Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Recommendation to ban porn discovered in upcoming EU report

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Brett Gibson 9 Mar 2013, 4:01pm

    The only reason people believe it’s degrading to women is because people believe that sex goes beyond the bedroom. In gay porn the bottom is “degraded” and no one complains – why? – because it’s just sex. Men dominate women, the top dominates the bottom, it’s life – get over it.

    1. Or we could just get beyond seeing sex as some kind of creepy power-imbalance experience, and stop talking in terms of “domination” and “submission”. Sex is not something one person inflicts on another, it’s something two (or more!) people do together, mutually and consensually, for their shared pleasure. What goes in what hole has nothing to do with “domination” – it’s about what feels good for each individual. Sex is a quintessentially cooperative activity among participants, not a competitive one between them.

      Indeed, apart from a minority of fetishists who get off on imparting some kind of creepy power-imbalance psychology into their sex, the only people who really see sex as a form of domination are rapists. Of which there are still alarmingly many, but it does the rest of us no favours to use their maladaptive psychology as the lens through which to assess sex in general.

      1. Well, I like being submissive during sex. Who are you to tell me I shouldn’t?

        1. Well, I do find it rather creepy and depressing, but I never said you shouldn’t. I said that we shouldn’t use this rather abusive paradigm as our standard lens on interpersonal sexual relations between people.

        2. Would you care to elaborate, Rich? By submissive, do you mean simply “the receptive partner”? Or do you mean that you like to beaten black and blue and thrown round the room so that you’re almost in fear of your life?

          You see, the question is important because there is pornography out there that depicts as normal the latter variety, and that’s not a healthy impression for youngsters to receive.

          Also, I don’t think the latter variety is a psychologically healthy option for any pair of consenting adults.

          1. GulliverUK 9 Mar 2013, 10:09pm

            There is nothing wrong with being bottom or top, and you are being trusting as a bottom that the top will behave in the way you like, and in that sense only are you submissive – but trusting is a more accurate term. Some people prefer top, some bottom, others like to mix and match, or swap during sex.

            As for the sex you mention, where there is physical abuse, and certainly if there is coercion, then I don’t know of any who like that – but I guess there must be at least some demand otherwise they wouldn’t make it. It wouldn’t upset me because I wouldn’t watch it, but I’d be concerned for those involved in production. Sex should, at its best, have some deep love, or strong sexual attraction between those involved, be free from coercion, consensual, legal and partners should look like they’re enjoying it – otherwise it’s a turn off, not a turn on, …. IMHO.

        3. And I love a man who is submissive when were having sex but I in no way dominate him, I love seeing the pleasure I can give, that’s not what domination is about. To me domination is a fetish that some people enjoy and others don’t.

  2. They make porn with women in it these days? Who would want to watch something like that!

    1. Darren Theoret 9 Mar 2013, 7:03pm

      you beat me to it LOL

    2. I like, sometimes. But my real love is tranny porn. There is nothing more beautiful in the world than tranny porn, and I say that as a bisexual transexual myself.

    3. Men who have Sex with Men…they are heterosexual after all…lol

    4. Well it depends on which side of the fence you come from! lol Me I prefer the girlies! lol Though, when it comes to so called lesbian porn online, they’re all straight! Grrr Hehehe

      1. There actually are some (albeit very few) legitimate lesbian porn sites out there, made by lesbians for lesbians (or bi ladies). *Cough* Not that I would know about such things! *Ahem*

    5. …lesbians?

  3. Colin *M* 9 Mar 2013, 4:14pm

    … because prohibition works so well.

    1. The Gay Survey Company 10 Mar 2013, 5:12pm

      PinkNews readers, please answer the following statement as true/false, using thumbs-up or thumbs-down.

      “Every gay man who watches gay porn is always fully aware that the guy being bottomed in the porn video has barely eaten a thing for three or four days before the filming, in order to make sure that his hole will be squeaky clean.”

      Thank you.

      1. Suddenly Last Bummer 10 Mar 2013, 5:22pm

        FFS. Or he could just douche. If that were the case none of us would eat..

        1. Just douching is not reliable enough for long hours of filming. Gay porn actors who are to be bottomed have to lay off normal food for several days before the shoot day. Certainly no dairy products. Too risky.

          Gay porn gives viewers the the notion that all men come with squeaky clean bottoms ready to be licked and sucked at any time. It’s a lie, of course.

          There’s a lot in gay porn that is a lie.

          1. Liam the God 10 Mar 2013, 9:44pm

            Porn is FANTASY! As in “Not Real Life”. Anyone that thinks otherwise is the same kind of idiot that beats up an actor because they play a total Bastard in a soap opera! Harry Potter isn’t real, either: Let’s ban the speccy little C… C…. Conjurer!

          2. Do you think Gone with the wind and Skyfall are documentaries then?

    2. The Gay Survey Company 10 Mar 2013, 5:30pm

      Let’s see just how much real truth is acknowledged by those who believe that there should be no restrictions placed upon pornography.

      Here’s a question. Please answer true or false, by using thumbs-up, or thumbs-down.

      “Every gay man is fully aware when he watches gay porn that the passive porn actor in the porn video has taken immodium tablets in the hours prior to filming, in order to ensure that his rectum will be squeaky clean when the camera zooms in on the action.”

      True or False?

      Thank you.

      1. of course we take imodium & stuff. can’t afford mess when the camera’s rolling. director would never use me again! and it totally kills off the atmosfeer

      2. Liam the God 10 Mar 2013, 9:45pm

        Wow! Next you’ll be saying that Mainstream Movies have REHEARSALS before filming starts!

  4. wait, wait, wait!

    “MEPs are said to be intending to amend the wording of the report on Tuesday, clarifying that the ban is specific to pornography in advertising.”

    Pornography in ADVERTISING?

    So, this opens the door wide to bans on ANYthing deemed even remotely “sensual” in advertising. I can see it already… a return to Victorian prurience. The mere sight of an ankle raises armies of protesters offended by the victimization and objectification of women.

    1. The Irish Rape Crisis Network has backed the proposal by Dutch MEPs to ban all forms of pornography, which would include internet porn. Kartika Liotard, an MEP linked with the Confederal Group of the European United Left, has tabled a proposal demanding “statutory measures to prevent any form of pornography in the media and in advertising, and for a ban on advertising for pornographic products and sex tourism”, with the scope of any ban to include the “digital field”. This has come as Icelandic politicians have begun debating a possible pornography ban in Iceland and as a recent study in Ireland indicated that children are viewing pornography at a much younger age than before.

      We certainly need to get beyond the black and white debate of censorship versus free speech. Pornography needs to regulated and moderated, just like everything else in life.

  5. What the actual F***?
    Where did this come from???
    You wanna ban porn??

    Over my cold dead sticky hands!!

  6. Robert (Kettering) 9 Mar 2013, 4:24pm

    Goodness me has Nanny finally made her way to Brussels? I thought it was only the UK that loved the Nanny State seems its spreading.

    That aside, this is really bad law and will criminalise thousands of currently innocent people. Terrible law usually only found in places like Saudi Arabia and Iran.

    1. This’ll be interesting: How is the UK a nanny state? At least with sexual stuff, because i can think of at least 4 or 5 examples in british media to prove otherwise xx

    2. Which law are you referring to? No bill has yet even been drafted in response to the report’s recommendations.

  7. as a woman I find this a worrying step backwards. The idea that women are automatically degraded by all forms of pornography has always seemed to me to feed into the myth that women don’t enjoy sex or pornography, because we’re such delicate sensitive flowers.

  8. Banning prostitution hasn’t worked out so well for prostitutes either, works very well for traffickers and pimps though.

  9. Dex (@MrDexB) 9 Mar 2013, 4:45pm

    So this plan is a part of the “Report on Eliminating Gender Stereotypes in the EU”. Funny because gay porn isn’t that stereotypical! So our porn would be banned all because of stupid “porn” featuring women almost strangled to death!

    1. You say “gay porn isn’t that stereotypical”. I disagree. When was the last time you saw a gay porn video showing a gay couple who are civilly-partnered and who simply make love in a tender and loving way?

      You know well what the stereotypical format of the porn video is, don’t you.

      Unfortunately they convey the stereotype that as soon as any two gay men (complete strangers) “clock each other” (on the street, in a work situation, beside a swimming pool, wherever) five minutes later they’re completely naked and going hell for leather at the hardest sex imaginable. Now if that’s not a stereotype, tell me what is!

      1. Most people don’t want porn like that. Porn is an escape from reality. What you are describing is the genre of amateur porn which is not exploitive at all, but all about people in relationships (and sometimes alone doing weird crap with vegetables) doing their own videos for the internet.

  10. Har Davids 9 Mar 2013, 5:02pm

    And it isn’t going to work!

  11. Oh read it properly. The vote won’t ban anything itself. It’ll recommend a ban which countries can choose to ignore if they wish.

    Obviously every sensible person should want an end to gender stereotypes, and I think the proliferation of internet pornography probably has done a lot of harm towards sexual attitudes towards women (although that’s only a feeling), but from a pragmatic point of view I don’t see how on earth this could be effectively policed. I’d much prefer to see the EU working towards continued better sex education, continued breaking down of gender stereotypes and continued greater economic freedom for women, and hopefully that will lead to healthier sexual attitudes towards women and fewer ambiguities about whether porn participants (especially women) are consenting.

    1. Dennis G. 9 Mar 2013, 6:24pm

      Don’t understand why the comment above has been thumbed down. Sounds perfectly sensible to me.

      1. It might be the line about wanting an end to gender stereotypes. That would put the trans lobby out of business!

      2. It’s ok I don’t take it personally : )

  12. Actually I come from a EU country where porn is said to be banned. It’s so heavily banned that nearly impossible to find a household without porn :)

  13. GulliverUK 9 Mar 2013, 5:56pm

    Technically inept beurocraps shoot off own foot whilst explaining the dangers of waving loaded guns around !

    Outlawing it in advertising, by placing legal obligations on advertisers, is probably the only possible ban they could muster – although if the man on the front of M&S knickers goes I shall be very annoyed !!! However, banning anything on the Internet is stupid, ignorant of the technicalities and just can’t be done. Even the stunted brain capacity of those Tory hoodlums who thought to do it here, in the UK, eventually gave it up when it was explained to them.

    And …. what would all the MPs and researchers in Parliament do all day when their porn is cut off !! I bet it’s even worse with the MEPs. :D

    1. Gully have you sorted your issues out as yet?

  14. Puritanical idiots.

  15. Nearly every single person who posts on PinkNews threads is in favour of regulation: regulation of the press, regulation of the banks, regulation of company practices, regulation of your transport companies, regulation of priests, and so on and so on.

    And so pornography requires regulation too!

    But pornography is not only completely unregulated, it is produced by seedy profit-driven lowlifes.

    Pornography producers thus create pornography that sets up habits and expectations which are far from desirable for society. 99% of the pornography that exists corrupts the mind.

    I’m with Jóhanna Sigurðardóttir, Iceland’s lesbian Prime Minister: pornography should be seriously regulated.

    1. “But pornography is not only completely unregulated”

      That isn’t actually true but there is room for better regulation, moreso to protect the rights of people within the industry than “society”.

      The rest of your comment requires citation if it’s to be taken seriously especially the “99%” claim.

    2. GulliverUK 9 Mar 2013, 7:30pm

      Cobblers Eddy. People don’t watch what they don’t want to watch. They watch it if they like it; There is nothing seedy about sex unless it is somehow coerced.

      What business is it of yours to set standards for everybody else. You’ve given your opinion, but as for telling people what types of porn they can watch, if at all, you can forget it. As for your claim that “99% of the pornography that exists corrupts the mind.” — if you are a weak-minded person, anything can corrupt you – thankfully most of us adults are able to objectively analyse things and be rational. Porn is for stimulation – just like Liquid Silk is. You’re not one of those people who actually believes that Deirdre went to prison in Coronation Street are you?

      Pornography is regulated already, and any that isn’t classified is already for private use only (not distribution). Further, the whole market is regulated by the market — crap doesn’t sell – people view and buy what they like.

      1. Although I agree with most of what you’ve written there, I am quite frequently faced with unsolicited pornographic images in adverts on the Net, including pictures of labia that I find rather disturbing. I also think that the media people choose to consume can affect their attitudes toward various aspects of life, although I prefer education to blanket censorship.

    3. 99% of porn corrupts the mind? LOL. ffs, get a life.

      And you say porn is produced by profit driven lowlifes – who do you think drives the banks, the food chain, the energy we use, highstreet commodities, the arms race etc? nice loving kind and caring people? – wake up – the whole world is driven by profit driven lowlifes.

    4. If anyone here thinks that pornography does NOT corrupt the mind, then, please, arrange a showing of YOUR favourite pornography to some youngsters from your local schools.

      Ah?

      You wouldn’t want to expose young children to pornography? Why not?

      You wouldn’t want young children to see hard hetero or homo sex? Why not?

      You say it’s not corrupting of the mind. So why not?

      Think!

      1. casparthegood 9 Mar 2013, 9:23pm

        Grow up . Even before any other considerations it is illegal to show to or allow acces to by any person under the age of 18 etc . This is a complete non-argument and a waste of bandwidth

        1. Really. British law forbids sixteen-year-old adults accessing porn?

      2. “Think!”

        Good advice practice what you preach.

        Children are not the intended audience of porn. I wouldn’t let a child watch “nightmare on elm street” are you proposing we ban horror films too?

        What about sharp scissors? Children shouldn’t use those. <—– This makes just about as much sense as your puritanical rambling

  16. Because societies that ban porn are so far advanced in terms of gender equality and respect.

  17. Just think of the billions saved, I mean lost.
    The porn industry makes more money than the gaming industry and Hollywood combined.
    Besides, there’s always ways to access porn, even via the darknet on things like Tor.
    It will just create a black market, putting money in the hands of gangs, and will be much more harder to regulate, being illegal and all. Leading to much more, and currently illegal forms of pornography created.
    They can’t control cannabis, what makes them think they can control pornography?
    I don’t even bother much with porn, but I do tend to dislike being told what, and what I cannot view, when no harm’s come to play, between two consenting adults.

  18. Yes of course, before the internet, women were regarded as equals. And not like cattle for trade, like they still are in nations where porn is banned. Like the Arab nations.
    I agree that women are, and should be regarded as equal. Banning porn is not going to achieve that.
    Women are treated more equally now, than they ever have. Not perfect, but it’s heading in the right direction.

    besides any political party that considers should proposal will soon find themselves without votes. And the opposition, those opposing such draconian laws gaining lots of votes.
    Porn’s as popular as it is for a reason.

    1. “Porn’s as popular as it is for a reason.”

      And what is “the reason”, Mike?

      I suggest there are a number of reasons, not just one.

      And one of those reasons is that porn is addictive.

      Another reason is that the more that porn invades society, the more people become habituated to it.

      Another reason is that porn is deliberately promoted and popularised by those who make it. Why? Because they want to rake in the money.

      If porn is “a fine thing”, please direct me to any academic Department of Pornography at one of our universities. Please give me the name of its Professor of Pornography. Please tell me why you are happy for there NOT to be a Secretary of State for Pornography.

      Think with the brain, not the dick.

      1. A very small minority of people are porn addicts. Alcohol is more addictive than pornography should we ban that?

        1. Liam the God 9 Mar 2013, 11:03pm

          Hang on: No ALCOHOL in Muslim Theocracies, either! No porn, no alcohol, and women are respected and given equal rights with men…… NOT!!

      2. Liam the God 9 Mar 2013, 11:02pm

        Shouldn’t you be at a Prayer meeting, along with all the other self-loathing sexual inadequate’s? Porn has existed for… well, FOREVER! Ancient Rome had pornography, and it existed before them. Most of the arguments you have made are spurious, illogical, or just plain stupid.

  19. The banning of consensual adult pornography: a further attack on individual freedom where the religious Right joins hands with the mind-control-obsessed Left.

    So what will happen if EU member states follow this recommendation and ban pornography? Will we need to build more prisons to accommodate people discovered to have viewed consensual adult porn online? Will we need to take more police officers off solving real crimes to cope with detecting porn criminals?

    The same thing will happen with this harebrained idea as happened with alcohol prohibition. People will completely ignore it. Innocent people will be made into criminals. And the neurotic association between sex and guilt will be reinforced.

    1. GulliverUK 9 Mar 2013, 7:43pm

      European Spring. Right now you don’t get anything for free, and people are hurting financially — any further encroachment on to individual pastimes would be unthinkable by anyone who doesn’t want to start a backlash.

      The Tories are famous for their stupidity in this area – John Major and the Egg later whilst talking about “Back to Basics”, any number of them caught with their todger where it doesn’t belong, cheating on their expenses — how ethical is that? Allow Mothers’ Union arch wingnut to write a report attempting to ban all this — and who is to say it isn’t his report that is behind this move, with the likes of Vasey pandering to the Neanderthal right.

      They are thick and they are stupid, and they have been told time and time again. Here was the government trying to do just this in 2010.
      Internet porn block ‘not possible’ say ISPs
      http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12041063

  20. GulliverUK 9 Mar 2013, 7:35pm

    Why is it there’s always some deluded f–wit who wants to control everybody else, whether it’s bureaucrats, politicians, civil servants, local councils, regulators, religious nutters, televangelists, The Pope, or some other jobs-worth.

    Why do these crazies believe they have a better understanding of ethics and right and wrong than everybody else. Politicians are the people we least think of when we look to leadership on these issues, and whilst the ECHR make pretty sensible calls most of the time, the same can’t be said for EU bureaucrats.

    1. Gulliver, quickly, you need to moderate your position! The cameras are rolling! Your statements are going to be paraded before the nation! :-)

      You don’t truly mean that you want hard, free-for-all, orgy-style, BDSM, pornographic videos spread all around the land like it was bread and milk and sweeties and chocolate down at the local corner shop, now do you?

      You need to issue a moderating statement, I think? Draw back a little, hmm? ;-)

      1. GulliverUK 9 Mar 2013, 9:31pm

        Eddy,
        I need to moderate nothing whatsoever. As long as the sex is, as I already pointed out, consensual, not coerced, and it’s legal, then people should watch what they like. I myself am not in to BDSM — to be honest I just don’t actually understand the dynamics of it — so I won’t watch that, but I’ve no problem with others who understand and enjoy it in watching adult entertainment of that type.

        You’ve clearly never heard the term “swingers” – it’s heterosexuals who wife-swap and have orgies – and although I’ve only a few times had a threesome, I’ve no objection to orgies either. It is … frankly … none of my business. It’s not harmful, it’s enjoyment for those who engage, it releases tension and pressure for many, and if they want to, it’s not my place to tell them not to, nor would I wish to do so. I’m quite happy for my statements — all of them — to stand, be published on Christian web sites, or wherever. I don’t say things I don’t mean.

        1. Gulliver, way too much information.

          1. Goodness gracious, you’ve lived a sheltered life!

  21. GingerlyColors 9 Mar 2013, 8:34pm

    You’ll never stop pornography. It will be like trying to ban prostitution, drugs and alcohol, any laws will be unenforcable. The authorities should concentrate on pornography depicting illegal sexual acts whether it is against children or non-consensual. I would like to see internet service providers putting a block on pornographic websites unless users ‘opt in’ but even then those who post porn on the internet would find a way round filtering software.
    I do not agree with porn being shoved in peoples’ faces however, and I would prefer people who enjoy pornography to be more discrete, in other words not viewing it in the company of people who may find such material offensive.

    1. I agree, porn will never be stopped. They were into it in Pompeii, and there’ll always be people seeking it. And those people will always be able to get their hands on it somehow.

      But in our society porn has become so freely available that a child, familiarised with computers at school, has only to do the most simple Google search to bring up the hardest and most corrupting pornography there is! Why do good parents now rush to tweak computers before their little ones get near them? And what about the kids of all the other parents, the parents who couldn’t give a damn, the irresponsible parents, the ones who let them smoke and drink alcohol from the age of 10 and so forth: do they bother to preserve the creative innocence of childhood?

      1. GulliverUK 9 Mar 2013, 9:38pm

        School computers should be protected by filters – but you just won’t catch everything, and more than that most of these filters block LGBT sites on suicide prevention, news web sites like Pinknews, GayTimes, etc. On their mobile phones such content is blocked — unless they find a watch to go in and switch off the block, but that can require a credit card – so if Dad or Mum find a £1 charge on their card from their mobile provider – they should investigate. Again, mobile providers often block Pinknews and other sites — because the filtering software is rubbish.

        On home PCs they should be running software to control browsing — again, all filtering software has the same issue, it cannot cope with the huge number of variations, and my own Kaspersky software blocks Pinknews and other sites if I set up to filter out porn. The technology doesn’t work properly.

        It is the parents responsibility to control access to magazines, books, films, and the Internet — not society.

        1. Spoken by one who is obviously not a parent.

          1. GulliverUK 9 Mar 2013, 11:20pm

            Correct. The law wasn’t changed soon enough and I was denied that.

            What I am is a man with 25 years IT experience in servers and networking, and I’m fully aware that filtering won’t work. I can find loads of ways around it. However, adding filtering on a PC is relatively easy with packages like Kaspersky, and Windows, and aside from the negative affects of blocking legitimate sites like PN, it is fairly successful. I can even block VPNs, either at the router level, or simply via Kaspersky. I can restricts by hours, or permit or deny individual sites.

            As a child I did know where my parents porn was — under the bed — and happy to look through when my parents were out. Although I was really looking at the men, not the women. Did me absolutely no harm.

            What experience do you have as a parent then, that I don’t have? Given the fact I was once a child I have a fairly good understanding of how children think.

            ps. Surprised nobody has mentioned hedge porn yet !

          2. The experience I have as a parent that you don’t have is the fact that I am a parent – a gay single dad (now that is a minority for you) and was out when I became a dad (before any changes to the law). And I too remember what it was like as a child as I imagine most if not all people do. And I can assure you there is a big difference between childhood memories and being a parent, particularly in the period we live in.

            Also your argument is not consistent. First you say that it is up to parents to control access to the internet but then you say filtering doesn’t work.

            It is unfortunate that you don’t have children if that is what you wanted. However, just because you were a child once doesn’t qualify you to make assumptions/judgements about parents or parenting. I can assure you it is alot harder than you can possibly imagine (and imagine is all you can do).

          3. Jake, what I said wasn’t inconsistent. The filter will block some legitimate sites, like PN, GayTimes, LGBT suicide prevention, etc., which is unacceptable. It may well also let some porn sites through.

            I applaud you for being a gay dad. I’m afraid I just felt I would need backup, a second, a lover, to help me cope – it was my issue, my problem, my failure. I would have been a great dad I know now, but I surrendered to my fears – especially with everyone telling me I was a defective human. Even though you say it’s a lot harder than I might have imagined, it’s the biggest regret I have in life. I was brought up, most of my youth, by my mother, and she worked tirelessly for us, and I think she did a really good job.

            Kaspersky seems to work, BUT blocking legitimate LGBT web sites could be very damaging for a young person who is gay and not able to access information they need to carry become confident, or to help them, e.g. suicide prevention for LGBT youth.

          4. Firstly, Gulliver, hugs for missing out on being a parent. I wonder if it’s truly too late for you to become one.

            Secondly, however, on Jake’s point, you wrote that parents “should be running software to control browsing”. Would you really recommend this given that “most of these filters block LGBT sites on suicide prevention, news web sites like Pinknews, GayTimes, etc.” and “blocking legitimate LGBT web sites could be very damaging for a young person who is gay and not able to access information they need to carry become confident, or to help them”? Does Kaspersky manage to block enough undesirable porn to make access unlikely without blocking many of the legitimate sites?

      2. “And what about the kids of all the other parents, the parents who couldn’t give a damn, the irresponsible parents, the ones who let them smoke and drink alcohol from the age of 10 and so forth: do they bother to preserve the creative innocence of childhood?”

        Erm no obviously they let their children smoke and drink alcohol. I suppose we should all stop smoking and drinking because of terrible parents. Ban cigarettes and alcohol now! In fact ban parents, it’s the only way to protect the children!!!!!

  22. “Everyone in the world appreciates porn, everyone knows that . . .”

    Oh, sorry, Felipe. But I am afraid I didn’t know that EVERYONE in the world APPRECIATES porn. And I didn’t know that EVERYONE knows this.

    But certainly just looking down my street I have a suspicion you may have made a mistake. There’s one youngster in my street who may well have seen a bit of porn now and then. And then there’s one married man who’s rumoured to be a bit of rake. But apart from that I am quite sure that the men and women, the married couples, down my street DON’T consume porn, and DON’T appreciate it.

    Are you living in a little porn-bubble, Felipe? Do your mum and dad, gran and grandpa, all watch porn on a Saturday night then?

    1. GulliverUK 9 Mar 2013, 9:24pm

      Eddy,
      If they did watch porn, I expect you’d be the very last person on the planet they’d tell. You’re remarks denigrating everybody else who is more liberally minded than you is shocking. You appear out-of-control.

      1. And you’re a porn addict?

  23. I really hope it is banned. Those who really want it will always be able to get it, but it won’t be one click away from the face of every child using the internet. Good policy.

    1. GulliverUK 9 Mar 2013, 9:46pm

      Parents who cannot be bothered to implement free filtering software and user controls on their PCs are to blame — not society. They can usually ring their ISP for details on how to set this up, and some ISPs will even block this for you.

      And most parents keep their own porn magazines where kids can get hold of them – usually under the bed, where they’re handy. Isn’t that true?

      It’s not available to every child a click away – where did you get that from? Can you elaborate on why you think that.

      1. Gulliver, what epoch are you from? Magazines? You are obviously referring to your own childhood. We are in the 21st century – the computer and internet age. Perhaps you should re-read the article. As you pointed out above filters do not work as they should.

        I thought parents and children are part of society, not separate from it. You seem to have narrow and bigoted views of parents just as many right wing christians have narrow and bigoted views of gays.

        My advice…stop accumulating the tickets sport.

        1. Last time I checked, the man from the Mothers’ Union (ironic eh?) said he wanted all billboard,bus-stop advertising, and any magazines, censored, along with porn on the Internet — or frankly, any pictures which didn’t show women in full length dresses, banned. Before that Ed Vasey was banging on about banning all porn on the Internet – like the loon he is. Filters don’t work because a) there are ways around and b) they block legitimate sites which young people should have access to. The latter being the really important one.

          Parents control what young people read, who they associate with, what they watch on TV, and should determine what they have access to on their phones and PCs. It is THEIR responsibility. We are NOT going to shut down legitimate adult entertainment because parents are crap at their jobs. It was their choice to have children, they have to be responsible for them. As a society we already place restrictions on films via classifications.

          1. Gulliver, what alternate universe are you living in? As children get older parental “control” becomes harder as the children become semi-independent. The only way around this would be to lock them in their rooms until they are adults.

            Nowhere have I said to shut down legitimate adult entertainment or ban pornography from the internet. However, you seem to have totally unrealistic expectations of parents. When a child walks out of their home they should become the concern of society as they are the most vulnerable group within society.

            Also many men become fathers not by choice, they simply have no say in the matter (not my situation).

          2. Using your logic, however, why should society be responsible for men who have unprotected sex with other men and as a consequence become HIV+. As a society do we already not pay enough taxes towards the National Health system. So why should our taxes have to go towards these men. Was it not their choice to have unprotected sex and therefore, THEIR responsibility (I do not think this just making a point).

            Maybe you should try walking in someone else’s shoes for awhile Gulliver and develop a bit of empathy for others.

          3. Please explain how a man can become a father and it not his choice, if he becomes a father it’s because he had unprotected sex with a woman, which as you state is a choice when it comes to HIV. It’s a choice both times.

            I agree that there are some unrealistic expectations put on parents but banning porn is not going stop children being put at risk, they are at risk, as are we all every time we step out the door. Education is the key, children should be taught what consensual sex is, how a girl becomes pregnant, why its ok to be gay, etc. wrapping them up in cotton wool only makes them more vulnerable. Teach them how to live in the real world and that includes porn, then they have a real choice and understanding of what they are doing.

          4. “Gulliver, what alternate universe are you living in?”

            Jake28, well said – except that the question can be directed at the majority of commenters on this thread, sadly.

            I can only explain the ferocious fear of the loss of easy access to online porn videos as evidence of an addiction to it.

            And I have to say I am surprised that one of the most vehement opponents of banning porn in this thread is someone who appears to have been quite used to browsing his parents’ porn collection underneath their bed! Obviously this person was raised in a rather lax household! ;-)

          5. “Parents control what young people read, who they associate with, what they watch on TV, and should determine what they have access to on their phones and PCs. It is THEIR responsibility.”

            How are they meant to do this if, as you write, “[f]ilters don’t work because a) there are ways around and b) they block legitimate sites which young people should have access to”?

          6. David, my best friend became a father to his second child after being denied choice. Their mother had told him that she was taking birth control pills.

    2. casparthegood 9 Mar 2013, 10:34pm

      er… the thread was about preventing the degredation of women, nothing to do with controling what kids can or can’t see online or anywhere else for that matter.This is the kind of ‘protect the children’ attitude that I expect from the more evangelistic religious right wing ban it all brigade who happily allow their kids to read 2000 year old porn because it’s in the bible.

    3. Maybe as a society we should learn that the Internet is not a place for children.

      Pornography is one of many inappropriate things a child can be exposed to online, it’s not even the worst.

      Any parent who lets a child on the Internet without supervision AND an adequate filter in place is negligent not ignorant it’s 2013 not 1993. Children shouldn’t have their own laptops, iPads or smartphones until they’re 16. Companies who make games consoles should give the consumer the option to delete web browsers or restrict access via a password.

  24. Certainly, adult erotic entertainment products that feature children and animals should be banned outright as they cause immeasurable pain and suffering.

    However, the concept that straight porn is the sole and leading influence on violence against women is monocausal and flawed. What about the effects of other social institutions, as well as the diversity of porn o sa a genre?

  25. NorthernIrishGuest 9 Mar 2013, 10:35pm

    Why ban it? Why not just try harder to ban and prosecute those who force women into the sex industry – those people are the ones doing the damage.

    The problem is that the governments do not want to take firm control of sex industries. A government has to stop the circumstances by which women are forced into this – usually the need for money or due to abusive partners. That is the problem.

    1. What about the porn featuring performers (of both genders) who freely choose to be in the industry?

    2. *Edit*

      … (of all genders) …

  26. Authorities should concentrate on continuing attempts to eradicate the production and distribution of illegal porn. Pornography consisting only of consenting adults, depicting masturbation and consenting sex is only potentially harmful to children having access to it. It is the responsibility of parents to prevent their children accessing pornography. Internet systems could also be improved to give parents better peace of mind. However, anyone wanting to take part in or viewing legal pornography should be able to continue doing so – why shouldn’t they in a democracy?

    I’m sure many politicians enjoy pornography, so I doubt this proposed EU measure will get anywhere. They should only continue trying to eradicate pornography that is genuinely harmful and already illegal.

    1. As for the ‘degradation of women’ – well, legal pornography consists of consenting adults. If the women taking part wish to do so, why would anyone want to stop them unless they’re morally self-righteous hypocrites? In western democracy, women who are not chained to prohibitive religions have the same amount of free-will as men. It is the women who are chained by their religion who are being degraded. They have no free-will. That is what the MEPs should concern themselves with.

    2. Research proves that online porn has reduced the number of occurrence of rape, and hence physical abuse.

      1. Interesting. Can you provide some links to these studies, preferably in peer-reviewed journals?

  27. Liam the God 9 Mar 2013, 11:09pm

    Straight Porn is probably the only place where you will find the WOMEN being paid more than the MEN! And whereas before a woman would only be “Marketable” (for want of a better word) until maybe 34 with the interest in “MILF” porn has extended their careers for another 20 years or so.

    1. Only another 20 years? I would have thought another 40 years at least as many heterosexual men have very strange tastes. It’s not just MILFs, it’s also GILFs they’re now ‘into’.

      1. casparthegood 9 Mar 2013, 11:22pm

        I will bow to your superior knowledge on that :-)

        1. The topic arose during coffee-break at work LOL. It was rather disturbing to listen to!

          Though, I was already aware of men and their GILFs – remember a certain 61 year-old homophobic Northern Ireland MP who was having an affair with a 19 year-old?

          1. Mrs Robinson ? :D

      2. GulliverUK 9 Mar 2013, 11:23pm

        Good grief ! You guys sound like experts !!! :D
        What about HILF ? We’ll leave the GILF for now :)

        1. What’s a HILF? Please tell!

          :-D

          1. Homosexual??? ;-)

          2. Husbands ! :D

            Just playing with yer :)

            Could mean homosexuals if you wanted.

  28. On The Other Hand 9 Mar 2013, 11:53pm

    As anyone who’s been to the British Museum recently will know, the first thing the human race did when it discovered Art, apart from drawing animals, around 30,000 years ago, was to make images of a woman with large breasts. The oldest ceramic object known is of a woman with large breasts.

    Straight men will make and enjoy such images, and no law will stop them.

    1. Imagine the uproar if any attempt was made to prevent straight men having their porn. Though, I think there would also be an uproar from both “straight” and gay men if gay porn suddenly disappeared.

      1. Liam the God 10 Mar 2013, 12:39am

        And more than a few Women, from my experience!

  29. I’m sorry but we are not China!! If I wish to watch porn that’s my business.As long as people are not accessing and watching child or animal porn, or porn where people are being harmed, then what business is it of anyone!

  30. I really like porn. sad face :( thank god im american. But still not cool.

  31. The worst shags are always porn addicts. Get it away from them for the sexual good of society!

  32. ...Paddyswurds 10 Mar 2013, 1:00pm

    Completely eradicating porn from the Interweb would be nigh on impossible, and would in a lot of countries be an infringement of the Freedom of Information Act. Like the telly, there is the off switch and parents must take a less lazy interest in what their children can access on the web.There are things like opt-in and parental control which can be used successfully but it would mean parents taking and interest in their children’s welfare and not leaving it to others. To impose censorship on billions of adults is just not feasible and any attempt to do so by stealth is rightly doomed to failure….

  33. ...Paddyswurds 10 Mar 2013, 1:10pm

    How will ISPs police this proposal when they still cannot eradicate child porn from the net and it has always been illegal. I just cannot see success for this short of switching off the Internet completely and that will never happen. One way that would help is to stop it being available on mobile devices like smart phones and Tablets using the IMEI number associated with such devices. Banning porn completely will drive it underground again like in the past and that would definitely be a retrograde step.

  34. DCBrighton 10 Mar 2013, 1:13pm

    I can understand why this has been quite divisive opinions on this one.

    Of course, there should be tougher regulation on the industry to prevent exploitation. The traffickers of Eastern Europeans coming on the promise of “modelling” work, should be dealt with in the harshest ways the law can provide.

    As for children accessing porn, the control lies firmly with the parents. There is software available and the latest version of Windows has really robust parental controls. Time limits, web filtering, app restrictions and logging PC activity. The best parental control in my opinion does not lie in the software though, it is simply this- When the PC is online, keep it in a communal family area like the living room and you can see exactly what your kids are doing.

  35. The obsession with sex as a dangerous thing to be regulated, comes from the desire to make people douseful work in place of sexual expression. This is why sex is taboo in western society.
    In primitive cultures sex is or was not seen as a bad thing the way it is in western culture. These societies lacked our capacity for sustained work effort as their energy and attention was spent on sex.
    A sexless life is a barren and dry life as is so well described by EM Forster among others.
    Already schooling and discipline removes us far from instinct. If we tighten the grip on people further people will have more psychological problems.
    Feminism and queer theory is about as unnatural and inhuman it is possible to get

  36. So the only legal and viable porn will be gay porn, because there are no women?

  37. Any non-LGBT person following PinkNews would be correct in deducing from the comments in these columns that lesbians and gays fiercely want the right to settle into permanent and faithful marriages, that lesbians and gays utterly detest the behaviour of the Catholic Church, and that the very same lesbians and gays want unfettered access to all forms of pornography, that lesbians and gays see pornography as being of equal value and status as world literature.

    1. Liam the God 10 Mar 2013, 9:52pm

      You’ve made quite a leap from “defending pornography” to “Defending Pornography as equal value and Status as world literature”. What you have basically said is that “LGTB people aren’t that much different to NON LGTB people”, which is actually true! Well done for being observant about that, anyway. As for the rest I suggest you fond some Bill Hicks material and listen to what he said about “Po-Naw-Gra-Fuh”.

    2. In all instances, please replace “lesbians and gays” with “some lesbians and gays” (if not “some homosexual people”).

  38. This is a tabloid journalist’s wet dream in terms of exciting alarm among their core constituency of underachieving white males.

    While I have no illusions that the ECHR cannot be trusted to defend basic civil liberties (which Julian Assange has borne witness to) and there is a definite authoritarian streak to the European Constitution, I can’t help but think there is more to this story than we are being told.

  39. This will not get anywhere.

    It’s another group of people stamping their feet and trying to force their will and moralistic opinions onto others. It’s nothing more than a fart in a wind tunnel.

  40. The discussion here leads me to conclude that many contributors have (not for the first time) been misled by the headline. The final paragraph of the article states, “MEPs are said to be intending to amend the wording of the report on Tuesday, clarifying that the ban is specific to pornography in advertising.”

  41. James Campbell 5 Apr 2013, 9:05pm

    Homophobes often refer to a ‘slippery slope’ when they want to dramatise a change in the law, well this time it really is a slope, which threatens freedom of speech. There are laws which already exist, framed to protect minors and other vulnerable groups, but which are often not enforced appropriately. Children (and other vulnerable groups) must be protected and this is where any restrictions should start – and end. Yes, i hear what is said about “a ban which countries can choose to ignore if they wish”. but I don’t trust the un-elected bureaucrats in Brussels when they talk about ‘choice’. They don’t believe in choice.

    So who will decide what is porn – some narrow minded moron in an office (or perhaps a cassock)? I have experienced just how idiotic the over-application of such restrictions can be when drawn up by an unrepresentative, biased, ill-informed minority.

  42. James Campbell 5 Apr 2013, 9:06pm

    In common with millions of others, I use a mobile internet dongle when I travel to access my e-mail and the internet. Professionally (I am a doctor) I sometimes need to access web sites which may contain text and images that some (who may be unable to discriminate between medical content and less ‘clinical’ imagery) may regard as worthy of censorship. When using the dongle for the first time I was amazed when I was informed that the site I was attempting to access was ‘age-restricted’ and ‘blocked’ to ‘protect’ minors ….. I was advised that in order to get the block lifted, I had to ‘prove’ I was an adult by registering my credit card (credit cards are only issued to 18+ applicants). The fact that my mobile account was paid for monthly by my credit card appeared to have eluded the company (American) which devised this censorship. It took me months, many e-mails & telephone calls to get the restriction lifted.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews.co.uk. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all