|
|||||
|
| Porn Users Forum » User Ranks » User Post History |
Post History:
Tree Rodent (0)
|
| 701-708 of 708 Posts | < Previous Page | 1 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 8 | 14 | Page 15 |
| 11-06-08 07:38pm - 5903 days | #6 | |
|
Tree Rodent (0)
Active User  Posts: 708 Registered: Oct 29, '08 Location: UK |
Yes, I agree, there is definitely more bizarre freaky stuff nowadays because of the internet. The reason there is so much bizarre stuff from America on the internet is because of the laws governing video production. They aren't allowed to show these things on video, but they can get away with it at the moment on the internet. In fact, it is illegal to even make a pornographic video, showing straight sex in some American states. British mainstream TV is allowed to show much more than American TV. Germany was allowed to do just about anything until they just thought up the "young look" thing. Japan can do all sorts of stuff but can't show any genitals. It's certainly all fu**ed up. But maybe that's how governments like it. Enough grey areas and inconsistencies, so they can go after who they want to go after, and use loopholes in the same laws, to protect who they want to protect. I have always believed that is why the law has evolved into being so convoluted and complicated. It is simply so they can apply or use whatever law they want, in whichever way they want it, to suit their own ends. Yes, I also agree that the governments are going after the ISPs. That's what they're doing in the UK too. The governemnt is putting pressure on them all the time to stop people downloading pirate material. | |
|
||
| 11-06-08 06:58pm - 5903 days | #2 | |
|
Tree Rodent (0)
Active User Posts: 708 Registered: Oct 29, '08 Location: UK |
Using that criteria, a jury could find almost anything obscene. I don't think most people realise how restricted American video producers are. 20 years ago they could show almost anything. Nowadays watersports is most definitley out. Fisting is a no no. Spanking scenes can be prosecuted if they are linked in any way to sexual behaviour. Compared to European producers, there is very little allowed in the way of genuine deviation. No wonder the product from mainstream American porn is so bland. But these latest developments are certainly very interesting. The EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) is an organisation that is trying to get across the idea that internet does have, and should have different rules of copyright in order to protect free speech, innovation, and consumer rights. It argues amongst other things, that copyright is far too often used in a negative way. It also seeks to protect civil rights and privacy. The battle for control over the internet is being fought all the time. They are all seemingly little unconnected battles. But porn, and music rights battles amongst other things, are being fought right now by people, against organisations that have their own agenda. As usual, most of it is about control and power - which equals money. Edited on Nov 06, 2008, 07:48pm | |
|
||
| 11-05-08 05:47pm - 5904 days | #18 | |
|
Tree Rodent (0)
Active User Posts: 708 Registered: Oct 29, '08 Location: UK |
What should happen is that when some people can't control themselves, to the extent that they actually harm other human beings in a criminal act, the rest of the people, in the form of a democratically elected government intervene. This is because the government is supposed to represent the people's wishes, passing laws that the people want, for the people. In reality what happens, is the powerful minority who control the media, make sure the only people who get elected, are the ones that are going to represent the wishes and interests of the powerful minority. IMO there is no free speech because the rich minority own the media, and the media are the ones who get to decide who is elected, what opinions and what truth is published. The last group of people I want in control of the internet is the government, because it is the last place where there is true freedom of speech. They have managed to stifle it everywhere else, and as I have said in another post, they now use the excuse of terrorism, paedophilia, extreme porn, and mass murder, to try and control the internet. It's just my opinion, but personally I do not want governments controlling what can and can't be seen online. Inevitably they will control it. There is another reason the internet is so dangerous, apart from free speech, and that is you can download media far cheaper then anywhere else. Not so good for giant corporations. So yes, these people need to control it, and in the end they will get their way, under the guise of protecting the poor, dumb, uneducated, impressionable, weak masses. For their own good, of course. Edited on Nov 05, 2008, 05:52pm | |
|
||
| 11-04-08 06:43pm - 5905 days | #31 | |
|
Tree Rodent (0)
Active User Posts: 708 Registered: Oct 29, '08 Location: UK |
Sorry I'm late on this thread but I just joined. So much that has been said here is something I have wanted to scream about for years. I just have to add my pet hates - which are basically just about the same as everyone else. 1. Tattoos - toally sick of them. Total turn off. 2. Fake breasts - totally sick of them. Total turn off. 3. Too many close up gynaecological shots. 4. Focus on some idiot guy's face for about 2 minutes as he pulls faces, when what I want to be seeing is the girl's body. 5. Too much talk from some brain dead guy, followed by more talk from some other brain dead guy, when what I want to be seeing is the girl's body. 6. So much make up and surgery, the female looks like some 50 year old woman who is trying to look 18, and ends up looking 80, even though she is probably only 35. 7. Sex with underwear on. I know this is actually a turn on for some people. Just a matter of taste I suppose. 8. Cheap disco music in the backround. 9. Cheap disco music played LOUD. 10. Piercings. 11. Too much oral and close ups of oral. Again I know this is a turn on for some people. Just a matter of taste, once again, I suppose. | |
|
||
| 11-03-08 03:29pm - 5906 days | #54 | |
|
Tree Rodent (0)
Active User Posts: 708 Registered: Oct 29, '08 Location: UK |
Bugger - I misspelled lollipops. Oh the shame! But thanks Monahan and Wittyguy. My fear is we will look back on this era in ten years and think about it as the good old days when you could look at and download just about anything. Governments are already finding ways to stop downloading of pirated material, by making ISPs caution and then ban members who continually download. It's why I have always liked the idea of satellite. No wires, no connections, no ISP's or providers of any type. Once you have the dish you can tune in to just about anything that technology and money will allow. Severe regulation of the internet is sadly inevitable. Corporations know how to manipulate the fears of the public using the media, so they can regulate what we consume, and how we consume it. Now if only someone can advance this internet thing a bit further so that it can all be done by microwave signals without telephone or media companies being involved. Just tune into anything that's out there. Now wouldn't that be great? | |
|
||
| 11-03-08 02:29pm - 5906 days | #88 | |
|
Tree Rodent (0)
Active User Posts: 708 Registered: Oct 29, '08 Location: UK |
This seems to be as good a place as any to make an outsider's comment/suggestion. I don't think any anonymous rating should count. There are a few reasons for this. Obviously if one member does not like another he can mess up their percentages. Another reason is, that one member may not like the negative received from another, and so posts a negative in retaliation. Another reason would be that certain sites may not like negative reviews, so register as members, earn a few points, and then leave a negative to blacken the image of the member that left a fair review. Obviously removing anonymity would not stop all the above happening, but it would make the whole process more transparent. I think it would certainly help. | |
|
||
| 11-03-08 01:37pm - 5906 days | #52 | |
|
Tree Rodent (0)
Active User Posts: 708 Registered: Oct 29, '08 Location: UK |
Cheers, and thanks! There seems to be a lot of thoughtful discussion on here, so hope I can contribute. | |
|
||
| 11-03-08 12:14pm - 5906 days | #50 | |
|
Tree Rodent (0)
Active User Posts: 708 Registered: Oct 29, '08 Location: UK |
As a newbie I thought I'd make this my first post as it is one that caught my eye. For many years I have realised how governments try to control freedom of speech and expression. They love terrorism, paedophilia, murder, social unrest etc because it gives them a great chance to pass laws that restrict the freedom of its own people. The greatest threat to any people is generally its own government, as the majority is nearly always ruled by a wealthy minority, who control the media, and therefore control who gets elected. The most unpleasant and uncivilised countries generally have the most restricitive censorship. We're in a battle at the moment, because the internet means cheaper access to media, music, news, arts, and so on. This means less profit for the rich corporations who own the media, and who put politicians into power. The internet also means access to information and free speeech, which has always been anathema to governments and powerful corporations. These people will, as has been suggested on here, eventually take control of the internet. I think it is inevitable. They will use any excuse they can. They will use terrorism and extreme porn as an excuse to clamp down on freedom of expression and cheap access to media. This is a sort of crossover to the extreme thread on here. I could hardly read the description of some of those videos, but I just watch what I want to watch. I believe in freedom of speech and freedom of expression. When videos break the law, then maybe those who make them should be prosecuted. But in the past you could be breaking the law by being homosexual. Most of the laws are not passed for the majority but for the minority, under pretence of helping the citizens as a whole. This goes back 2000 years where they would pass laws en bloc. A bunch of laws would have one good law highlighted for citizens, along with 9 bad ones, which would favour the minority. Not only is censorship used to restrict rights of citizens, it also by inference, suggests that those who lead and control are superior to the rest of us. Superior enough to be able to tell us what is good for us, and what we should be doing and watching. We may not like or agree with some of the things we see or hear. Thankfully on here it looks like we have some very intelligent and well educated people. One thing governments have always hated, has been intellectuals who disagree with them. That's why simplistic tabloid journalism goes down so well. The governements like it, and so do people who let the media tell them what to think, because they are too stupid to think for themselves. But thanks to the way simplistic media influences its simplistic people, it will eventually be able to convince them that censorship and control of the internet is the only thing that can stop terrorism, mass murder, paedophilia, football hooliganism, smoking, public disorder and unrest, tax evasion, oh yeah - and driving without a TV licence, and stealing lolipops from sweet shops. Edited on Nov 03, 2008, 12:21pm | |
|
||
| 701-708 of 708 Posts | < Previous Page | 1 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 8 | 14 | Page 15 |
|
