Porn Pass. Would you get one?

McMurphy

We have loads of stuff going on at the minute in the country, from Bodily fluids leaking from corpses left out on trolleys due to inadequate mortuary facilities, to the unprecedented housing crisis, and the (unsure how it didn't make AH) the Denis O'Brien/Broadband plan (he's obviously the only man that's capable of fulfilling state contracts these days).

With all that is going on in the state, it is nice to see that minister for mental health - Jim Daly has his priorities sorted and wants to introduce some kind of "Porn Pass" system, in order try and make whoever is using the device at the time prove their age if they want to access adult related material.

The UK laws, which come into effect on July 15, will see users asked to produce passports, driving licences or what are being described as 'porn passes' when seeking to access adult websites.

Porn passes will be sold in shops to people who can prove they are old enough to access adult website.

I don't know the ins and outs of the proposed legislation yet, but would I not be correct in assuming that underage teens I assume this is aimed at, will easily bypass any need for a porn pass by using proxies etc anyway?

I don't think it'll catch on personally, and believe the minister's time would be better spent elsewhere, anywhere.

KikiLaRue

When you sign up to a gambling site, you have to register a debit card and in some cases upload an ID.

I’ve often wondered why governments don’t make this compulsory for porn.

Mod-Trial ongoing so post redacted

McMurphy

KikiLaRue wrote: »

When you sign up to a gambling site, you have to register a debit card and in some cases upload an ID.

I’ve often wondered why governments don’t make this compulsory for porn.

Online bookies don't tend to offer credit tbh.

As for the violent porn, teen-agers will still be able to access it if they're determined enough - age restrictions won't hamper them, which is why I believe it's a waste of resources and time introducing passes.

KikiLaRue

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Online bookies don't tend to offer credit tbh.

Lots of them have free games but require you to sign up with a card anyway

TheValeyard

Yes, because teenagers have no idea how to bypass these filters.

This plan will work and is totally not a complete waste of time

Gbear

KikiLaRue wrote: »

It might not stop 15-16 year olds, but I think it could reduce the number of 11-14 year olds watching stuff they are too young to understand.

Heaven forbid parents do their own ****ing jobs.

McMurphy

KikiLaRue wrote: »

Lots of them have free games but require you to sign up with a card anyway

That's how they get you K, lure you in with a free game and or credits once you register a card....

Some adult websites do similar (um, apparently).... Free trials/preview of premium stuff once you register a card.

I don't think comparison with a gambling site is really a fair comparison tbh, it's not like a dedicated porn site is the only (possibly not even the first) place someone can access pornographic material.

I don't think there'll be a huge swathe of adults heading to the local eurospar to purchase/apply for porn passes tbh, much more likely that the whole thing gets driven underground, where a man and a woman going at it hammer and tongs will be the least of Jim's worries.

Del2005

The ban on pirate bay worked a treat. This will be similar but actually worse because lazy parents will now think that their kids can't watch porn when they can easily.

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo

I think this is being pushed by those Ruhama people, which is nothing more than a religious front of the Magdalene Laundry. They are nut jobs and they are given far too much credence.

I mean they got the Prostitution Bill through, even though there was no real popular sentiments to bring it.

stefanovich

VPN is way more convenient.

Why not ban gay marriage, abortion and books mentioning the word sex altogether? That worked great in the past in Catholic Ireland, where there wasn't a single case of sexual abuse for decades. Those pedo priests must have been secretly watching porn all along.

Oh and VIDEO GAMES the spawn of Satan. Not to mention that Heavy Metal Music. And them young wans going out with hardly any clothes on. Ban them too.

50 shades of grey. Pure filth.

suicide_circus

porn is a problem for a some people and is not good for kids but this scheme will not fix anything

Roger Hassenforder

I dont think its a terrible idea.

Hard core/porn is too easily accessible if you go looking. Not to mind when its being pushed.
Kids growing up thinking weird shıt porn is "normal".

Fair enough if you go looking for it and want to consume age appropriate material. But
Im constantly updating pop up blockers and filters on the kids devices. Fcuking sick of porn TBH

#andImnotaprudemyself

stefanovich

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

I dont think its a terrible idea.

Hard core/porn is too easily accessible if you go looking. Not to mind when its being pushed.
Kids growing up thinking weird shıt porn is "normal".

Fair enough if you go looking for it and want to consume age appropriate material. But
Im constantly updating pop up blockers and filters on the kids devices. Fcuking sick of porn TBH

#andImnotaprudemyself

This will just prevent the technically illiterate from accessing it.

stefanovich

stefanovich wrote: »

This will just prevent the technically illiterate from accessing it.

And make the nerdy kids suddenly popular by being able to circumvent the filters.

paw patrol

Gbear wrote: »

Heaven forbid parents do their own ****ing jobs.

Del2005 wrote: »

The ban on pirate bay worked a treat. This will be similar but actually worse because lazy parents will now think that their kids can't watch porn when they can easily.

This blasting of parents for sh1t their kids do is just a lazy trope .
Anybody with kids beyond the age of 2 actually knows how difficult it is to monitor them 24/7.
Not to mention a wholly unhealthy endeavour for both parent and child to be watching/watched all the time.
I wish posters like you two would cop on.


My eldest is 16. I really don't care if he watches porn
I'd rather not walk in on him though

I have two girls, a 15 year old and a 21 year old. We have talked to them about porn and how anything you put online is there forever. Utterly pointless banning it, makes it forbidden and exciting.

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo

I think restricting what is on a Smartphone to people under the age of 18 would be the best solution here. So basically have the phone without Google, and maybe even no YouTube. Then your left with the ability to call and text, with access to the App Play Store for games which is quite safe, and maybe access to Wikipedia. I do think that would be a solid base for protecting children from the internet.

Keep the good parts and leave off the rest. I mean if one child in a classroom has access to a phone, that essentially means everyone has easy access to hardcore porn. Getting rid of Google solves this problem to a fairly large extent imo.

paw patrol

My porn should be my business alone , once they can tie you to an ID you can bet your mortgage there will be a leak showing your preference for the Asian ladyboys on a Monday and "Fat Granny Pissing" on a lonely wednesday.


Yet another announcement by a FG overlord for legislation controlling behaviour, FG are really a party of law and order which in practical terms means control.

So there you have it folks , despite all the PR, media spin and right-on vibes for repeal the 8th / Marriage referenda.
The reality is the blueshirts haven't gone away.

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo

'Fat Granny Pissing' is a really niche category.

Sandor Clegane

Just another ploy to relieve parents of actually having to parent their kids.

If parents are concerned about what their underage kids are up to online id suggest they take some responsibility for their children and do some parenting.

I mean it has no hope of being successful anyway but still, look after your own kids without punishing, inconveniencing everyone else.

Gbear

Degag wrote: »

I see this being bandied about alot. Mostly in cases of video games like Grand Theft Auto etc.

I'm sure there was also a very pronounced use of spoons, cotton clothing material and electricity in those cases. We really should limit vulnerable people's access to those.

Correlation =/= causation.
There's a reason why you need to research this stuff to find mechanisms that prove a direct relationship between behaviours. You can correlate pretty much anything with anything else.

paw patrol wrote: »

This blasting of parents for sh1t their kids do is just a lazy trope .
Anybody with kids beyond the age of 2 actually knows how difficult it is to monitor them 24/7.
Not to mention a wholly unhealthy endeavour for both parent and child to be watching/watched all the time.
I wish posters like you two would cop on.

Parenting isn't monitoring them 24/7 but instilling values in your children and having an open dialogue with them about things they might encounter in their lives that might harm them, including drugs, booze and sex.

Some things they'll see or experience when you won't be there, and that's fine. You just need to be available to help them through it. And for some things, they'll experience them themselves and have to learn from them on their own. I'm sure that's frightening but we all went through the same thing when we were kids.

Whether it's because of ignorance of the topics, embarrassment that causes a breakdown in communications, or open hostility towards sexuality, that's down to the parent to fix.
The government can help by providing the parents with educational resources but it should not be taking on the role of moral arbiters for all society on the pretext that it should be doing parents' jobs for them.

Gffg

KikiLaRue wrote: »

When you sign up to a gambling site, you have to register a debit card and in some cases upload an ID.

I’ve often wondered why governments don’t make this compulsory for porn.

They banned certain kinds of fetish porn in England.

Gffg

I watch porn every now and then, but I wouldn't be identifying myself in order to do it.

OldMrBrennan83

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo wrote: »

I think restricting what is on a Smartphone to people under the age of 18 would be the best solution here. So basically have the phone without Google, and maybe even no YouTube. Then your left with the ability to call and text, with access to the App Play Store for games which is quite safe, and maybe access to Wikipedia. I do think that would be a solid base for protecting children from the internet.

Keep the good parts and leave off the rest. I mean if one child in a classroom has access to a phone, that essentially means everyone has easy access to hardcore porn. Getting rid of Google solves this problem to a fairly large extent imo.

Under 18? Jesus, just roll the gestapo out and be done with it. How about making parents parent?

I suspect you're just another Google tinfoil hatter. Bing gives far better porn results anyway.

EmmetSpiceland

Gffg wrote: »

They banned certain kinds of fetish porn in England.

That’s right, they made “bondage”, “face sitting”, “fisting”, “water sports”, “BDSM” and material featuring female ejaculation or “sex wee” as some call it.

There were a few other categories banned as well but I believe this was overturned earlier this year.

KathleenGrant

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo wrote: »

'Fat Granny Pissing' is a really niche category.

Oooooo hope for Kathleen yet.

Gimme A Pound

Deleted User wrote: »

Why not ban gay marriage, abortion and books mentioning the word sex altogether?

This way of arguing - just leaping to an extreme scenario that isn't relevant and nobody mentioned - is just intellectual dishonesty.

Porn (and some of it is very extreme) being accessible only to those of appropriate age is what's being referred to. Nobody said anything about the separate matters of abortion, same-sex marriage... and books mentioning the word sex? Don't know what that's about. Certainly has nothing to do with porn. And nobody said anything about banning.

Gffg

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

That’s right, they made “bondage”, “face sitting”, “fisting”, “water sports”, “BDSM” and material featuring female ejaculation or “sex wee” as some call it.

There were a few other categories banned as well but I believe this was overturned earlier this year.

Over turned? So people in England can once again watch face sitting and the like?

Gimme A Pound

paw patrol wrote: »

My porn should be my business alone , once they can tie you to an ID you can bet your mortgage there will be a leak showing your preference for the Asian ladyboys on a Monday and "Fat Granny Pissing" on a lonely wednesday.


Yet another announcement by a FG overlord for legislation controlling behaviour, FG are really a party of law and order which in practical terms means control.

So there you have it folks , despite all the PR, media spin and right-on vibes for repeal the 8th / Marriage referenda.
The reality is the blueshirts haven't gone away.

They're still fascists from the 1930s because one minister wants to introduce a (albeit unworkable) system to prevent children from being able to access hardcore porn?

God the hysteria on this thread.

Aongus Von Bismarck

This is a website I automatically associate with nerdy 'neckbeard' sorts of men - compulsive video gamers, fans of UFC (but not the gym), addictions to extreme pornography and tube sites. The sort who can only get their sexual kicks through masturbation and sickening gonzo pornography, and who then blame women for not finding their subculture an attract one to pick a partner or lover from. So it's easy to see why such a proposal would cause outrage.

The availability and normalisation of pornography is not something that should be celebrated or seen as normal. Quite apart from the reality that it mostly involves a man bringing himself to climax while staring into a laptop or telephone screen.

EmmetSpiceland

Gffg wrote: »

Over turned? So people in England can once again watch face sitting and the like?

I could be wrong but I thought I’d read somewhere that it was, or perhaps it was being challenged.

I wouldn’t be too keen on a number of those “genres” of pornography myself but if someone wants to “get off” over the images of a young woman wearing some lad’s face like one of those yokes in the “Alien” movies who am I to tell them it’s wrong?

IAMAMORON

Modern fascism in your face. This is how it creeps in, bit by bit, very slowly.

I can remember when magazines were illegal.When I was 13 I travelled to the UK with the Scouts. Myself and a friend were obsessed with a Baywatch star called Erica Eleniak. She is gorgeous. We bought 2 copies of Playboy in a newsagent across the road from Euston Station. One copy is probably still in my parents attic. I was in love with her.

My point is that a teenager will get their hands on porn if they want to. Even at 13.

Aongus Von Bismarck

Aongus Von Bismarck wrote: »

This is a website I automatically associate with nerdy 'neckbeard' sorts of men - compulsive video gamers, fans of UFC (but not the gym), addictions to extreme pornography and tube sites. The sort who can only get their sexual kicks through masturbation and sickening gonzo pornography, and who then blame women for not finding their subculture an attract one to pick a partner or lover from.

Why do you persist in coming?

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Why do you persist in coming?

He's describing himself.

Aongus Von Bismarck

Aongus Von Bismarck wrote: »

. Quite apart from the reality that it mostly involves a man bringing himself to climax while staring into a laptop or telephone screen.

Hate to burst your bubble but we all brought ourselves to climax over the Sunday World or a Playtex bra ad in woman's way back in the day. Personally I was 11 or 12. This is NORMAL and HEALTHY. There was also a mag called Amateur Photographer with nudes in it. Got lots of mileage out of that one.

Are you disgusted by sex?

If they were talking about banning extreme porn for kids then maybe. But they aren't. Aside from the fact its unworkable anyway.

Aongus Von Bismarck

Deleted User wrote: »

Hate to burst your bubble but we all brought ourselves to climax over the Sunday World or a Playtex bra ad in woman's way back in the day. Personally I was 11 or 12. This is NORMAL and HEALTHY. Are you disgusted by sex?

Not at all; I have a very healthy sex life. I just don't think the widespread availability of pornography is healthy for young people who will visit these sites out of curiosity and form the opinion that what is shown in these clips is what constitutes a healthy sex life or appetite. Especially as these sites are having to produce ever more extreme material to satisfy the sordid desires of their main userbase - neckbeard men in their 20's and 30's who find it difficult to form real and meaningful relationships with women, and who increasingly find themselves only able to come through watching hateful and misogynistic porn featuring psychopathic men and vulnerable, drug addicted young women.

Anything that can be done to limit young peoples exposure to this is to be welcomed.

KikiLaRue

It shouldn’t be controversial to say we should protect pre-teens and teens from porn, especially the more extreme categories.

This idea might not be the way to go about it, but it’s a worthy endeavour.

https://womensenews.org/2003/10/teen-magazines-send-girls-all-the-wrong-messages/

Teen girl mags should be banned too as they encourage teen girls to be obsessed with making themselves sex objects and indulging in risky sex.

McMurphy

Aongus Von Bismarck wrote: »

Not at all; I have a very healthy sex life. I just don't think the widespread availability of pornography is healthy for young people who will visit these sites out of curiosity and form the opinion that what is shown in these clips is what constitutes a healthy sex life or appetite.

Wouldn't see the likes of that in Germany Angie.

Especially as these sites are having to produce ever more extreme material to satisfy the sordid desires of their main userbase - neckbeard men in their 20's and 30's who find it difficult to form real and meaningful relationships with women, and who increasingly find themselves only able to come through watching hateful and misogynistic porn featuring psychopathic men and vulnerable, drug addicted young men.

Anything that can be done to limit young peoples exposure to this is to be welcomed.

It's not being done to target these young men, it's been proposed to attempt to prevent underage teens who undoubtedly know a hell of a lot more about getting past filters and proxies than Jim Daly will ever understand.

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo

OldMrBrennan83 wrote: »

Under 18? Jesus, just roll the gestapo out and be done with it. How about making parents parent?

I suspect you're just another Google tinfoil hatter. Bing gives far better porn results anyway.

I'm actually a DuckDuckGo kind of guy. There's no reason why every smartphone should have internet searches available. Having apps, calls and texts is more than enough for a child to have on their phone.

If I had a smartphone as a teenager I would have been looking up porn every wa(n)king second.

Gimme A Pound

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Modern fascism in your face.

An ill conceived suggestion to prevent children accessing hardcore porn? No. No it isn't fascism whatsoever.

Playboy isn't remotely comparable to the extreme stuff online btw.

Aongus Von Bismarck

Aongus Von Bismarck wrote: »

Not at all; I have a very healthy sex life. I just don't think the widespread availability of pornography is healthy for young people who will visit these sites out of curiosity and form the opinion that what is shown in these clips is what constitutes a healthy sex life or appetite. Especially as these sites are having to produce ever more extreme material to satisfy the sordid desires of their main userbase - neckbeard men in their 20's and 30's who find it difficult to form real and meaningful relationships with women, and who increasingly find themselves only able to come through watching hateful and misogynistic porn featuring psychopathic men and vulnerable, drug addicted young women.

Anything that can be done to limit young peoples exposure to this is to be welcomed.

That's not what's being discussed though. It's a blanket ban on all porn. And tracking everyone who watches it.

Do you watch the auld porn yourself?

Popular music is all about hoes and bitches and having porn sex with lots of men / women... Including the likes of Arianna Grande and Miley Cyrus... Should that also be banned?

Gffg

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

That’s right, they made “bondage”, “face sitting”, “fisting”, “water sports”, “BDSM” and material featuring female ejaculation or “sex wee” as some call it.

There were a few other categories banned as well but I believe this was overturned earlier this year.

Now that's probably an example of something that's lovely to look at on screen, but mightn't be as good in reality.

And with porn, you can make believe that squirting isn't pee, and instead believe that it's her heavenly juices!

Gimme A Pound

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

I dont think its a terrible idea.

Hard core/porn is too easily accessible if you go looking. Not to mind when its being pushed.
Kids growing up thinking weird shıt porn is "normal".

Fair enough if you go looking for it and want to consume age appropriate material. But
Im constantly updating pop up blockers and filters on the kids devices. Fcuking sick of porn TBH

#andImnotaprudemyself

You shouldn't have to add that bit at the end.

Deleted User wrote: »

Are you disgusted by sex?.

Jeez, that's some leap - where did they indicate that?

KikiLaRue wrote: »

It shouldn’t be controversial to say we should protect pre-teens and teens from porn, especially the more extreme categories.

Exactly.

Deleted User wrote: »

https://womensenews.org/2003/10/teen-magazines-send-girls-all-the-wrong-messages/

Teen girl mags should be banned too as they encourage teen girls to be obsessed with making themselves sex objects and indulging in risky sex.

They shouldn't be banned but yeah they sure as sh1t should be undergoing a change in content.

Deleted User wrote: »

That's not what's being discussed though. It's a blanket ban on all porn.

A "ban"? Who said anything about a ban?

Gimme A Pound

Deleted User wrote: »

Popular music is all about hoes and bitches and having porn sex with lots of men / women... Including the likes of Arianna Grande and Miley Cyrus... Should that also be banned?

What ban are you talking about?

A "ban"? Who said anything about a ban?

A ban for under 18s.

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo

Deleted User wrote: »

Popular music is all about hoes and bitches and having porn sex with lots of men / women... Including the likes of Arianna Grande any Miley Cyrus... Should that also be banned?

I think there is something very insidious and troubling about the two 'role models' you mention there in Grande and Miley. They start out on children's shows and are looked up to by young impressionable girls. Then a few years later they are wearing nothing while riding a wrecking ball. It's morally very questionable behavior. Going from cute and innocent to straight up naked ho is very unfair.

At least for young boys they get to look up to soccer players for the most part. Who generally behave quite professional.

Gimme A Pound

Deleted User wrote: »

A ban for under 18s.

People always had to be 18+ to access porn.

EmmetSpiceland

[Deleted User] wrote: »

A ban for under 18s.

Hasn’t that ban always been in place?