Uk porn ban to come into effect in july

[Techno-Druid]

All that will happen, even if VPNs are used, is that those who were underage will find it harder to be able to view stuff they weren't eligible to view in the first place.
Even to buy a VPN, you would probably have to get access to a credit card, something most teens are unable to do (without explaining to parent's why...) so even though it is a solution, it would probably only be undertaken by those old enough in the first place, whom the change in enforcement is not aiming for anyways.

If you're referring to prepubescent/early pubescent children then yes, but older adolescents are literally biologically programmed to desire sex to a degree (women reaching full sexual maturity at 15-16, men at 16-17) and aren't exactly going to have much difficulty getting access to pornographic images (whether it's from PornHub or teen sexting which is becoming increasingly more common).

[Sciborg]

It's good that the UK government is trying to teach kids more about the internet by encouraging them to explore and understand the usage of VPNs.

[Techno-Druid]

Whether or not they are programmed is entirely irrelevant. Having a desire to boink, doesn't suddenly give you the technological know-how to set up a VPN.

No, it just gives you the incentive to learn as well as find other ways to get off such as having real sex (which may be for the best tbh, too many people in my generation are having difficulties having sex, finding a long-term partner, learning to drive and getting their own house) but we will have to accept the fact that this could have implications that completely modify the sexual behavior of teens, just as access to porn on the internet did.

[Trassk]

No, it just gives you the incentive to learn as well as find other ways to get off such as having real sex (which may be for the best tbh, too many people in my generation are having difficulties having sex, finding a long-term partner, learning to drive and getting their own house) but we will have to accept the fact that this could have implications that completely modify the sexual behavior of teens, just as access to porn on the internet did.

it will also cause more rapes and sexual misconduct to occur, due to sexually frustrated teens unable to get their rocks off online.

I promise, when this comes into force, we're see a spike in how many teenagers commit acts like this.

[nocturnus]

It's "proven" that meat is unhealthy, so can we throw you in jail and take custody of your kids if you feed them meat?

This doesn't make a lot of sense. Enforcing the mature content law will not result in imprisonment or loss of custody.

I won't react to the meat claim, I'll just treat it as a poorly chosen example.

Well, movies don't accurately reflect what happens in the real world. Does it damage children to watch movies?

Not that it has anything to do with what you quoted, but they absolutely can. It strictly depends on the kind of content your children are exposed to, especially at a tender age.

it will also cause more rapes and sexual misconduct to occur, due to sexually frustrated teens unable to get their rocks off online.

There is absolutely no evidence to support this hypothesis. If anything, the opposite could be true since there is evidence of a correlation between being exposed to pornography and perpetrating sexual harassment. There is a lot of documentation on the effects of hardcore pornography on men, women and children. I'll see if I can find the source.

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

Actually, I am trying to stay as impartial as possible.
But people (and yourself) are constantly trying to argue a different view when there isn't one. There is no ban, there is no restriction beyond that which should already have been in place.
Honestly I couldn't give the slightest shits what people watch, be it soft or hardcore scat porn. But the law has, and always was there, and now it is being enforced and people are feigning and declaring outrage.

I have only been "aggressive" to people like yourself who insist on trying to bait and talk shit to inflame for no other reason than to act like dickwads. That is all.

Now carry on with your insults before switching back to whatever other accounts you use to try to bait people. I couldn't care less.

Impartial? Truly false.

A different view exists, I'm sorry that you think you're woke and anyone else who disagrees with you is wrong.

Factually a ban.

Enforcing a ban, got it.

You have been aggressive with everyone, regardless of whether they were aggressive first.

- - - Updated - - -

Tried to explain in basic terms, but you are just flame baiting at this point.

Bye.

It is literally a ban - this thread is about the enforcement of a ban.

- - - Updated - - -

Your definition is based on personal opinion, as opposed to how it will be utilised in a legal meaning.

Thus, I am afraid to say, and have said repeatedly and tired of doing so, contrary to what you may like to think, you are utterly and definitively wrong regarding this.


You are just trying to carry on an argument, and as I said, am honestly you have nothing to offer to the discussion. Bye.

Its the correct definition of the word. Its fact.

[Doctor Amadeus]

Meh...Porn is overrated lol

[Mormolyce]

This doesn't make a lot of sense. Enforcing the mature content law will not result in imprisonment or loss of custody.

I won't react to the meat claim, I'll just treat it as a poorly chosen example.

Well how else does the state "override" parents' wishes for their kids? If you read through the posts, this was an example where a parent decided that it's okay to show their children porn. It's not a poorly chosen example, I was responding to:

It is proven that porn is unhealthy. so the state should be able to override that.

And challenging the notion that the state should be able to override the parents on anything "proven unhealthy".

Not that it has anything to do with what you quoted, but they absolutely can. It strictly depends on the kind of content your children are exposed to, especially at a tender age.

Okay, so should the state be able to tell parents what films their children can and cannot watch, even when accompanied by said parent? Regardless of what the parent thinks of the film in question.

- - - Updated - - -

Meh...Porn is overrated lol

You've been watching the wrong porn.

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

This doesn't make a lot of sense. Enforcing the mature content law will not result in imprisonment or loss of custody.

I won't react to the meat claim, I'll just treat it as a poorly chosen example.


Not that it has anything to do with what you quoted, but they absolutely can. It strictly depends on the kind of content your children are exposed to, especially at a tender age.

There is absolutely no evidence to support this hypothesis. If anything, the opposite could be true since there is evidence of a correlation between being exposed to pornography and perpetrating sexual harassment. There is a lot of documentation on the effects of hardcore pornography on men, women and children. I'll see if I can find the source.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/release...1130111326.htm

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/b...sexual-assault

http://i.4pcdn.org/tg/1403795869933.pdf


.... is Standford a good source, or should we only use information from religiously backed studies in the UK?

[Doctor Amadeus]

You've been watching the wrong porn.

lol no such thing

[Mormolyce]

Meat us necessary for protien (in reasonable amounts)
Porn gives you a false imagination from the get go.

You don't need to get protein from meat, you can survive just as well on a good vegetarian or vegan diet.

But that's not the point, is it? IF it were proven that eating meat was unhealthy THEN would you support the government telling parents that they can't feed their kids meat? Presumably fining them or calling child protective services on them if they don't comply, potentially jailing them or taking their kids away?

[Kyphael]

Well, at least no one will ever be a wanker again.

[Mormolyce]

/hearty chuckle
Oh England, you silly, silly island you.

They have a conservative party in government. Can happen anywhere unfortunately.

- - - Updated - - -

Well, at least no one will ever be a wanker again.

I think you're about 17 pages late on that one I'm afraid.

[Vatrilian]

We seem to be moving into an odd weird society, almost oddly puritan. The Metoo movement has made everyone go sex crazy.

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

You don't need to get protein from meat, you can survive just as well on a good vegetarian or vegan diet.

But that's not the point, is it? IF it were proven that eating meat was unhealthy THEN would you support the government telling parents that they can't feed their kids meat? Presumably fining them or calling child protective services on them if they don't comply, potentially jailing them or taking their kids away?

You don't even need to say meat, what about just straight up using candy and soda? Meat does have some benefit, but candy and soda? Flat out bad for you.

[Mormolyce]

We seem to be moving into an odd weird society, almost oddly puritan. The Metoo movement has made everyone go sex crazy.

What does MeToo have to do with this?

This is because the conservative party is in power in the UK. They're been anti-porn since time immemorial. They always promise to do this kind of thing, gets them easy votes with family groups and social conservatives.

[therealstegblob]

Okay, let's just disregard 20 years of psychology.

Yeah, I agree. Let's disregard quack studies, lol.

[Minikin]

Its a fucking hubcap thread mate I'd save your breath Just pity the poor fucks who take any of his OPs literally, neigh any who even pay it attention for a moment.

I'll admit the irony of me posting here now to save others the effort of pointing it out.

OT this will be about as effective as the time I used to get little messages from Virgin media saying "Oops, sorry we've been asked by the UK gov to block access to this site!" for things like TPB. No one will be negatively affected except maybe people with very very little idea how things work.

Wth it's a hubcap thread?! Sneaky, got caught unawares.

Ot: the law has always existed you whiners

[nocturnus]

Okay, so should the state be able to tell parents what films their children can and cannot watch, even when accompanied by said parent? Regardless of what the parent thinks of the film in question.

In my opinion? Yes, absolutely.

Well how else does the state "override" parents' wishes for their kids?

I haven't read anything about imprisonment or loss of custody. I would think that they'll enforce it with fines mostly directed at the supplier of porn, rather than the child or parents. Much like catching an unerage individual in a bar.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/release...1130111326.htm

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/b...sexual-assault

http://i.4pcdn.org/tg/1403795869933.pdf


.... is Standford a good source, or should we only use information from religiously backed studies in the UK?

Maybe it wasn't clear, but I wasn't referring how pornographic material affects adult behaviour. I was referring to how it can affect children's behaviour.

Yeah, I agree. Let's disregard quack studies, lol.

Look mate, a quick Google search will show you that the studies aren't "quack" and that there's consensus about it. Philip Zimbardo, Carlo Foresta and many other scientists/psychologists did extensive research on the effects of pornography and the consequences of 'arousal addiction'. Gary Wilson wrote 'Your brain on porn', which admittedly, I haven't read yet since I have a truckload of research I have to get through before getting into leasure reading.

I never claimed that porn is - by definition - bad for you. I said it can have detrimental effects on various components of your social life, especially when consumed in large quantities and at a tender age.

[therealstegblob]

I never claimed that porn is - by definition - bad for you. I said it can have detrimental effects on various components of your social life, especially when consumed in large quantities and at a tender age.

No, your burden of proof stretches a little further than DURRRR GOGLE IT. There's no good consensus about it, only things from fucking staunch anti-porn quacks.

There's no evidence whatsoever that porn really does anything to you. Rather, it's a symptom of other issues.