• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Does 'rape culture' accurately describe (many) societies?

Poem said:
Rachel de Souza disagrees with you:

"It's going through the Lords at the moment - we need it to go through, we need children not to be able to access porn, particularly this violent porn, online."
Click to expand...

That doesn't mean online porn is going away. Unless the UK is going to institute something like China's "great firewall", which still can by bypassed. The average 10 year old is capable of installing Tor or something like it and accessing servers in Sweden, the USA, etc.
 
lobosrul5 said:
That doesn't mean online porn is going away. Unless the UK is going to institute something like China's "great firewall", which still can by bypassed. The average 10 year old is capable of installing Tor or something like it and accessing servers in Sweden, the USA, etc.
Click to expand...

Indeed, I didn't say otherwise. But de Souza is clear that young people including 8 years olds should not be seeing this material.

As a society we should be asking why that isn't happening.
 
Poem said:
Indeed, I didn't say otherwise. But de Souza is clear that young people including 8 years olds should not be seeing this material.

As a society we should be asking why that isn't happening.
Click to expand...

And this is going to be achieved ... How?

Keep them in a Faraday Cage 24/7 ?

I think it would be more useful to expose them to comedians who make fun of sex in general and porn in particular.
 
Last edited:
The Great Zaganza said:
And this is going to be achieved ... How?

Keep them in a Faraday Cage 24/7 ?
Click to expand...

It wont be achieved because there is no will to make it happen - not because it isn't possible. Why would the Children's Commissioner say is should happen if it wasn't possible?
 
Poem said:
Indeed, I didn't say otherwise. But de Souza is clear that young people including 8 years olds should not be seeing this material.

As a society we should be asking why that isn't happening.
Click to expand...

Because technology makes it virtually impossible to implement without very serious "big brother" style surveillance and limitations. I got access to porn at an early age before home internet access was really a thing (and I didn't have it anyways). Trying to pass legislation to keep kids from seeing it these days is just "feel good" legislation to make people think their representatives are "doing something". Its a virtual impossibility. Changing societal norms so that kids are monitored at all times on all devices/screens is probably impossible and possibly more harmful than beneficial anyways.
 
Poem said:
Yes.

You think she isn't serious?
Click to expand...

She is a politician - being seen to do something is 4/5th of having done something.

Porn has been with humanity forever, and every new medium creates a new wave of outrage and "concern for the children".
And yet civilization doesn't crumble.

By the time we have a way to effectively control access to Internet porn, technology will have moved on to something else.

What she and other fail to account for is the superficiality with which all media is being consumed - by the time something could leave a deep impression, it is replaced by the next thing.

Again, I think that humor is the key here.

My upbringing might be unusual, but the bands we listened to joked about bad sex, porn and even beastiality before I encountered the actual stuff - at which point it was neither shocking nor interesting.

Humor is a great way to help people, especially kids, through confusing topics.
 
Poem said:
Thanks.

Why would the MSM (on the whole) ignore the fact that Pornhub's employees have admitted on camera to totally inadequate moderation? As I said, Sound Investigations says they have had MSM coverage but I haven't found any.

Surely, the charges against Pornhub are so serious that any society that actually respected consent and age limits would demand that they be shut down? It's the nature of the supply chain that is so disturbing. As theprestige put it:



As we speak, traffickers and rapists are profiting from their uploaded Pornhub videos. The Sound Investigations video on Mike Farley went up five months ago.
Click to expand...

Well I was aware of some of the issues raised about Pornhub and other sites before your thread and my news comes from (except on some specific issues/matters) "the MSM". Pornography is because of the many social and cultural sensitivities a hard subject for the MSM to deal with. Plus in my country there has a been a lot of discussion over many years because of the "Online Safety" legislation that was enacted last October. That gives the government wide powers over what people in my country are allowed to see and how we are allowed to see it. As far as I am aware this has not affected the legality of Pornhub, of course it could be that it is being investigated at the moment and we simply haven't been informed. (Our law enforcement agencies investigate many things that we only learn about if it makes it to the next stage, usually prosecution.)

Should Pornhub be closed down because of lax moderation, I would need to know about the percentages involved, what is the volume of illegal content? 1 in 10 would be terrible 1 in a million may not be (I don't know how many performances Pornhub has for viewing so those are very much pulled out my arse numbers.) As I'm not a believer in the idea that we can ever create perfect systems that won't occasionally fail - it's the occasional failure rate that for me is critical.
 
Poem said:
Rachel de Souza disagrees with you:

"It's going through the Lords at the moment - we need it to go through, we need children not to be able to access porn, particularly this violent porn, online."
Click to expand...

Aren't you in danger of mixing different issues? What we allow children to see and do is in many areas of life very different to what an adult is allowed to see and do. (As it should be.)
 
lobosrul5 said:
Because technology makes it virtually impossible to implement without very serious "big brother" style surveillance and limitations. I got access to porn at an early age before home internet access was really a thing (and I didn't have it anyways). Trying to pass legislation to keep kids from seeing it these days is just "feel good" legislation to make people think their representatives are "doing something". Its a virtual impossibility. Changing societal norms so that kids are monitored at all times on all devices/screens is probably impossible and possibly more harmful than beneficial anyways.
Click to expand...

I disagree that it necessarily requires draconian measures, it would be straightforward to implement an age verification system which could anonymously allow adults to gain access to age restricted sites. By anonymously I mean both from the government side and the site side.
 
Darat said:
I disagree that it necessarily requires draconian measures, it would be straightforward to implement an age verification system which could anonymously allow adults to gain access to age restricted sites. By anonymously I mean both from the government side and the site side.
Click to expand...

And then I access the site thru Tor, or a VPN, which makes it look like I'm accessing PH via a country that does not implement such age restrictions OR the ability to access a banned website in the UK because they haven't implemented suitable age verification. The only way for the UK to prevent that work around will require draconian measures, ie banning VPN services from within the UK and keeping an ever growing blacklist of foreign IP addresses.

ETA: theres also the issue of the verification system itself. It would certainly be possible to create such a system that doesn't allow the government to track what content an individual is viewing. However, I don't think its possible for a user to verify that they aren't tracking you. Its all a one way hash they say... and how do I know that, I say.
 
Last edited:
Poem said:
Indeed, I didn't say otherwise. But de Souza is clear that young people including 8 years olds should not be seeing this material.

As a society we should be asking why that isn't happening.
Click to expand...

Because parents aren't parenting sufficiently, and hope to childproof the rest of the universe to make up for their own failure.

Don't want your kids seeing stuff? Monitor their internet usage. Don't give them unfettered access. Don't give them smartphones. Don't put computers in their rooms and ignore them. Pay attention. Raise them.
 
lobosrul5 said:
Because technology makes it virtually impossible to implement without very serious "big brother" style surveillance and limitations. I got access to porn at an early age before home internet access was really a thing (and I didn't have it anyways). Trying to pass legislation to keep kids from seeing it these days is just "feel good" legislation to make people think their representatives are "doing something". Its a virtual impossibility. Changing societal norms so that kids are monitored at all times on all devices/screens is probably impossible and possibly more harmful than beneficial anyways.
Click to expand...

It's only impossible if there is no will to do so - which clearly there isn't.

Please allow me to restate the gravity of this issue from various experts. (BTW, Children's Commissioner Rachel de Souza is not a politician but an educationalist and former head teacher)

Rachel de Souza:
"I have grown increasingly concerned about the normalisation of sexual violence in online pornography, and the role that this plays in shaping children’s understanding of sex and relationships."

The Telegraph (May 2023):
Teenagers must be blocked from watching porn under Online Safety Bill, says Children’s Commissioner:

"Teenage children should be barred from accessing or watching pornography online under new laws, the Children’s Commissioner has said after new research showed the damage it causes them.

Dame Rachel de Souza said her new study, published on Tuesday, showed children’s access to porn on social media and other platforms was leading them to replicate the sexual violence they saw online in attacks on other youngsters."

The Guardian (April 2022):
Age checks needed urgently to protect children from online porn, say charities

"An “immediate and urgent” introduction of age verification is needed to stop children accessing extreme content on pornography websites, children’s charities have warned.

In a strongly worded open letter to the largest pornography sites in the UK, a coalition of charities and child safety experts led by Barnardo’s said the harm being done to children was so severe that the issue could not wait to be addressed as part of the online safety bill, which has yet to come into effect."

The Guardian (Sept 2023):
Pornography driving UK teens towards child abuse material, say experts

"Child abuse experts and police are warning that access to increasingly extreme pornography is driving a rise in harmful sexual behaviour among young people, from sexting to watching online child abuse.

One of the most alarming developments for the charity and for police has been the rise in minors watching or sharing illegal child abuse material."

UNICEF:

"Pornographic content can harm children. Exposure to pornography at a young age may lead to poor mental health, sexism and objectification, sexual violence, and other negative outcomes. Among other risks, when children view pornography that portrays abusive and misogynistic acts, they may come to view such behaviour as normal and acceptable."
 
The Great Zaganza said:
I guess that depends on the definition.

But she certainly is in no position to make what she said happen -so 4/5th was accurate to generous.
Click to expand...

Your assertion was based on her being a politician. As a former head teacher and current Children's Commissioner she is perhaps the least likely to be disingenuous.
 
Poem said:
Your assertion was based on her being a politician. As a former head teacher and current Children's Commissioner she is perhaps the least likely to be disingenuous.
Click to expand...

my point, which you keep ignoring, is that she has no ability to make what she demands happen, politician or not.

She would do better finding ways to inform kids about porn in a non-scary way, and not add to the sense of the forbidden fruit around the topic.
 
Last edited:
Darat said:
Well I was aware of some of the issues raised about Pornhub and other sites before your thread and my news comes from (except on some specific issues/matters) "the MSM". Pornography is because of the many social and cultural sensitivities a hard subject for the MSM to deal with.
Click to expand...

Hard to deal with? Why?
Plus in my country there has a been a lot of discussion over many years because of the "Online Safety" legislation that was enacted last October. That gives the government wide powers over what people in my country are allowed to see and how we are allowed to see it. As far as I am aware this has not affected the legality of Pornhub, of course it could be that it is being investigated at the moment and we simply haven't been informed. (Our law enforcement agencies investigate many things that we only learn about if it makes it to the next stage, usually prosecution.)
Click to expand...

OK.
Should Pornhub be closed down because of lax moderation, I would need to know about the percentages involved, what is the volume of illegal content? 1 in 10 would be terrible 1 in a million may not be (I don't know how many performances Pornhub has for viewing so those are very much pulled out my arse numbers.) As I'm not a believer in the idea that we can ever create perfect systems that won't occasionally fail - it's the occasional failure rate that for me is critical.
Click to expand...

Mike Farley talks as if it's everywhere. #65

Pornhub has 180 million unique visitors per day (Again, Mike Farley)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom