Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 60

Thread: Australia's extreme censorship

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    1,073
    Come on, that's going a bit far. Ineffective opposition does not amount to accomplice.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    America, and damn proud of it!
    Posts
    3,576
    Quote Originally Posted by Iuris View Post
    Come on, that's going a bit far. Ineffective opposition does not amount to accomplice.
    Actually it does. There are enough actual child sex rings in the world that trade in real and illegal pedophilia material, to keep every country busy for decades trying to stomp them out. There's no reason for Australia to claim that small breasted women in porn is encouraging and sanctioning of child rape, and needs to be stomped out to help fix the problem.
    [QUOTE=Brady;363469]When I was a kid I did lots of things like playing with fire and torturing animals even though adults told me not to.[/QUOTE]
    The admission of a sociopathic serial killer.

    [QUOTE=Penfold;363126]No Personal attacks, insults, name calling, offensive generalizations, or labeling.[/QUOTE]
    He should practice what he preaches.

    The three duties of government: 1. Protect property 2. preserve contracts 3. provide for the rule of law.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    7,353
    Quote Originally Posted by Iuris View Post
    Me, I'm only in favor of measures designed to actually protect and consider it a necessity that outlets be left in place.
    I haven't taken the position of advocating censorship, but I think that to leave outlets in place is a fair argument for most of the spectrum of sexuality. It's just that the argument gets thin IMO when we are talking about a particular deviancy that is criminal to act upon. I disagree with the sweeping statement that porn contributes to rape, but what of "rape porn" specifically?
    "They asked if I had found Jesus and I didn't even know He was missing."

  4. #34
    JPSartre12 Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by NATO 556 View Post
    Australia's 'small breast' ban - The Week



    I see no justice and no common sense here. All I see is Australia demonstrating that they don't deserve to be classified as a "civilized nation". They see fit to declare adult work as child pornography, they're not civilized. They're no better than communist China.
    Sorry, I'm having a hard time being outraged. I've been a breast man all of my life.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    America, and damn proud of it!
    Posts
    3,576
    Quote Originally Posted by sinjin View Post
    I haven't taken the position of advocating censorship, but I think that to leave outlets in place is a fair argument for most of the spectrum of sexuality. It's just that the argument gets thin IMO when we are talking about a particular deviancy that is criminal to act upon. I disagree with the sweeping statement that porn contributes to rape, but what of "rape porn" specifically?
    Rape in general is illegal, whether the victim is perceived as a child or an adult. However the ban only applies to depictions that involve women with small breasts because they look young.

    Personally I don't see the point of this divide and conquer tactic in regards to tackling the pornography issue.
    [QUOTE=Brady;363469]When I was a kid I did lots of things like playing with fire and torturing animals even though adults told me not to.[/QUOTE]
    The admission of a sociopathic serial killer.

    [QUOTE=Penfold;363126]No Personal attacks, insults, name calling, offensive generalizations, or labeling.[/QUOTE]
    He should practice what he preaches.

    The three duties of government: 1. Protect property 2. preserve contracts 3. provide for the rule of law.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    7,353
    Quote Originally Posted by NATO 556 View Post
    Personally I don't see the point of this divide and conquer tactic in regards to tackling the pornography issue.
    Because you view all porn as harmless entertainment or because you view all porn as equally vile?
    "They asked if I had found Jesus and I didn't even know He was missing."

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Limeyland
    Posts
    7,893
    Quote Originally Posted by sinjin View Post
    The kind Aussies are banning.

    That right there. You're the "legend in your own mind" type. Self-fluffer. Ho hum.

    That's a span of about 40 years. My point is that graphic depictions of rape are rare in film.

    Clearly you don't understand the formula for slasher films.
    The Aussies are banning publications and films of women with small breasts.
    If you think that mens mags like Nuts are pornographic you are a little sad..dont mix with other men much..mother told you sex was dirty?
    Oh dear the porn expert is insinuating that I must be getting my rocks off..see above
    Graphic depictions of rape are freely available in videos and so are not 'rare'.

    Expert on slasher films with 'teenage trollops getting killed...see above

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Limeyland
    Posts
    7,893
    Quote Originally Posted by sinjin View Post
    The link you provided talks about how it's not simply small breasts but young women with small breasts who look very young besides. This genre of porn seeks to make the girls appear to be underage even though they aren't. Have you seen any of this stuff or are you just blabbing about that which you know nothing.
    You obviously have...examples?

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Limeyland
    Posts
    7,893
    Quote Originally Posted by sinjin View Post
    Would you think you might have a problem if you found yourself attracted to "snuff" porn, even if you knew the killing was only simulated? I would.
    The same goes for porn where the girls are made to look 13.
    You seem to know a lot about this too.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    7,353
    Quote Originally Posted by gansao View Post
    You obviously have...examples?
    Use your imagination and Google.
    "They asked if I had found Jesus and I didn't even know He was missing."

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Limeyland
    Posts
    7,893
    Quote Originally Posted by sinjin View Post
    And if they could find 18 year olds that looked 8 you'd be fine with that too?
    Once again name some examples.
    It would very difficult to find an 18 year old who looked 8.
    Maybe you are wishful thinking.
    Maybe you are thinking of that little black guy in diffrent strokes

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Limeyland
    Posts
    7,893
    Quote Originally Posted by sinjin View Post
    Use your imagination and Google.
    I would destroy your hard drive if you ever bin the laptop

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    7,353
    Quote Originally Posted by gansao View Post
    If you think that mens mags like Nuts are pornographic you are a little sad..dont mix with other men much..mother told you sex was dirty?
    We are not talking about magazines like "Nuts".
    You might want to have a look at this:

    Melinda Tankard Reist Blog Archive Australian Sex Party caught out in attempt to hide reality of ‘teen porn’ titles
    Last edited by sinjin; 03-16-2010 at 05:38 PM.
    "They asked if I had found Jesus and I didn't even know He was missing."

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Limeyland
    Posts
    7,893
    Quote Originally Posted by sinjin View Post
    We are not talking about magazines like "Nuts".
    You might want to have a look at this:

    Melinda Tankard Reist Blog Archive Australian Sex Party caught out in attempt to hide reality of ‘teen porn’ titles
    Banning magazines featuring women with small breasts will do nothing to stop this stuff.
    The first post suggested a blanket ban on publications featyring small breasted women whereas this stuff is obviously promoting underage sex...lot of difference.
    I think children are being sexualised today by their own mags and pop lyrics as well as films and television programmes.
    I dont see anything in this article about promoting underage sex specifically with middle age men but I would agree that middle age men would buy stuff portraying it. Just as they would buy stuff portraying under age sex between girls and boys..which is the point I made and one that you seem to argue against.
    I sure that with a bit of imagination the government could target the stuff that was in the article but I think that 'Wimmin' in the government want to kill two birds with one stone..just a guess ..we have one or two in the British government that think the page 3 topless girls promote rape, pillage and the degradation of womenkind. They are usually ugly old mingers

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    7,353
    Quote Originally Posted by gansao View Post
    Banning magazines featuring women with small breasts will do nothing to stop this stuff.
    The first post suggested a blanket ban on publications featyring small breasted women whereas this stuff is obviously promoting underage sex...lot of difference.
    Now we're on the same page. Banning porn featuring women who appear underage is what they're seeking.
    Not simply small-breasted women. That was disinformation from the adult industry.

    I think children are being sexualised today by their own mags and pop lyrics as well as films and television programmes.
    True, but a totally different topic.

    I dont see anything in this article about promoting underage sex specifically with middle age men but I would agree that middle age men would buy stuff portraying it.
    Adult men are the target.

    Just as they would buy stuff portraying under age sex between girls and boys..which is the point I made and one that you seem to argue against.
    Maybe, I've not seen or heard of such a porn genre.

    I sure that with a bit of imagination the government could target the stuff that was in the article but I think that 'Wimmin' in the government want to kill two birds with one stone..just a guess ..we have one or two in the British government that think the page 3 topless girls promote rape, pillage and the degradation of womenkind. They are usually ugly old mingers
    That may be true but hardly the point.
    "They asked if I had found Jesus and I didn't even know He was missing."

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •