In the News

[Lady Grey]

This porn thing is actually just an automatic parental control type thing by Internet providers that you can turn off right?

Because that seems fine to me. It's just if they were totally banning it I'd disagree... It makes you wonder where censorship would stop if that happened.

Obviously though, I'm of the opinion that illegal porn should be blocked/taken down/banned etc.

[Son of the King]

While it is fine where porn is related (maybe have it so that you opt in to having porn blocked, rather than opting out though), the quote CG got from the comments on the BBC article is right, once censorship has started it will be harder to stop.

[Clockwork]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23401076

Oh noes they are stealing all of teh porn.

Any thoughts on this? I like the idea of it myself. Also
"In addition, the prime minister will say possessing online pornography depicting rape will be illegal."
armadillo I'd always assumed that was already the case.

In the porn industry simulated rape is common, couples do this irl as well though it's considered an oddity usually. Though then again who draws the line as to what is 'simulated', it's not as easy as: well she's paid for it and knows what she's getting into.  Because I very much doubt that is always the case.

I'm in two minds about this. Yes for sure that kids are watching it and the type of 'it' too young. But say you have an early twenties male living with his parents who for various shallow and self loathing reasons watches porn. Would said unnamed individual want his internet bill paying parents to know about said hypothetical habits? It may be legal but it's also a little shameful.

Then again pirating sites are banned and we all know how that goes.

[Jubal]

It also raises the question of what counts as porn, which I think is a major, major issue here.

So I'm massively in favour of rape porn being illegal, that I think is a fairly obvious point to target. Also further crackdowns on illegal pornography in general, possibly including putting the onus more on the person providing the child with computer access, would be good.

On the other hand, the stuff on legal porn being censored I'm pretty dubious about;
1) pornography is classed as basically any sexually explicit matter used for sexual gratification. The last part of that definition is user-end so not in question here; if any erect penis or pair of exposed breasts counts as sexually explicit, then most of the main sites on the internet should be blocked by this legislation.
2) this confuses issues around pornography and implies that everyone who's ever seen tits on the internet is on a slippery slope to being a sex offender and in jail for the rest of their lives, and/or that it's unnatural or wrong for children during puberty to decide the other gender's genitals actually look sort of interesting. I think it is very wrong to give children lots of access to over-sexualised material, but it's also important that we don't end up with them all falling back on illegal and harder to monitor (and potentially nastier) porn sources.
3) This would just generally make more sense as an opt-in system. I think everyone should have the option of not looking at porn and parents should be helped to avoid showing their children, but I generally don't like assumptions of censorship first and ask questions later.
4) "Studies suggest the filtering systems can be fooled quite easily and present no real obstacle to anyone that can use a search engine." - BBC News. How the hell is this going to work and who's liable? No practical solution has been suggested.
5) For softcore porn in particular I really don't think it's up to the government to decide what should be socially normative. Some (probably most) porn is demeaning to women, I don't doubt, and that is wrong. Some gives a very messed up view of sex and relationships, too, which is equally problematic. On the other hand some of these things we've got to deal with as a society not by clamping down but by creating and working with cultural norms.

So tl;dr version: cutting back on nastier forms of porn good, autocensoring legal porn impractical as a system and moreover could have negative unintended consequences.

[Gen_Glory]

Don't most ISP already provide a parental lock?
And as this is being sold as protect the children, isn't it just a law to cover bad parents?

This seems like a precursor to more drastic internet monitoring, also this is a good way of pulling attention away from the fact we are being monitored by the government

Also http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/51746 sign it! SAVE OUR PORN

[comrade_general]

Purely hypothetical eh, Rob?

The whole thing doesn't sit well with me, nor do I think it would with the majority of the folks in this country, what with our insane views on various freedoms and self-expression and junk.

[Clockwork]

I have no idea what you mean c_g

[Jubal]

I'm fairly sure it could be ruled unconstitutional in the US. Hopefully it won't get far here, depends how much of a moral crusade the papers decide to go on and how many people care I guess. Conflating the issue of legal porn use with child protection is really out of order though I think.

EDIT: Also this http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-23409404 is a bad piece of science journalism and annoys me a lot. "Things aren't simple or dramatic so they must be wrong" isn't an argument. I wouldn't mind if he had a bunch of scientists on either side, but he doesn't, he's got a bunch of scientists arguing against... basically nothing.

[Scarlet]

Ohdeadgod. Just the title of the article. And then you keep reading.

[Jubal]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23665106

SERIOUSLY WHAT THE HELL.

I mean, correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't that ruling go against pretty much the entire legal history of the US?

[comrade_general]

One nutjob judge trying to throw their religious bullarmadillo around. It will get repealed by someone else I'm sure.

[Jubal]

Yeah, I figured it was one nutjob. Still, worrying that those sorts of people can get that high up in the legal profession.

[Scarlet]

OH FOR PITY'S SAKE!

[Pentagathus]

What are we thinking on the recent news on Syria? I'm not exactly shocked that our MPs voted against military action, but apparently I should be.

[comrade_general]

Doesn't matter what I think here; if we do something people will say "get out of there, you have no right, stop being the world police etc." and if we don't do anything people be like "how cruel to stand aside and let these atrocities occur etc." There's no winning when you're American.