Yeah it makes me wonder too, I think it was actually a female that introduced this porn bill. Either way, this country is so fucked up. Think they're trying to start a dictatorship.
AmberCutie's Forum
An adult community for cam models and members to discuss all the things!
New UK Porn Bill
- Thread starter SexySteph
- Start date
-
** WARNING - ACF CONTAINS ADULT CONTENT **Only persons aged 18 or over may read or post to the forums, without regard to whether an adult actually owns the registration or parental/guardian permission. AmberCutie's Forum (ACF) is for use by adults only and contains adult content. By continuing to use this site you are confirming that you are at least 18 years of age.
- Status
Yeah it makes me wonder too, I think it was actually a female that introduced this porn bill. Either way, this country is so fucked up. Think they're trying to start a dictatorship.
Females can be sexist too. Everyone should start sending her science articles teaching her what it is and how it sometimes can't be stopped for some women. My ex used to squirt with EVERYTHING. I would rub her nipples and there would be a giant puddle on the floor. lol.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn26772-female-ejaculation-comes-in-two-forms-scientists-find/
Guy
Deactivated Account
They determined that female ejaculate is urine.
Urine in pornography violates UK obscenity laws.
Female semen contains toxic vapours that are dangerous to wildlife. It's why I never make women cum. It's a health and safety issue.
No. they determined there is no way to tell the difference between the two.
"The BBFC is required to seek to avoid classifying material that is likely to be considered in breach of the Obscene Publications Act," the BBFC told us. "According to the advice we take from the police and the CPS, sex works featuring urolagnia [the gaining of sexual pleasure from urination] are likely to be considered obscene.
"Therefore, unless it's very clear that what is being shown is indeed 'female ejaculation', as opposed to urolagnia, the Board's position has to be that scenes of this nature featuring liquid that might be urine have to be cut. The situation is further complicated, for us, by the fact that medical advice we have taken has suggested that some scenes submitted to us that purported to show 'female ejaculation' were, in fact, urination."
http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/joel-golby-ejaculation-police-squirting-vaginas-jizzing-cocks-808
"Therefore, unless it's very clear that what is being shown is indeed 'female ejaculation', as opposed to urolagnia, the Board's position has to be that scenes of this nature featuring liquid that might be urine have to be cut. The situation is further complicated, for us, by the fact that medical advice we have taken has suggested that some scenes submitted to us that purported to show 'female ejaculation' were, in fact, urination."
http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/joel-golby-ejaculation-police-squirting-vaginas-jizzing-cocks-808
Actually for those companies it wont be that much extra work - they already have the infrastructure to hold a lot of user information in a way that complies with existing data retention laws; the big problem will be for smaller sites that will have to come up with this infrastructure on their own, plus the cost of running age verification (I've seen some lawyers and site owners saying it will be a few pounds per person to be checked).
Actually there was a lot more than this involved in Google's move out of China - quoting wikipedia - "In January 2010 Google announced that, in response to a Chinese-originated hacking attack on them and other US tech companies, they were no longer willing to censor searches in China and would pull out of the country completely if necessary.[8] "
This situation is different to China's - in that case, there was no alternative to try to get the law overruled because the Chinese government doesn't care. In this case, the law can be fought in the UK itself via judicial means, as well as going all the way to the EU courts (while the UK remains in the EU). And even after they leave the EU (if they ever do it), companies outside of the UK could use international law if they can show that this places them in a competitive disadvantage to UK-based companies.
- Status
Similar threads
-
- Locked
- Question
