Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Porn Pass. Would you get one?

1356

Comments

  • #62
    Charles Ingles
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,180 ✭✭✭Charles Ingles


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    If what you say is true, how exactly will a porn pass which will be easily bypassed help matters?

    Educate parents on children’s responsible use of internet based technologies; develop a children’s internet use charter that would be easy for parents to administer - and encourage open communication between parents and children - porn passports are just nonsense. If kids can get alcohol and drugs even with the laws currently in place getting access to a porn site will be “child’s play”

    Pornography should be used only by adults not by children


  • #63
    Zorya
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,194 ✭✭✭Zorya


    sugarman wrote: »
    Of course its that simple, if their mobile provider had a content blocker such as Three mobile do ...do you not think that would make a massive difference to their ease of access.

    Add to that, the responsibility of parents in the home with their own home network to restrict what they can and cannot access.

    It wont remove it completely of course, they can still send each other stuff over Whatsapp etc.. but they cannot search for anything and everything at the tips of their fingers 24/7.

    She did not even have a phone at the time, my kids didn't have wifi phones until they were mid to late teens but it was different then. But that did not stop the porn being shoved in her face.
    The problem needs to be dealt with at source. It is part of the morally-relative post-modern laissez-faire view of thngs - porn is good for us and should be allowed, so it's all fun and games at first, and no one seems to be having a bad day and that's all fine. But then it begins to get dodgy but who are we to say what's wrong or right, don't be a prude, don't dictate to others, etc etc. And then of course it snowballs and no one knows anymore where is the place called stop and there are rotten manipulative exploitative people who are going to rip the arse out of that moral relativity, in this case literally.


  • #64
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 14,242 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    KikiLaRue wrote: »
    It shouldn’t be controversial to say we should protect pre-teens and teens from porn, especially the more extreme categories.
    It isn't controversial to say that.

    I think people are simply questioning the moral panic surrounding teenagers seeing people engaging in consensual sex on the Internet, while as we type, our nieces and nephews are probably down in the bottom bedroom playing GTA or watching violent movies on their parents' Netflix account.

    There's something about sex that unsettles people.


  • #65
    eviltwin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    Charles Ingles wrote: »
    Pornography should be used only by adults not by children

    Try living in the real world where children are naturally curious about things that are off limits.

    Hardcore porn is too easily accessible but I doubt a porn pass will help. It's a parenting issue more than anything. Kids will always see things they shouldn't.

    I do think it would be helpful to have a proper sex education programme where kids learn about more than just the mechanics of sex. Too many young people are seeing porn as a manual and it's giving them expectations of sex that aren't realistic.


  • #66
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 9,106 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Charles Ingles wrote: »
    Pornography should be used only by adults not by children

    And adults shouldn’t take illegal drugs but they do. What’s your point here, I haven’t advocated children should watch porn. :rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    TheDiceMan2020
    Closed Accounts Posts: 153 ✭✭TheDiceMan2020


    So now the kids hanging around outside shops and off-licences looking for cigs and booze can add porn passes to the mix.

    It's an idiotic proposal. Even in places like Iran where there is blanket government internet control the population circumvent it with proxies.

    It really highlights the ignorance of government ministers regarding how the internet works.

    And parents in favour of it because they think it will make their job easier are even bigger fools.


  • #68
    Gimme A Pound
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,482 ✭✭✭Gimme A Pound


    Gbear wrote: »
    You're extremely naive if you think that's the primary concern of the government in instituting measures like this.

    Governments are extremely uncomfortable with the concept of a free and open internet.

    For some nominally good reasons, such as the welfare of the people and national security, and some less good reasons, such as controlling public discourse, serving the interests of big business, and monitoring communications and behaviour, governments across the globe are seeking ways to clamp down on the autonomy and freedom that the internet has allowed people to experience.

    A porn block gives a government the means to implement the infrastructure to increase their hold over the internet, while cloaking it in a pubic health narrative that few would have the balls to oppose in public for fear of being labelled some kind of deviant.

    Leaving out the practical concerns, such as the inevitable leaking of data on those who sign up to such a scheme, and that it would be largely ineffective at accomplishing its stated aims, we shouldn't be in any way cavalier about relinquishing the freedoms we have been afforded by technology purely to satisfy a certain group of negligent parents or technological illiterates.



    Is it? Is there a pressing need to do so?

    There are certain clear health crises that we are facing in this country (and across the developed world), from air quality, to obesity, to mental health. Is there any pressing need to combat pornography, and is there any evidence that this course of action will have any impact at doing so?
    I don't disagree with you, I just really dislike hysterical misuse of language - like "fascism" and "ban", and claims of things people never said, and nonsensical comparisons and scenarios. It's dishonest and a sh1tty standard of discussion more suited to Facebook, Twitter and YouTube.

    Also, there is a conversation to be had about the potential effect the extreme stuff is having on children's understanding of sexuality. It always gets shouted down though in a very "lady doth protest too much" kinda way.


  • #69
    Nobelium
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,089 ✭✭✭Nobelium


    KikiLaRue wrote: »
    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.

    No, how dare you, it won't work. We must sexualise children and allow them unrestricted access to hard core gonzo porn at as young an age as possible, all in the name of so called freedom.


  • #70
    Gimme A Pound
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,482 ✭✭✭Gimme A Pound


    Zorya wrote: »
    She did not even have a phone at the time, my kids didn't have wifi phones until they were mid to late teens but it was different then. But that did not stop the porn being shoved in her face.
    The problem needs to be dealt with at source. It is part of the morally-relative post-modern laissez-faire view of thngs - porn is good for us and should be allowed, so it's all fun and games at first, and no one seems to be having a bad day and that's all fine. But then it begins to get dodgy but who are we to say what's wrong or right, don't be a prude, don't dictate to others, etc etc. And then of course it snowballs and no one knows anymore where is the place called stop and there are rotten manipulative exploitative people who are going to rip the arse out of that moral relativity, in this case literally.
    "It's just sex - why do you have a problem with sex?"

    Yeah my friend's son was tormented at school for not being interested in porn when he was 13/14.


  • #71
    eviltwin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    Aurora Bald Beef wrote: »
    "It's just sex - why do you have a problem with sex?"

    Yeah my friend's son was tormented at school for not being interested in porn when he was 13/14.

    That's a bullying problem not a sex or porn programme


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    Gimme A Pound
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,482 ✭✭✭Gimme A Pound


    eviltwin wrote: »
    That's a bullying problem not a sex or porn programme
    It's obviously both.


  • #73
    EmmetSpiceland
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,991 ✭✭✭✭EmmetSpiceland


    A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »
    There's something about sex that unsettles people.

    I think it’s the type of sex that people find unsettling, ATNM.

    I mean, it’s not like back in the day where you might be lucky enough to find a copy of “Pink & Plump” stashed under a bush. The stuff they’re watching is pretty extreme, multiple lads with enormous mickies going to town on some little young one or that “face f-ing” where they ram it down their throat full steam ahead. Hardly considered “normal” or “healthy” sex acts.

    You’d have been hard pressed to find content like that from a pre-internet “bongo” mag, I’ve no doubt they were out there but they’d have been difficult to get your mitts on.

    “It matters not what someone is born, but what they grow to be” - A. Dumbledore

    “It is not blood that makes you Irish but a willingness to be part of the Irish nation” - Thomas Davis



  • #74
    Gimme A Pound
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,482 ✭✭✭Gimme A Pound


    Yeah saying people have an issue with sex because they have reservations about what Emmet S described is the ultimate in dishonesty. And it's pretty mean-spirited too.


  • #75
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 14,242 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    EmmetSpiceland wrote: »
    The stuff they’re watching is pretty extreme, multiple lads with enormous mickies going to town on some little young one or that “face f-ing” where they ram it down their throat full steam ahead. Hardly considered “normal” or “healthy” sex acts.
    jayzis, Emmet, when people were talking about extreme acts I thought it was about porn that involved knives, blazing chainsaws, beastiality -- that's what I genuinely thought extreme porn was referring to.

    A bit of multiple penetration or slightly rough sex, some women like that kind of thing. I don't think having mild kinks like that is anything for the rest of us to concern ourselves with. If I accidentally saw that on my nieces' or nephews' search history, it wouldn't even occur to raise it with someone.

    Is that really what people are referring to as extreme porn?


  • #76
    Gimme A Pound
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,482 ✭✭✭Gimme A Pound


    A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »
    A bit of multiple penetration or slightly rough sex, some women like that kind of thing. I don't think having mild kinks like that is anything for the rest of us to concern ourselves with.
    He didn't describe "a bit of" or "slightly" or "mild" anything.

    Nah obviously nobody would want a kid seeing that.


  • #77
    Zorya
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,194 ✭✭✭Zorya


    A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »
    jayzis, Emmet, when people were talking about extreme acts I thought it was about porn that involved knives, blazing chainsaws, beastiality -- that's what I genuinely thought extreme porn was referring to.

    A bit of multiple penetration or slightly rough sex, some women like that kind of thing. I don't think having mild kinks like that is anything for the rest of us to concern ourselves with. If I accidentally saw that on my nieces' or nephews' search history, it wouldn't even occur to raise it with someone.

    Is that really what people are referring to as extreme porn?

    Up until now, you thought there were videos available online of women being penetrated by blazing chainsaws?


  • #78
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 14,242 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Aurora Bald Beef wrote: »
    He didn't describe "a bit of" or "slightly" or "mild" anything.

    Nah obviously nobody would want a kid seeing that.
    He mentioned face f-ing. That's what I think most people would classify as slightly rough sex. I don't think most people would say that's extreme, unless I'm really desensitised.


  • #79
    AllForIt
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,852 ✭✭✭AllForIt


    The problem is not that kids have unfettered access to porn as Minister Daly puts it, it's that they have unfettered access to the Internet full stop.

    The idea that every adult who either once a year or 10 times a day watches porn must go to the trouble of going to a store and paying for a pass and typing it in everytime they visit a new website strikes me as completely unfair and OTT. I have already provided my passport to my ISP provider to take the age filter off my service and I don't feel I should be asked to do anything more than that.
    "We really need to think long and hard about how we are failing our children by handing over to them full and unfettered access to viewing or purchasing highly inappropriate products that could damage their mental well- being irreversibly.

    If the minister is really interested about mental health then he should ban social media like facebook instagram and snapchat to people still at an impressionable age which would be up to about 35. Seriously though those yokes are more of a problem for youngsters mental health than porn is imo.

    As far as anonymous verification is concerned I don't believe it for a second. If you use an ID across multiple web sites then that is a from of tracking i.e this ID XXX accessed these websites at this time and these days etc. And what's wrong with that you might ask? Well, it's the principle of it for a start and where it might lead. The UK have already be found out thanks to Snowden for covert Internet surveillance and it is my opinion that the UK state is intent of introducing as much legal surveillance as they possibly can.
    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.

    There needs to be a once and for all solution like this to cover all the issues concerning kids and there online access.

    If your just going to tackle the porn issue in isolation then this debate is going to descend into a completely pointless discussion about the morality of porn, objectifying of women etc etc which is all just a big distraction from the actual issue.


  • #80
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 14,242 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Zorya wrote: »
    Up until now, you thought there were videos available online of women being penetrated by blazing chainsaws?
    I was thinking more along the lines of some kind of dangerous sex. Some lad with a chainsaw in one hand and his mickey in the other, about to penetrate a knife-juggler.

    That kind of thing.


  • #81
    Discodog
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,134 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    Three Mobile have an adult filter. You have to present id to get it removed. That is unless you do what every kid does & use Opera mini as your browser. There is so much porn out there that making the bigger sites have, so called age verification, will be pointless.

    And credit card "Age verification" is often a scam.

    I agree that this is part of governments wanting to control the internet.


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    EmmetSpiceland
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,991 ✭✭✭✭EmmetSpiceland


    A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »
    He mentioned face f-ing. That's what I think most people would classify as slightly rough sex. I don't think most people would say that's extreme, unless I'm really desensitised.

    Ah, I didn’t mean to get into what either you or I consider “extreme” but I think we could both agree that you could certainly consider the “acts” I mentioned previously would be extreme for juvenile viewers.

    “It matters not what someone is born, but what they grow to be” - A. Dumbledore

    “It is not blood that makes you Irish but a willingness to be part of the Irish nation” - Thomas Davis



  • #83
    Gimme A Pound
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,482 ✭✭✭Gimme A Pound


    A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »
    He mentioned face f-ing. That's what I think most people would classify as slightly rough sex. I don't think most people would say that's extreme, unless I'm really desensitised.
    You possibly are.

    And he mentioned more than face ****ing.

    If people think aggressive deep throating and gang banging and depiction of the woman as being subjugated all the time is no biggie, that's their opinion, but if they look at it objectively, they'll be able to see no problem whatsoever that this is something a perfectly reasonable person with no issue with sex would have negative view on, and that it's concerning when children see the likes of it.


  • #84
    wakka12
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,786 ✭✭✭wakka12


    I think its a good idea. Itll stop very young children from accidentally happening upon it, I remember when I was like 11 or 12 I somehow happened upon porn sites from searching something rather innocuous.It really disturbed me tbh. As for pbuescent people, 15-16, yes theyll find ways around it and thats fine, I thin they should be able to watch it if they want. If theyre actively searching for it I think they are mature enough for it. But this law will be a good way of protecting very young children who arent ready for it.


  • #85
    Nobelium
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,089 ✭✭✭Nobelium


    I suppose it all depends if you're on the common good and human societal side of decent responsible caring parents and the upbringing of the next generation . . . or you're on the literal **** side.


  • #86
    PsychoPete
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,139 ✭✭✭✭PsychoPete


    I really don't like the idea of a website having my id and knowing that I've been looking up "autoerotic asphyxiation while a midgets gives a reach around". I'd prefer to keep that anonymous


  • #87
    JohnnyFlash
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,055 ✭✭✭JohnnyFlash


    PsychoPete wrote: »
    I really don't like the idea of a website having my id and knowing that I've been looking up "autoerotic asphyxiation while a midgets gives a reach around". I'd prefer to keep that anonymous

    That could be a stretch.


  • #88
    Roger Hassenforder
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,555 ✭✭✭Roger Hassenforder


    A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »
    It isn't controversial to say that.

    I think people are simply questioning the moral panic surrounding teenagers seeing people engaging in consensual sex on the Internet, while as we type, our nieces and nephews are probably down in the bottom bedroom playing GTA or watching violent movies on their parents' Netflix account.

    There's something about sex that unsettles people.

    Nonsense.

    Theres a big difference between consensual sex and some of the easily accessible content out there, where consent is questionable - some "barely legal" teen getting banged by 4 or 5 lads, bukkake (spelling?), or some other "humiliation", animal, mother/son incest and the race to the next weird and fcuked up thing, isnt "just sex". "Ah sure she got paid for it" ...

    This isnt an attempt to stop lads getting their **** on, to me its an attempt to restrict/control how easy it is to access porn, with the safety of kids the driver.

    And sure we all had a fap to family album and we turned out ok, isnt an argument to let chaps fap to whatever they like because its their doddamn right. No one is banning whatever blows your nuts for you.


  • #89
    Outlaw Pete
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,423 ✭✭✭✭Outlaw Pete


    Bloody hope not. Thought my embarrassment days were over when the Internet came about. The year before it did I recall having to phone the good ladies of Sky customer services and ask to book Television X for the night for £4.99.

    "Hello, can I have TVX for one night please?"
    "Yes, sir. Is it tonight you are interested in or another night?"
    "Tonight"
    "Would you like full access for 30 days for just £12.95?"
    "No thanks"
    "For £6.95 we could also give you access to the Playboy channel for the night"
    "No, that's okay"
    "So it's just one night only of Television X, is that right"
    "Yes"
    "Okay, it should unscramble now for you"
    "Thank you"
    "Enjoy your night's screwing"
    "Pardon?"
    "I said enjoy your night's viewing"
    "Oh, thanks, bye"

    Morto for mid 90's me.


  • #90
    Yamanoto
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,489 ✭✭✭Yamanoto


    It wouldn't surprise me in the least if we soon see the usual cabal of Ivana Bacik, Ruhama, ICTU & Susan McKay start lobbying hard to have Brussels restrict both the content and channels of distribution of pornography in Europe.

    They'll say a woman may think she's freely chosen to perform in x-rated content, but as it constitutes an act of violence against women, her choice is invalid. She must be protected from herself - John Charles McQuaid would be proud.

    It seems the 'bodily autonomy' argument only holds sway, once women don't do anything with their
    bodies that might fly in the face of third-wave feminist orthodoxy.


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 99,624 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    One company with no credentials claims to have cornered the market. They aren't charging. How exactly does that work , what is their business model ?

    "The way that 1Account will make money is actually through its 1Account Pay service that will be launching at a later date, not through its age verification." This comment sums that up
    The number of people who will buy subscriptions without first seeing a sample of what is on offer is approximately zero.

    And remember, you will have to verify your ID before you can have any clue whatsoever about what they are offering.
    So how will they make their money ?



    https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/05/08/age_verification_biz_claims_no_payment_model/
    The Age-verification Certificate (AVC) is a voluntary, non-statutory certification scheme to ensure age-verification providers maintain high standards of privacy and data security.
    Oh yeah your personal data is totally secure if it's a voluntary non-statutory cert
    And GDPR may not apply after Brexit.


Advertisement
Advertisement