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

[Poem]

None of the women in the bottom row look younger than 18 to me.

Based on the fact that the BBFC approved the video without cutting in that respect, you are correct - but any unbiased observer looking at that picture would say they look underage.

And so be honest about what you're actually trying to accomplish. Tell us what you want, and why, in plain language. Then do us the courtesy of letting us make up our own minds, instead of trying to browbeat, gaslight, and mislead us into accidentally agreeing with your unstated but poorly-hidden premises.

Clearly posted instead of actually dealing with what you have dodged.

 

[theprestige]

Based on the fact that the BBFC approved the video without cutting in that respect, you are correct - but any unbiased observer looking at that picture would say they look underage.

How underage do they look, in your unbiased opinion?

Clearly posted instead of actually dealing with what you have dodged.

I have no idea what this means.

 

[Lithrael]

I have already posted the BBFC's acknowledgement of the prevalence of roleplay material easily available on the net that carries a sentence of up to 10 years in the UK. You continue to dodge that fact.

I will not dispute that 'roleplay material that carries a sentence of up to ten years in the UK' is available on the internet if you know where to find it or if someone sends it to you. I do dispute your characterization of the articles you have quoted. And I am not convinced that material that could send you to prison for ten years is being served up to everyone who goes to look at a few videos on PornHub.

You do not seem prepared to acknowledge that much of what you have been insisting is 'roleplay material that carries a sentence of up to ten years in the UK' is in fact 'roleplay material that is comparable to DVDs licensced by the BBFC for publication in the UK.'

All trout are fish but not all fish are trout.

 

[Poem]

I will not dispute that 'roleplay material that carries a sentence of up to ten years in the UK' is available on the internet if you know where to find it or if someone sends it to you. I do dispute your characterization of the articles you have quoted. And I am not convinced that material that could send you to prison for ten years is being served up to everyone who goes to look at a few videos on PornHub.

The BBFC article clearly states that illegal material is easily accessible; that is not my 'characterisation'. You cited the BBFC in relation to the Young Harlots film to show that it passed without cutting any dodgy roleplay content, so when they unequivocally say (and yes I'll quote it again) that:

The research shows that, in the past three months, users had been exposed to online content depicting physical violence, non-consensual activity, incest, and adults role-playing as children. Such content may cause harm by promoting an interest in sexually abusive relationships or in activity (such as strangulation) that can lead to serious physical harm. As such, it would be refused classification by the BBFC and would therefore be illegal to supply or distribute offline (on DVD or Blu-Ray). Of those exposed to these types of content, users were most concerned (67%) by material depicting adults role-playing as children.

then you are forced to acknowledge when they find the other way - when they do say that roleplay is available and is illegal.

You do not seem prepared to acknowledge that much of what you have been insisting is 'roleplay material that carries a sentence of up to ten years in the UK' is in fact 'roleplay material that is comparable to DVDs licensced by the BBFC for publication in the UK.'

All trout are fish but not all fish are trout.

I acknowledged that I was wrong about Young Harlots based on the front cover picture you posted. The BBFC would have based their assessment off of the actual content.

 

[Poem]

How underage do they look, in your unbiased opinion?

They look like school kids.

I have no idea what this means.

And I have no idea about the waffle you offered up either. That you are prevaricating is obvious. Just answer the posts and points I put to you.

 

[theprestige]

They look like school kids.

What age school kids? High school seniors who've already celebrated their 18th birthdays?

And I have no idea about the waffle you offered up either. That you are prevaricating is obvious. Just answer the posts and points I put to you.

The last point you put to me, that I ignored, was a vile personal attack. I'm not going to answer it. Go fish.

 

[Poem]

What age school kids? High school seniors who've already celebrated their 18th birthdays?

Bottom right looks between 14 and 16.

The last point you put to me, that I ignored, was a vile personal attack. I'm not going to answer it. Go fish.

Which post?

 

[Lithrael]

Okay, one more time: material that "would be refused classification by the BBFC and would therefore be illegal to supply or distribute offline (on DVD or Blu-Ray)" is NOT the same thing as simulated CSAM and does not carry a potential sentence of 10 years in prison. SOME of the most EXTREME examples might be prison-worthy. Material fitting that description in general is not.

It's you'll-be-fined illegal, not prison-time illegal.

 

[Poem]

Okay, one more time: material that "would be refused classification by the BBFC and would therefore be illegal to supply or distribute offline (on DVD or Blu-Ray)" is NOT the same thing as simulated CSAM and does not carry a potential sentence of 10 years in prison. SOME of the most EXTREME examples might be prison-worthy. Material fitting that description in general is not.

It's you'll-be-fined illegal, not prison-time illegal.

Would you explain to Darat why he is wrong?

My understanding, based on Barnardo's submission to the Online Safety Bill is that you are wrong. They state unambiguously that what's illegal on DVD and Blu Ray is rife or easy to view on mainstream sites.

Content that would be prohibited offline by the BBFC (British Board of Film Classification), making it illegal to own on DVD or Blu-Ray, is readily available on mainstream pornography sites. The BBFC will not classify any content as R18 if it is illegal, or material that is potentially harmful – for example because it depicts and/ or promotes child sexual abuse, incest, trafficking, torture, and harmful sexual acts. It includes material which promotes violent sexual activity, including breath restriction (strangulation), gagging and forced penetration, and depicts sexual activity with adult actors made to look like children: petite, young-looking performers made to look underage through props such as stuffed toys, lollipops and school uniforms. It also includes content which depicts sexual activity between family members, such as between fathers and daughters and brothers and sisters. This content is extremely harmful, promoting violence against women and girls, and sexualising children. Yet online, it is easy to view free of charge and currently lacks age-gating.

As I stated it is illegal right now in the UK, the prison sentence is up to 10 years if you are found to possess or view such material. What is illegal on DVD and blu-ray is illegal on line, in the UK. People are caught, prosecuted and when found guilty in a court sentenced for up to 10 years in prison, there may also be lifelong punishments.

 

[theprestige]

Bottom right looks between 14 and 16.

How can you tell?

Which post?

Don't worry about it. Water under the bridge.

 

[arthwollipot]

How charming.

Just as "charming" as some of the things you have said in the past.

 

[Darat]

Would you explain to Darat why he is wrong?

Nothing I've posted contradicts anything lithrael has posted.

 

[Poem]

Nothing I've posted contradicts anything lithrael has posted.

Your statement:

As I stated it is illegal right now in the UK, the prison sentence is up to 10 years if you are found to possess or view such material. What is illegal on DVD and blu-ray is illegal on line, in the UK. People are caught, prosecuted and when found guilty in a court sentenced for up to 10 years in prison, there may also be lifelong punishments.

relates to 'such material' in response to my post quoting Bernardos. With regard to the same 'such material' Lithrael's emphatically states:

Okay, one more time: material that "would be refused classification by the BBFC and would therefore be illegal to supply or distribute offline (on DVD or Blu-Ray)" is NOT the same thing as simulated CSAM and does not carry a potential sentence of 10 years in prison. SOME of the most EXTREME examples might be prison-worthy. Material fitting that description in general is not.

It's you'll-be-fined illegal, not prison-time illegal.

 

[Darat]

What we have learnt is that your definition and discernment is not (for example) what the BBFC uses, that is why you think I am saying something different or contradictory to what Lithrael has been posting.

Do you know a picture of a naked toddler in the bath could be classed as CSAM? There is something called context that you keep missing.

 

[Poem]

What we have learnt is that your definition and discernment is not (for example) what the BBFC uses, that is why you think I am saying something different or contradictory to what Lithrael has been posting.

You said 'such material' in response to my quotation of Barnardos. What definition do they use that is different?

Do you know a picture of a naked toddler in the bath could be classed as CSAM? There is something called context that you keep missing.

This helps in what way?

This looks like straightforward doubling down:

My posts were very clear so where you get the idea that "You argued that anyone accessing such material in the UK is potentially committing a crime." I don't know. I'll try again.

In the UK it is illegal to produce or consume any pornography that depicts the participants as being under 18 regardless of the participants actual age. To do so could lead to you being imprisoned for up to 10 years, heavy fines and being for the rest of your life on the "sex offenders" list.

If the porn video gives the appearance of the performers being under 18 it is illegal in the UK, doesn't matter what media or distribution channel is used.

I am saying that watching such material in the UK is illegal and you could face up to 10 years in prison and an unlimited fine and be put on the sex offenders register for doing so. (The same for producing it and for distributing it.)

 

[Poem]

And more:

The particular CSAM I am talking about features legal actors. That is ZERO children. Such content is legal in the US - so asking you why you deem it abhorrent is a valid question. I think it is abhorrent - but plenty do not.

You aren't going to answer are you? - and I stated the reason why above.

You have just described it as CSAM - I find CSAM abhorrent, again if you don't understand why CSAM is abhorrent I really ha

 

[Poem]

Okay, one more time: material that "would be refused classification by the BBFC and would therefore be illegal to supply or distribute offline (on DVD or Blu-Ray)" is NOT the same thing as simulated CSAM and does not carry a potential sentence of 10 years in prison. SOME of the most EXTREME examples might be prison-worthy. Material fitting that description in general is not.

It's you'll-be-fined illegal, not prison-time illegal.

If it is not the same thing as CSAM, then why does Darat use that term to describe simulating underage porn; I make no mention of the term CSAM:

Why does Darat find content that features legal actors simulating underage porn 'abhorrent' for any other reason than that it facilitates the kind of dark rabbit holes The Guardian article I posted outlines?

@Darat - on the one hand you won't accept the concept of escalation - yet the simulation is abhorrent? I have asked you to explain this multiple times now.

If you have to have it explained to you why CSAM is abhorrent then the gulf between us is too deep to ever be breached by words.

 

[Darat]

Again none of what I’m posted contradicts or disagrees with what Lithrael posted.

Your problem is that your initial description of what was being depicted was wrong according to the BBFC and everyone else.

 

[Poem]

Again none of what I’m posted contradicts or disagrees with what Lithrael posted.

That is possible but I have presented what looks like a clear contradiction

Your problem is that your initial description of what was being depicted was wrong according to the BBFC and everyone else.

I have quoted the BBFC - you haven't established my interpretation is wrong.

 

[Poem]

Okay, one more time: material that "would be refused classification by the BBFC and would therefore be illegal to supply or distribute offline (on DVD or Blu-Ray)" is NOT the same thing as simulated CSAM and does not carry a potential sentence of 10 years in prison.

Your evidence is what?
Again:

As I stated it is illegal right now in the UK, the prison sentence is up to 10 years if you are found to possess or view such material. What is illegal on DVD and blu-ray is illegal on line, in the UK. People are caught, prosecuted and when found guilty in a court sentenced for up to 10 years in prison, there may also be lifelong punishments.

SOME of the most EXTREME examples might be prison-worthy. Material fitting that description in general is not.

Evidence?

It's you'll-be-fined illegal, not prison-time illegal.

Evidence?