has it been discussed on sh, cant recall anyway people are yelling about it so maybe we should take a sneaky peaky
so whats it all about
take a look
staggy
xx
Sex God
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
backlash
last reply
7 replies
1.1k views
1 watcher
0 likes
i gotta say i agree with the government on this
they want to ban extreem sites like the ones that the british/asian teacher involved in the london bombing was watching (the kind of site that supports terrorists)
also extreem violence & murder i think that the murderer of the young teacher from brighton area was addicted to such sites
i have seen some shocking/sickening video's ppl have shown me on mobile phones i dont see we will miss anything if these sites were banned & if it stops one person being or murdered it was worth banning
they want to ban extreem sites like the ones that the british/asian teacher involved in the london bombing was watching (the kind of site that supports terrorists)
also extreem violence & murder i think that the murderer of the young teacher from brighton area was addicted to such sites
i have seen some shocking/sickening video's ppl have shown me on mobile phones i dont see we will miss anything if these sites were banned & if it stops one person being or murdered it was worth banning
Orgasminator
Actually its not as clear cut as that...
I'll post the quote from an email I've had, then put my own slant in another post...
Stop the Government's War on Net Freedom
The Home Office has begun a consultation process on plans to strengthen
the criminal law in respect of possession of extreme adult images. The
government is currently discussing plans that could lead to people being
imprisoned for downloading images from the internet. This is a step too
far from a government determined to regulate every aspect of our lives
and quash individual expression.
Backlash is the campaigning organisation bringing together individuals
and activist groups to oppose this legislation. Read more about us on
the backlash website on
I urge you to voice your opposition to this legislation. Make a
submission to the Consultation Document
You can also view the document on the BBC
Some basic advice on how to write your submission is available.
It is highly recommend that you write to your MP. You can find out who
your MP is on the backlash website
. Some examples of letters members of Backlash have written can be found
here
. You should also contact justice organisations like Amnesty, Justice
and Liberty to tell them about your opposition.
If you are a member of a trade union or another lobby group, you could
also write a letter to them.
Sign our petition online or print off our petition and get as many
signatures as you can.
You can help in our media campaign by writing to the letter page of
your local paper or a national paper or a magazine.
You can also call into radio stations.
Join our Smartgroup to take part in the discussions.
We are also in urgent need of donations to help fund our campaign in
print.
The campaign around the government consultation is growing apace, with
action springing up pretty much everywhere. There is also (if a target
date for getting in response to the consultation of November 20. Two
weeks before deadline - in the hope that some people who are a tad less
organised will get going.
The text below comes from a request under the FIA in terms of what the
Home Office is thinking of including in its definition of images to be
banned. Read and weep!
This is NOT in any way about images of 'extreme violence'. Bondage is
in there. Corporal punishment is in there. The works. Basically, if
you ever did any bdsm, and you have pics on your pc, prepare to buy a
new pc in 18 months time.
Anyway. Take a look:
"And just in case you are wondering exactly what is going to be banned
under this new legislation, I have the complete list here (in simplified
format obtained under the Freedom of Information Act). Note this list is
by no means comprehensive as the Home Office Legal Department are adding
categories and clauses all the time but it gives you an idea of how wide
ranging this is:
Asphyxia. Where the person is being choked in order to gain sexual
pleasure.
. Sexual acts between humans and animals.
Bondage. Tying a person in an unnatural position for sexual
gratification where the participant is unable to withdraw their consent
(for example they are gagged).
Corporal Punishment. Inflicting pain on another person
Cruelty to animals. Includes organised dog fighting, bear baiting,
badger baiting, cock fighting. Also `crush' material which features
humans stamping on vertebrates or standing on them with increased
pressure until they are crushed.
Defecation. Voiding excrement from the bowels.
Enemas. Flushing the bowels with water, usually to drink the product or
torture the victim.
Fisting. (anal or vaginal) Inserting a fist in the anus or vagina for
sexual gratification.
Insertion of an object. Only where the insertion clearly inflicts pain.
Menstrual Blood. Sex between adults where the female is menstruating
heavily and the blood is being smeared on the body or the used tampon is
being sucked etc. This does not include post-intercourse depictions
where a small amount of blood can be seen on the participants.
Necrophilia. Sexual intercourse with a corpse.
Sado-masochism. Sadists achieve sexual pleasure through inflicting
torture and humiliation upon another person. Masochists desire
maltreatment as a means of sexual gratification.
Scatology. Depictions indicating a general interest in excrement such as
smearing or eating of excrement.
Urolagnia. The act of urination in the context of any of the following
where a person is shown: urinating at the same time as they are engaged
in a sexual act. The urination and sexual act must be seen at the same
time. The sexual act includes those such as fellatio (oral sex) and
masturbation which would not be obscene if shown without urination;
smearing urine on themselves or another; urinating on another person;
being urinated upon; drinking urine.
Violence (non-simulated). Scenes of actual violence or mutilation shown
in an exploitative context where they are not part of a legitimate
documentary. For example a compilation of newsreel footage concentrating
solely on scenes of violence or mutilation. This would also cover scenes
of actual sexual assault including .
Violence (simulated). Scenes of simulated sexual violence such as
shown in an exploitative context where the activity is graphically
depicted and clearly intended to appear non-consensual. This excludes
scenes contained in serious dramatic films."
^Thunder^
I'll post the quote from an email I've had, then put my own slant in another post...
Stop the Government's War on Net Freedom
The Home Office has begun a consultation process on plans to strengthen
the criminal law in respect of possession of extreme adult images. The
government is currently discussing plans that could lead to people being
imprisoned for downloading images from the internet. This is a step too
far from a government determined to regulate every aspect of our lives
and quash individual expression.
Backlash is the campaigning organisation bringing together individuals
and activist groups to oppose this legislation. Read more about us on
the backlash website on
I urge you to voice your opposition to this legislation. Make a
submission to the Consultation Document
You can also view the document on the BBC
Some basic advice on how to write your submission is available.
It is highly recommend that you write to your MP. You can find out who
your MP is on the backlash website
. Some examples of letters members of Backlash have written can be found
here
. You should also contact justice organisations like Amnesty, Justice
and Liberty to tell them about your opposition.
If you are a member of a trade union or another lobby group, you could
also write a letter to them.
Sign our petition online or print off our petition and get as many
signatures as you can.
You can help in our media campaign by writing to the letter page of
your local paper or a national paper or a magazine.
You can also call into radio stations.
Join our Smartgroup to take part in the discussions.
We are also in urgent need of donations to help fund our campaign in
print.
The campaign around the government consultation is growing apace, with
action springing up pretty much everywhere. There is also (if a target
date for getting in response to the consultation of November 20. Two
weeks before deadline - in the hope that some people who are a tad less
organised will get going.
The text below comes from a request under the FIA in terms of what the
Home Office is thinking of including in its definition of images to be
banned. Read and weep!
This is NOT in any way about images of 'extreme violence'. Bondage is
in there. Corporal punishment is in there. The works. Basically, if
you ever did any bdsm, and you have pics on your pc, prepare to buy a
new pc in 18 months time.
Anyway. Take a look:
"And just in case you are wondering exactly what is going to be banned
under this new legislation, I have the complete list here (in simplified
format obtained under the Freedom of Information Act). Note this list is
by no means comprehensive as the Home Office Legal Department are adding
categories and clauses all the time but it gives you an idea of how wide
ranging this is:
Asphyxia. Where the person is being choked in order to gain sexual
pleasure.
. Sexual acts between humans and animals.
Bondage. Tying a person in an unnatural position for sexual
gratification where the participant is unable to withdraw their consent
(for example they are gagged).
Corporal Punishment. Inflicting pain on another person
Cruelty to animals. Includes organised dog fighting, bear baiting,
badger baiting, cock fighting. Also `crush' material which features
humans stamping on vertebrates or standing on them with increased
pressure until they are crushed.
Defecation. Voiding excrement from the bowels.
Enemas. Flushing the bowels with water, usually to drink the product or
torture the victim.
Fisting. (anal or vaginal) Inserting a fist in the anus or vagina for
sexual gratification.
Insertion of an object. Only where the insertion clearly inflicts pain.
Menstrual Blood. Sex between adults where the female is menstruating
heavily and the blood is being smeared on the body or the used tampon is
being sucked etc. This does not include post-intercourse depictions
where a small amount of blood can be seen on the participants.
Necrophilia. Sexual intercourse with a corpse.
Sado-masochism. Sadists achieve sexual pleasure through inflicting
torture and humiliation upon another person. Masochists desire
maltreatment as a means of sexual gratification.
Scatology. Depictions indicating a general interest in excrement such as
smearing or eating of excrement.
Urolagnia. The act of urination in the context of any of the following
where a person is shown: urinating at the same time as they are engaged
in a sexual act. The urination and sexual act must be seen at the same
time. The sexual act includes those such as fellatio (oral sex) and
masturbation which would not be obscene if shown without urination;
smearing urine on themselves or another; urinating on another person;
being urinated upon; drinking urine.
Violence (non-simulated). Scenes of actual violence or mutilation shown
in an exploitative context where they are not part of a legitimate
documentary. For example a compilation of newsreel footage concentrating
solely on scenes of violence or mutilation. This would also cover scenes
of actual sexual assault including .
Violence (simulated). Scenes of simulated sexual violence such as
shown in an exploitative context where the activity is graphically
depicted and clearly intended to appear non-consensual. This excludes
scenes contained in serious dramatic films."
^Thunder^
i do see your point pierced-jon & do agree with you that all on the list is going a bit far as even most mp's have probably viewed some of those images
but i do still stand by what i said about as in a lot of sites should be banned or at least strictly regulated
maybe im just gettin old & should change my name to victor :shock:
but i do still stand by what i said about as in a lot of sites should be banned or at least strictly regulated
maybe im just gettin old & should change my name to victor :shock:
Orgasminator
As someone who is invloved in swinging and the BDSM comunity there are some photos and depictions (ie faked, drawn, painted etc.) that I find offencive... I have no interest in scat play, I believe that children should not be involved in adult material, Animials by the very nature of not being able to concent or not should not be included in the sexual activities of humans, and I don't find the idea of true necrophillia in the least bit exciting or sexual...
there are I'm sure many other things I dont like but dont come within the proposed legislation such as photos of grossly obese people that the daily sport was so fond of showing (gurt gut bucket, ) and overly skinny women such as are depicted on sites that link sexuality with bulmia and anorexia as both play up on a condition that is ultimatly life threatening and is hard to control for the individuals and less so if they are being "loved" into it by people.
The problem with the new law is that its very badly worded, and is being pushed through as a knee jerk reaction to one woman who died at the hands of a mentaly unstable person who used the premis "it was looking at pics that made me do it.. not my fault" to gain a lesser sentance.
This new law is a clever one, its really being introduced because the "obscene publications act" requires people to take a logical view of what is obscene... and while this is a very flexible view depending on whos chosen to class any "objected to" material and the morals and censorship at the time (If you look at playboy over the years, what is and is not allowed has gone from nothing, to all, to some hidden, to all on show over the years) but basically intelegent people view a photo that has come into the radar and give an opionion....
The new law negates intelegance and automatically makes all photos of a type against the law to download and view (it does not specifically prevent such photos being taken and posted on the net) but criminalises anyone viewing it...
I cant post a link to my site due to the fact i'm not allowed... but I've a gallery of 2 gay guys in a bondage senario, also my ex in a DS senario... and a friend suspended on a beam, and when it finally goes live 8 people suspended in a loft and vairious other senarious... all fully concenting, all "real" and not faked, and all enjoied by the people involved... all totally ilegal to view under the new law if it becomes enacted. Some because poeple are "obviously" unable to concent (masks/gags/etc.) others because it shows restraint, humiliation, etc....
Also there are thousands of girls who sign up and pose on "living dead girls" and "suicide girls" who all at some point do the dead goth in a bath with slashed wrists... Which while abhorent if the photos were for real are only classed as ilegal under the new law if they have a sexual content... well DUR!!!! their tits are out!
The new law at the same time being badly worded is also cleverly worded so that new catorgries can be added without going back to parliment for adaptation... so how long before they add "photos with more than one person" "photos with 1 person" "photos depeciting 3somes," as thats obvioulsy objectionable and abuse to the person in the middle... "photos depecting buckaki" as its humiliation to women and some depreaved guy might think that he can wank over a woman and might go on to rapeing or even killing her...
I'm not saying that some, or even any, of my work is particually art worthy, but there is a lot of very clasic art out there which is well reconised as "art" but potentially falls foul of this new law....
Heck, if you want to take it to its (il)logical conclusion then impressions of the christ on the cross technically fall within the remit of the new law as they show a person in bondage with a sado-mashicistic slant of needing the spikes driven through the hands to die for the good of others... at no point is it obvious that he has any way of using a safe word or giving concent.
So to sum up... its a crap law because it does not stop such works being created and only criminialises the people that view it and also it makes ilegal to view some of the greatest works of art, and also it includes photos that any person in their right mind would not have concidered capable of causing someone to go an comit a violent act against another...
The reality is that sick people will always comit sick acts... and there are a hell of a lot of sick people out there that dont comit sick acts because they find a release through wanking over visual/written material that slates their lust and prevents them from doing it for real... a sick fucker is a sick fucker and while they might be drawn to a specific type of material, it does not make them any sicker or any more likely to act out their desires.
there are I'm sure many other things I dont like but dont come within the proposed legislation such as photos of grossly obese people that the daily sport was so fond of showing (gurt gut bucket, ) and overly skinny women such as are depicted on sites that link sexuality with bulmia and anorexia as both play up on a condition that is ultimatly life threatening and is hard to control for the individuals and less so if they are being "loved" into it by people.
The problem with the new law is that its very badly worded, and is being pushed through as a knee jerk reaction to one woman who died at the hands of a mentaly unstable person who used the premis "it was looking at pics that made me do it.. not my fault" to gain a lesser sentance.
This new law is a clever one, its really being introduced because the "obscene publications act" requires people to take a logical view of what is obscene... and while this is a very flexible view depending on whos chosen to class any "objected to" material and the morals and censorship at the time (If you look at playboy over the years, what is and is not allowed has gone from nothing, to all, to some hidden, to all on show over the years) but basically intelegent people view a photo that has come into the radar and give an opionion....
The new law negates intelegance and automatically makes all photos of a type against the law to download and view (it does not specifically prevent such photos being taken and posted on the net) but criminalises anyone viewing it...
I cant post a link to my site due to the fact i'm not allowed... but I've a gallery of 2 gay guys in a bondage senario, also my ex in a DS senario... and a friend suspended on a beam, and when it finally goes live 8 people suspended in a loft and vairious other senarious... all fully concenting, all "real" and not faked, and all enjoied by the people involved... all totally ilegal to view under the new law if it becomes enacted. Some because poeple are "obviously" unable to concent (masks/gags/etc.) others because it shows restraint, humiliation, etc....
Also there are thousands of girls who sign up and pose on "living dead girls" and "suicide girls" who all at some point do the dead goth in a bath with slashed wrists... Which while abhorent if the photos were for real are only classed as ilegal under the new law if they have a sexual content... well DUR!!!! their tits are out!
The new law at the same time being badly worded is also cleverly worded so that new catorgries can be added without going back to parliment for adaptation... so how long before they add "photos with more than one person" "photos with 1 person" "photos depeciting 3somes," as thats obvioulsy objectionable and abuse to the person in the middle... "photos depecting buckaki" as its humiliation to women and some depreaved guy might think that he can wank over a woman and might go on to rapeing or even killing her...
I'm not saying that some, or even any, of my work is particually art worthy, but there is a lot of very clasic art out there which is well reconised as "art" but potentially falls foul of this new law....
Heck, if you want to take it to its (il)logical conclusion then impressions of the christ on the cross technically fall within the remit of the new law as they show a person in bondage with a sado-mashicistic slant of needing the spikes driven through the hands to die for the good of others... at no point is it obvious that he has any way of using a safe word or giving concent.
So to sum up... its a crap law because it does not stop such works being created and only criminialises the people that view it and also it makes ilegal to view some of the greatest works of art, and also it includes photos that any person in their right mind would not have concidered capable of causing someone to go an comit a violent act against another...
The reality is that sick people will always comit sick acts... and there are a hell of a lot of sick people out there that dont comit sick acts because they find a release through wanking over visual/written material that slates their lust and prevents them from doing it for real... a sick fucker is a sick fucker and while they might be drawn to a specific type of material, it does not make them any sicker or any more likely to act out their desires.
Orgasminator
Quote by sorts
i do see your point pierced-jon & do agree with you that all on the list is going a bit far as even most mp's have probably viewed some of those images
but i do still stand by what i said about as in a lot of sites should be banned or at least strictly regulated
maybe im just gettin old & should change my name to victor :shock:
No there are things that should be banned... and there are some sick sites out there... the problem I have is images of concent within a "bdsm" (its not even really about that) being legislated against viewing and even titilating "necrophilla" images being included... theres nothing sexier than a cute goth in a bath of blood with her nipples showing, lol.
I've not included it in the other post, but there are also a lot of films that are well renouned that technically are included in this new law... such as the one of with the scene with her from the silence of the lambs, also any film (good or bad) with vampires, also all the films that were baned then un-baned such as texas chain saw masacare (theres a semi naked woman) and so on... its a badly worded law and should not be allowed on the statue books.
Sex God
when i first heard the discussion about this at the brum bizzar last month i started shaking my head, just like you might expect from someone that doesnt really understand what backlash is all about, i mean there has to be limits, of course there does but as jon has sadi so elequently this isnt the way to go about it , the law will be open to abuse by governments and this must not be allowed to go ahead.
the original questionaire that was sent out said
do you agree there should be limits to what people can see, of course most people said yes , dont we all have limits to decency ??? well that was the clever bit , it allowed the campaigners for this law to go back and sugggest that all the people agree with the proposal.....
the original questionaire that was sent out said
do you agree there should be limits to what people can see, of course most people said yes , dont we all have limits to decency ??? well that was the clever bit , it allowed the campaigners for this law to go back and sugggest that all the people agree with the proposal.....
