It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
All my links work I just checked them. If they're not suitable to you or you are too lazy to do the reading, thats not my problem. go do your own investigation and see for yourself. Revictimisation, or self abuse-post early childhood abuse IS extremely relevent when it comes to the porn industry..expressivly so. If you dont know why..its not my job to enlighten you..big free old you go do the reading and hard work of finding out for yourself.
You said that this proposal would take away your right to view porn or would censor porn..it wont. READ the proposal. If you absolutely DIDNT say that..then I stand corrected.
As do you, and the porn industry moreso, for contributing to the delinquency of minors and by refusing to self regulate. Children are not lawmakers or adults. That doesnt mean they dont have a political voice or deserve the right to protection.
Its not my credibility at stake here. I am not on trial and I have no need to justify anything to you, the reality of life for womena nd children in our societies and the degredation of children and women world over is evidence enough, the truth speaks for itself. I did provide links to relevent points..the rest *is* up to you, again, I am not your secretary.
Why should we have to pay for expensive programs to opt out so you can jerk off for 'free'? I live in a city and share this city with men..I pay my yearly land rates and taxes too the same as them..I dont pay for their nights in brothels however..thats theirs not mine to pay...same location doesnt mean I am responsible to pay for how they meet their PERSONAL needs. Same deal with the net. You use..you pay...why should everyone else! My children see naked bodies all the time, this isnt about naked bodies or healthy sexual exploration..its the perversion of healthy sexual exploration...its about retaining the right to CHOICE. This is about abuse and violence dressed up as sex and abusers and violent offers using those platforms to target and sexualise children to a particular viewpoint, and for some, using hte anonmity and hiding place of the net to commit and justify crimes.
No one is forcing you to breath air either..yet you do. All we are being asked to do in this proposal is to help close a door on the bedroom of public sex on the net...and thats is too much for you?
No.I said the research on the benefits of OPT IN hasnt been done yet..becase every time someone suggests acting in 'shockingly mature and responsible manner' about potentially abusive locations for adult sex, people such as yourself decry it...yet you go on to whine and blame the 'world' for your social problems and lament the decay of society at large, and wonder why and how it got there! What did you expect would happen?
YOU DONT LIVE IN A VACCUME - that is what I am talking about..EVERYTHING has a knock on effect and if you are not willing to step up to the plate to be accountable for the knock on effects of YOUR choices and the result of your demands for 'rights' without the inherrent responsibility that comes with having them then dont make or claim them! Clear enough?
What you read IS hard data preapred by people who know what they are talking about who have to deal with the real life consequences every day - authorites on the subject of 'affect'. If that isnt authortative enough for you, thats not my problem. GO to your own statistical board and see there. Again I am not your secretary. DO YOUR OWN RESEACH stop expecting to be spoonfed
b*llsh*t! Forgive me if I do not believe you...or in your idea of what fun is.
That's the point - IT IS hurting others. You're just not hearing that..you dont want to. None are so blind...
So those that come after you and have to clean up your mess dont matter..dont count..so long as you can access your porn anytime anywhere anyway you like the worlds a good secure fun place right....right.
Originally posted by SaturnFX
Originally posted by aivlas
reply to post by woogleuk
I think it blocks words, strict safe surf wont let me search the web/pics or vid for pussy
Yank porn we have Europe next door thanks.edit on 20-12-2010 by aivlas because: (no reason given)
Sadly, that also is not legal in the UK
basically, anything hardcore..or even like..medium..core is not allowed in the UK.
for the children and whatnot.
Originally posted by justwokeup
reply to post by something wicked
Do you have to register with the government as a smoker?
Do you have to register with the government as a drinker? Are you ok if the government keeps a record of what you drink and where you drink. Information they eventually will abuse or just lose on a laptop through plain incompetence
To apply a correct analogy this is like banning public entry to pubs/clubs and those places where cigarettes are sold except for people who have applied for the special government 'vice' pass. And as a special bonus keep the definition nice and open so you can expand it as need be.
its not washing with me, sorry.
Originally posted by aivlas
reply to post by Honor93
So me just repeating what you said but changing it slightly is nasty? but you writing it is funny?
LARP is not mainstream, porn is.
Dateline is not cool
I think the idea of this block is unworkable
I think the people who want/need to get around it will and the masses wont care either way
I don't think it has anything to do with pedophilia
I don't think it will increase acts of pedophilia off line
"you have absolutely no idea do you? this wont stop pedophilia at all." Was misworded I apologize deeply and it was cleared up in this post
edit on 20-12-2010 by aivlas because: (no reason given)edit on 20-12-2010 by aivlas because: (no reason given)edit on 20-12-2010 by aivlas because: sorted link
Originally posted by justwokeup
reply to post by something wicked
no its not facetious at all. A little aggressively written maybe, if so I apologise.
The filtering should be on the front end. At the machine being used, under the control of the owner of the machine.
Not at the back end under direction of the government.
I have no problem with filtering. I have no problem with it being mandatory for public access terminals. I have no problem with educating people to secure their own private terminals through public funds. I have no problem with free distribution of net nanny or helping setup of open DNS.
I do have a total problem with having to apply for permission to use my own private terminal in a particular manner.
Originally posted by aivlas
But it wont stop minors accidently seeing porn online it might cut it down slightly while using a browser, but what about all the mislabeled files on the p2p networks and file hosting sites.
Originally posted by DimensionalDetective
UK plans to block all porn in effort to 'protect children'
www.rawstory.com
(visit the link for the full news article)
The UK's coalition government is discussing a plan that would see all pornographic websites automatically blocked in an effort to keep children from accessing them.
Under the proposed plan, which appears to have the backing of Britain's major Internet service providers, the government would provide ISPs a list of objectionable websites, which the ISPs would automatically block. An Internet surfer would then have to "opt in" to be allowed to see the content.
Seller is under legal obligation to only allow product to be sold to people who meet guidelines as define by the government. In this case, cigarettes in the UK cannot legally be sold to under 16s. Now, if we make the supplier the web site providing porn, the seller the ISP...... what's different from what has been proposed?
(or as mentioned earlier, get outside and away from the computer)
Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes
"You're not allowed to put hardcore pornographic images in a public place or shop window in the 'real-word', and to view these you have to ''opt-in'' to a private adult-shop" ~~ Nooo, you can walk in, you can send in a friend, you can order through a magazine and have it delivered elsewhere, you can order by phone ... the internet is not the only choice and certainly not a new one and neither is porn ... they should evolve, together.
"I don't see how this is any different" -- well ok, but many of us do and i have managed an adult shop so i have an intimate familiarity with the subject. [age 21 to enter without any entertainment or alcohol]
"This is to prevent young children from accidentally viewing inappropriate material" ~~ yeah, we read that too, But, HOW does this get accomplished better than today? Do you realize how many ppl would 'opt-in' given an only choice? that is why the push so hard ... $$$ and more $$$ and the icing on top / net neutrality
"It is very common for me to stumble across a pornographic image or a link to a pornographic site, just by typing in a perfectly innocuous word or phrase, even when the search option is set to ''moderate''. ~~ clearly you need better management software or site specific entries. learn it and use it instead of abusing it.
Originally posted by something wicked
Originally posted by justwokeup
You can have children and still oppose this idea. I have a child and I oppose it.
We have enough of a nanny state as it is in the UK.
This is about the future generations and not giving up any more freedom. Its not about the porn, its about what inevitably follows.edit on 19-12-2010 by justwokeup because: typos
Hi, do you oppose your child not being served alcohol in a pub (assuming of course they are under the legal age)? Do you oppose your child not being able to buy - legally - cigarettes if they are under the legal age?
If you do, then following your comments, why? What difference do you see?