
reply to post by MountainLaurel

 

Pardon me?!

I was referring to the politicization and confirmation process that is encouraged.

Which you JUST contributed to, thank you very much for your defensive rant after BLATANTLY ignoring what I had written.

Pardon me..... but I had not even read your "rant" as I was posting myself at the time......and after reading it I have no idea what your even saying exactly? Anyways all I contributed was my truth, based on my reality......I didn't blatantly ignore anything.....your clever little "word game" does nothing to bring understanding to this discussion.....

reply to post by MountainLaurel


Okay, keep talking about leprechauns and unicorns and other things that don't exist and never happened.

I guess someone feels threatened about me talking about the facts of the matter.

Originally posted by teachtaire
reply to post by BrianFlanders

 

You have been more reasonable than one-eyed psych trigger black puppy of death.

Any-who, posting something similar which addresses this... in part... :

"I came up with a belief during a brief thought experiment regarding psychology:

Non-linear relationships must exist between supraliminal and subliminal stimuli, such relationships must also exist between the stimulus and response cycle as well.

To date, all I've found on this particular subject is "Critical Importance of Stimulus Unawareness for the Production of Subliminal Psychodynamic Activation Effects: An Attributional Model"

which I'm unable to read (any working links for a full text that is free would be appreciated.)

I'm casually interested in such things but have yet to take psychology. It seems that this line of inquiry leads into research on psychodynamic activation.... tbqh the first thing I think of when I think of this is Dr. Malmuth and his (sorry doctor, no offense,) extremely poorly construed and monetarily motivated papers on the effects of pornography on male aggression.

Besides the Malamuth research (again sorry,) is there any critical reading which I should read? The majority of the research seems to focus on the human sexual response cycle, probably because neuroendocrine/sexual brain organization is fairly well known and is able to be altered epigenetically quite easily.

Then again, maybe I should go back to the Pavlovian response? It seems related but distinct from what I'm talking about, i.e. linear vs. non-linear relationships between stimulus and response.

Perhaps there is a particularly good area of study in the sister field of sociology as this deals with a large group rather than individuals?

I've asked my profs. about this, but they just give me a confused look and excuse themselves to go eat lunch. And please, use small words."
*******************************

TLDR: NEIL MALAMUTH = critical BASIC reading for analysis of the topic. Notice funding/grant trends & year. And then compare that to similar data regarding non-direct relationships.

Or, if you want to use plain talk: analyse any areas that have HIGH levels of sex/gender civil/public/domestic/&&unresolved reports + the projected data off of Facebook and other websites vs. the relative size/demographic of the population.

The only problem is that some people intentionally skew information. But I've been saying that for a while. You may think I'm talking about myself (I'm not.) I'm in fact referring to Neil Malamuth and people of similar schools of thought who continue to lay the foundation for the acts of politicizing trivial issues that are solved internally with positive information cascades and feedback.

The MSM then uses this information as a focal point & all else follows. Mostly, what you're talking about.

ALL THINGS BEING SAID!!!! Even though his thoughts are very primitive, the play out in certain situations more than others.

Using psychology, I'd cite flight/fight situations.

Like, say during times of severe political unrest/'social disturbances'. Like, idk, riots or protests or whatever.

Any-who... that seems to be the minimalist version of the opinion of ATS? *As a whole with certain reservations*

I guess I posted that independent thread too early. My bad. 鐵 分戈!!!

edit on 25-7-2013 by teachtaire because: 報畯墨黑炎炎炎炎炎炎炎

Massive assault on civil liberties, regardless of the reason (the road to hell is paved with good intentions).

I'm wondering if there is some hidden agenda here; the internet is awash with porn to cater for the evidently great (mostly male) interest.

People are going to have to say that they want access to it.

Think of the revenue the government could generate by making people pay for the privilege.....

I'm in the adult industry, and I personally think it's a good idea. Sex is used so much in marketing and manipulation, perhaps preventing children from viewing such things will help them focus on things of more importance.

On another note, how difficult would that be to block all pornography? Is that really possible??

reply to post by czechosicilian


If you can shift the area of effect affected by an EMP, I'd think blocking all porn should be pretty dang easy.

The problem is when people get smart and start using high level image/data encryption. Point & counterpoint on down the road.

Originally posted by MountainLaurel
Not once have I said porn should be banned

Never fear. You don't need to. All you have to do is add your voice to the chorus of voices praising this shady maneuver by the British government. They will take all the support they can get. They don't care what you really want. All that matters is drowning out the opposition so they can say the majority is supporting an anti-porn agenda. As you may or may not be aware, this is one of the biggest reasons why TPTB are always emphasizing poll results, collectivism and Democracy. Because they know they can always manipulate people into voting other people's rights away. But it needs to be up for a vote first. Right?

or that I believe all Men that watch porn become violent rapists.

But you did find it necessary to mention your daughter had been raped in an anti-porn post. I just didn't see how that was relevant at all. Especially if you aren't implying that porn causes rape. Or maybe you are? If you are implying that, then how do you explain the men who watch tons of porn and don't rape? Like I said, I can almost guarantee you that I have seen far more porn than the men who raped your daughter. I'd be willing to bet the amount of porn they had seen was probably rather puny compared to someone like me.

So how else do you explain it unless it is no one else's fault but the person who chooses to commit rape?

It's not easy to debate the pros and cons about porn, especially if your a woman. Only one person even acknowledged the film I provided, and even then I was left with the impression many men believe that porn stars become rich and famous

I don't pay any attention to anti-porn films because they are obviously created with an objective in mind. They obviously are not being objective. They are obviously cherry picking and seeking out the worst things they can find. Digging for dirt. Occasionally there will be one that is pro-porn (which is just as biased as an anti-porn one). They will almost always claim to be objective and they're almost always lying.

As far as porn stars getting rich and famous, I certainly don't believe that all of them do. Most of them don't. This should be easy to guess just by doing the tiniest bit of observation. That is immaterial. When I say I believe in the freedom to make choices, I don't mean I believe in the freedom to make choices as long as they are good ones. That isn't freedom. Real freedom is the freedom to make bad choices. The porn industry should do everything it can to weed out the people who aren't right for porn as a simple matter of self-preservation. But obviously, you can't legislate this. Maybe some of them do try. I don't know.

I gave my honest opinion and shared a very sad and personal story. The fact is 1 in 4 women have been sexually assaulted in some way.

Once again, what does that have to do with porn? If you look into the numbers, sex crime has been on the decline since the 90s, I believe. Hmmm. That's about when the internet started to grow. Coincidence? Maybe. I doubt it. I think people who are satisfied are less likely to try to take what they want by force.

The OP's original point was that blocking porn in the UK was a good thing, I disagree for the reasons we have discussed, but I think to deny the negative effects some porn has on some people is as insane as trying to regulate porn.

I am not denying anything. I am simply stating a fact. Sex crime is not caused by porn. If it was, there wouldn't have been any sex crime before porn existed. You need to look for the real reasons for these things instead of taking the path of least resistance.

No one is denying that violent porn exists. But you are trying to argue that rape happens because violent porn exists and I think that's backwards. I believe violent (but still consensual) porn exists because there are people who have violent fantasies. You can worry that these people will watch this porn and then go do something bad but then, in order to be consistent, you'd have to worry that someone who enjoys boxing is going to walk around randomly beating people up. It does happen but we don't have to constantly argue with people who are whining about the negative effects of boxing. Some people just do bad things. Boxing doesn't cause it and porn doesn't cause it. They do it because they want to. You can't blame anyone else for that. You can't stop every bad thing from happening. We should punish the people who are actually responsible. Punish the rapist. Yes. I know if we do it this way we have to wait until a rape actually happens and then go after someone who actually committed rape. That makes sense to me. Unfortunately, some people are so focused on revenge that they aren't satisfied even when they've seen to it that the actual rapist is punished. They need to spread the blame so they can keep getting even. Punishing one person might feel good but it doesn't last long enough. The next time they get angry, they need to see someone else punished.

Originally posted by MountainLaurel
It makes me sooo very sad that so many Men in this thread want to dismiss Women's feelings in this thread..Do you think we all weren't sexual, "horny kids", do you think we didn't see porn, and maybe even enjoy it as a 'couples" activity, do you think we didn't know most Men had Playboy mags

The only feelings that we are dismissing are those of women in this thread trying to dictate to all of society that because they personally have a hang up or two about adult entertainment it should all be banned.

I really don't care what someone else thinks about the adult business and entertainment, if they don't like it, they don't have to watch it.
It's when those people use nonsense arguments and completely false claims to try to force their will on others that I become angry about it. They're not only attacking those who enjoy adult entertainment, they're attacking the other women who work in the business too, diminishing them and insulting them.

For a bunch of women who claim to be feminists, they sure are eager to attack other powerful women for making a career for themselves in a business they don't personally like!

Hypocrites much?

Originally posted by MountainLaurel
Single Men and Men that have a WILLING partner......Go For It.....but quit trying to convince the Women that have your back, that if you reject "extreme" porn, anal sex, fisting and rape porn as being somehow "uptight" your some kind of "Nazi" trying to shut down Men..... it's BS.

See, now you're getting into personal relationships and using the private lives of two people to stomp on all. I know several married couples who enjoy different things sexually, and their wives have no problem with their husbands enjoying adult entertainment.

I know one wife who is even happy for her husband to perform on camera.

You're viewing all couples as being the same, made from the same cookie cutter template, with the same beliefs as you. That's just not the case.

There are married couples out there who have various arrangements and agreements on these things, because they actually understand that men and women are indeed different. And if they don't have that middle ground or agreement between them, then what business is it of anyone else?

Originally posted by MountainLaurel
reply to post by InhaleExhale

 

Again, I learned a long time ago that this will very rarely be a subject Men and Women agree on, as for speaking for other Women I really feel comfortable that is not my agenda, I'm the Mother of a 22 yr old daughter that was raped by not one , BUT two men at 19 yrs old....as long as so many Men "believe" this is somehow what Woman "really" want...I stand by my conviction that extreme porn is harmful on many levels.....do you have the right to watch what you want, Yes, but as much as you wanna ignore the implications in the name of Freedom, fine.....I don't believe in censorship, which is the tricky part of this whole discussion.

That's a terrible thing to have happened, and I feel for you.

But, you're making this equation with no basis in evidence or fact. You are equating acting in "violent" scenes with a compulsion for rape, and there is no evidence at all to make that connection.

Did rape never exist before porn? How about before the invention of the VCR, were there never any cases of rape or child exploitation? Did it all just suddenly appear when people could watch it?

And how does this translate across all other media? Are there millions of men out there right now thinking they're super heroes? Are there millions of men trying to plan the perfect bank heist? Have millions of men become psychotic killers thanks to watching Saw?

No, it's nonsense. There are always people who do not know right from wrong. There are psychological issues, there are social issues, there are all kinds of things that lead to people acting out violently. Making a connection to porn and the actions of already messed up people is not a valid argument, it's never been linked, it's a "go to" argument by people who just want to find an explanation or use it to attack something they personally don't like.

There is one business I know of, and have worked with, based in the USA, which depicts BDSM and so on, and they have a full staff of more than 100 people from actors to camera crew to writers and set management - NONE OF THEM have ever acted violently toward others.

If we go by your example, surely some of those people should have been guilty of rape by now, seeing as they make this fantasy content for a living.