back to article Aussie censor balks at bijou boobs

The proposed Australian Government clampdown on smut just got a whole lot broader, as news emerged of a ban on small breasts and female ejaculation in adult material. The end result of this widening of the censor’s net could be the addition of millions of websites to the internet filter now being proposed. Breasts came under …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Stef 4
    Thumb Down

    Serioulsy?

    I thought this was a spoof/satirical article when I read it this morning. Now it has been reproduced here.

  2. Lionel Baden
    WTF?

    i really shouldnt bother posting

    Because i am completly speechless !!!

  3. John P
    WTF?

    oh dear Australia

    I was considering emmigrating to Oz when I finish my degree, but I can see you Ozzies are fast falling in to a Stalin-ist state, where you will have to confirm that your prospective partner has breasts of sufficient size in order to avoid being accused of imagining she was 12.

    Banning small breasts? What's next, banning small cocks because they promote paedophilia.

    What a load of *$*$*$**$*!

    WTF? - For obvious reasons.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Happy

      Small breasts

      This will never be a problem for me, my wife is an ample G cup :D

      I know they say more than a handful is a waste... but it really isn't ;)

      On a more serious note, surely banning pictures of women with small breasts would be illegal because it would prevent these models from getting work.

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Paris Hilton

    WTF ...

    Is this a (bizarre/backward) form of discrimination against the less well endowed female? Or at least an insult to their femininity by these politicians?

    Some men like smaller breasted women. Does that make them all paedos?

    (Me, I like 'em all :)

    Paris, as she might be banned under this legislation.

  5. Arclight

    Curious

    If I marry a woman with small breasts, does that also make me a paedophile, even if she's 34?

    I doubt such a law could stand in Europe, if seriously challenged, as it would be seen as restricting a persons right to work or, at the very least, discrimination against the differently abled.

    1. John G Imrie

      Raceist?

      Asian women have traditionally had smaller breasts than their occidental counterparts. I'd have thought the Ozies would have been more sensitive to their nabours.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Coat

      even if she's 34?

      34A or 34DD ?

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Thumb Up

    I guess

    you know your readership. Of all the non-IT can-u-believe it stories out there, you offer us the information that the Australian censors require their population to look at large breasts and avoid squirties. Thanks for the heads-up on this

  7. An ominous cow herd

    Australia wants to go back to the 18 hundreds...

    ... where the only por allowed would be doing it / seing it done with kangaroos in the bushes (as dangerous as that may be, if the roo's not in the mood...)

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Heart

    ASP website went down

    what else would you expect it to do?

  9. NB
    FAIL

    title

    LOLstralia.

    That will be all.

    1. LawLessLessLaw
      Boffin

      LOLstralia ?

      I doubt it, perhaps you missed the other meaning of the prefix "lol"

      as in

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lolicon

      as in

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lolita

  10. Velv
    WTF?

    Beaches ?

    Does this mean women less than a certain size will be banned from disrobing on the beaches ?

    Is there going to be a "Police" check to ensure only women above a certain cup size can take their tops off?

    Where do I apply ?

  11. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    heh

    big shock, I expect similar legislation over here in the UK, no small boobs and no shaved vagoo! That'll be my j-pronz collection out the window! I remember jocking about drawn porn 3 years ago, oh how I laugh at myself now for my magical powers!

    Soon no girls on tv unless they have massive baps, all woman with flat chest will require boob jobs and all children and teenagers will need to wear sacks so we can't be perverted by their obsenity!

  12. peyton?

    Just me?

    The whole campaign of the two senators seems kind of like a Freudian slip to me.

  13. Anonymous Coward
    WTF?

    Orgasmic

    That's what I rated the news item. Pretty appropriate. :-)

    I too was thinking about going to Oz. Not changed my mind since they rest of country and it's attitudes are still way better than here in the UK. It's only the sexual attitudes and the rise of the Australian moral minority is probably down their hangups about being descendants of convicts and therefore they have to show that they are better than that by being goody goodies.

    The problem about attacking such stupid laws is that you are then attacked in return as promoting pornography or paedophilia. However the best way is to go with the flow, but raise the stakes to the ridiculous. Campaign that since small breasts aren't allowed in film, then boob jobs should be state funded to ensure that small breasted women aren't thought as teenagers, and such like.

    The alternative is to embrace Islam and ask that all women must wear a Chadoor (or even a Burka) even in hardcore pornography so that men aren't led down the wrong path.

    1. markp 1
      Unhappy

      unfortunately, this.

      I was also contemplating decamping to the land of the rising beach-barbie should blighty get a little _too_ 1984, but now I'm not sure where really is left.

      Anyone want to join me in setting up a raffle for the chance to join the first crew riding SpaceShip Three across the gulf of the stars to set up a libertarian Mars colony?

  14. Anonymous Coward
    Happy

    2) Female ejaculation is an ‘abhorrent’ depiction

    I don't know, I thought it was a myth until I managed to get the wife to do it :-)

  15. Wize

    Sites that link to it will be banned too?

    Bye bye Google-Oz

    1. Tom Chiverton 1

      The hell ?

      Well exactly.

  16. Richard Wharram

    Further Reading ?

    Is there a link for further reading on this that is on a URL less likely to get me sacked than melonfarmers ? :)

  17. Sarah Bee (Written by Reg staff)

    Re: 2) Female ejaculation is an ‘abhorrent’ depiction

    I like that you're an amazing stud but are far too modest to tell the internet about it.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Happy

      Nah.

      "Amazing stud" is not a prerequisite. Just knowing what you're doing down there helps.

      And, of course there's no substitute for practice.

    2. Stef 4
      Paris Hilton

      Wow!

      "I like that you're an amazing stud but are far too modest to tell the internet about it."

      Wow!!! That's all it takes to be considered an amazing stud? I thought it was par for the course, and to be honest, what you were both doing it for.

      Paris, because, well, come on, surely?

  18. Anonymous Coward
    FAIL

    Difference

    While I'm not going to get involved in the argument on the difference between female ejaculation and urination, I would have though the difference between a child and an adult woman with small breasts would be clear and obvious, at least in legislative terms.

    Personally, I'd find a woman with naturally small breasts far less "offensive" than one with giant, bulging implants.

    AC, because apparently the above statement would make me a paedophile in Australia.

    Next you'll be telling me that drawing a picture of a child-like figure in a compromising position constitutes "child exploitation". Oh, wait...

    1. Richard Wharram

      Re:Difference

      Plainly anything that *might* be construed as possibly enabling someone to imagine that someone or something else might be a child should be banned.

      On this basis I demand that the makers of Star Trek: Voyager all be put on a nonce-register for titillating the pervs by saying that the plainly-adult-pretend-alien-female was in fact under 10 and sexually active. It's sickening when you think about what some pervs were thinking about when they were thinking about it.

      Ban this filthy filth.

      Oh, and rabbits are at it like rabbits when they're one ! *puke*

      1. Dale Richards
        Stop

        Title

        "...possibly enabling someone to imagine that someone or something else might be a child..."

        Notwithstanding the sarcasm of your post, I think you may have hit the nail on the head there. The real "crime" we're talking about here is the crime of *thinking about* inappropriate conduct with a child. Young children should be protected, but when a government starts telling you what you can and can't think, something has gone very, very wrong.

        If a paedophile finds they can get their kicks by looking at adult women with small breasts and pretending they're little girls, then I'm all for it. Better that than having them pursuing actual children.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      difference

      There's a huge difference between 'small' and 'immature', unless we're talking about politicians' brains, it seems.

      What next, a new law about "height of consent" ?

  19. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Far too lenient

    what about depictions of depilated pubic areas? Small women? Women with ponytails? Women in knee-high white socks? All images guaranteed to trigger the downward spiral of attraction to children, oh yes.

    And not just the depictions, but the actual women themselves, parading about with their small breasts and seducing me into a life of paedophilia? This is entrapment, and I will not stand for it!

  20. Chris Collins

    I agree

    I have perused films including female ejaculation in the interest of science, and that shit's fucking grim. Especially when they get it all on the lens, it's like sitting in the car when it's being washed with syrup. Plus small tits are a major disappointment, wonderbras are false advertising. They should drive the small norked ones off the telly, I'm not interested in your boring "news". Out of interest, are you allowed to see people weeing on each other?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Go

      Re: weeing

      "Out of interest, are you allowed to see people weeing on each other?"

      Well so far, Australia's finest export - Wet Set Magazine - hasn't been affected by any of this censorship nonsense, and it's been around a fair while now...

      1. Dale Richards
        Coat

        Urinary incontinence?

        There's an iPad for that.

  21. This post has been deleted by its author

  22. Oliver 7
    WTF?

    Furry muffs?

    "Senator Joyce claimed that publications featuring small-breasted women were encouraging paedophilia."

    ...or is it just that such images induce this senator to imagine naked little girls? I think I can guess where the problem lies here.

    Surely that (tenuous) anaology could be extended to models with shaven lady bits? Yet no mention of this!

    What a bunch of messed up freaks!

  23. Elmer Phud
    FAIL

    Nope, no big ones either

    Large mammaries might also be banned as they could be belonging to lactating women and that means there could be pictures of babies as well.

    So, no pictures of anything other than the - yet to be displayed - ideal Aussie female. Everyone else must leave the cuntry as they may stir up the menfolk.

    It's just so bloody two-faced, like most religions I guess.

    Men are strong and tough, women are weak and need protection.

    Big tough strong men are unable to have any self-control near women and are unable to have any discourse with women unless it's of the 'inter' type.

    The usual result -- it's all the fault of women and in this case the boobs are too big, too small, too whatever and it all seems to be led by the personal fantasies of a few blokes who get a stiffy even looking at pics of Mother Theresa.

    No more looking at pictures of the original Aussies, either as thier baps will be out - unless we can get back to the old colonial ways and go all National Geographic.

    Major fail for deffo

    1. Elmer Phud

      I didn't mean to

      "Everyone else must leave the cuntry "

      Freudian slip?

  24. John Ozimek

    Just for the record

    This ejaculation issue strikes me as one that is not being fought as well as it might. The censors have been playing the grown-up science card.

    That is, they have managed to sideline this into a debate about whether or not the thing actually happens...and the pro-ejaculation lobby have walked into that particular trap without a second thought.

    But hang on. Superman does NOT fly. Half the feats we see in mainstream films are impossible. And no censor steps in going...if its not possible, it is not allowed.

    Same with sex. How many men can actually cum several times in an hour? (No...i won't believe it even if i get half a dozen positive responses from this comment page!).

    But apparently men doing impossible things in the name of porn is ok...presumably because it seals a pact with the audience that that fiction is at least believable within the bounds of a porn film.

    So...ask an audience of women watching porn made for women whether they believe women can ejaculate and...if the answer is that they believe, then striking ejaculation out from the film-makers vocabulary is a denial of their sexuality.

    Not to put too fine a point on it, it is pure sexism...demanding a higher standard of "proof" for female sexual fantasy than is demanded for male.

    That seems to be the ground to fight this on - the sexual discrimination one - rather than the scientific one.

    j

  25. John Ozimek

    Stud?

    Nah. Don't think it is actually tied to the male sexual performance at all, Ms moderatrix....just that some women do, some don't.

  26. markp 1
    Paris Hilton

    methinks the lawmakers doth protest too much

    Somewhere in the middle of all this is an ageing pederast getting the biggest horn of his life off all the drama and the danger he's creating for himself. That, or they've got some kind of self-hate complex going on because of this (other) mental condition and want to get anything that even reminds them of lolitas out of the country so they aren't tempted to sin.... again.

    Or maybe the ozzie powers that be just like big boobed Shielas and want to cut down on all the shelf space wasted in newsagents with mags not featuring DD's, and time/bandwidth lost online by search results featuring the smaller boob.

    In turn, does this mean we can turn otherwise objectional underage material (photographic or drawn) into legit stuff just by photoshopping an award-winning rack onto the subject's chest?

    I wonder if the lawmakers have actually seen a grown woman naked and realise that there's more differences between them and an 8-year-old than just the chesticles. Suppose this also makes porn featuring cancer-mastectomy survivors borderline. Completely taboo if it's bilateral...

    I can go either way TBH. More than a handful is a waste, but good fun if you're not using your hands.

  27. Anonymous Coward
    Paris Hilton

    censoring the net

    these aussies have the right idea. we have to be protected from all this filth and smut on the interweb. can somebody please give me a list of the web sites that have this stuff? that way i can be sure not to visit them. thanks.

    paris hilton icon because i think she's got a list of these sites.

  28. AndrueC Silver badge
    WTF?

    WTF?

    "Senator Joyce claimed that publications featuring small-breasted women were encouraging paedophilia." and she thinks female orgasms are 'abhorrent'?

    She needs psychiatric treatment or at the very least a better bed partner.

    1. Pablo
      Alert

      Umm

      Senator Barnaby Joyce is a guy. Pronouns aside, the rest of your post still stands.

      1. AndrueC Silver badge

        Oh well

        Huh. That makes it worse.

        A man who equates small breasts with paedophillia and thinks women having orgasms is abhorrent.

        He /really/ needs medical help.

  29. Anonymous Coward
    Pint

    Simple solution

    If the problem is confusion with underage women, simply require full-frontal nudity with no shaving allowed to verify that the woman is not prepubescent.

  30. Graham Marsden
    WTF?

    So...

    ... no shaved pubes either because that makes the woman "look like a child" too and that will obviously encourage paedophilic thoughts.

    I just have to wonder, though, in whose minds these thoughts are being created, because it sounds to me like it's those passing the laws who are having them...

    1. heyrick Silver badge

      Hang on...

      I refuse to make any comment regarding the topic at hand as I'm afraid it would probably be a long string of obscenities for such asinine nonsense (and, by the way, WAY to make small-breasted women feel really good about themselves, fscking dumb-ass!)...

      ...though, I do feel that if we don't watch out, similar nonsense could happen on our side of the planet, lest we not forget http://www.campaignlive.co.uk/news/930893/American-Apparel-naked-ad-banned-watchdog/ - middle bottom, cute face. But a child? Only if you're out of your mind. Or the ASA.

  31. Dazed and Confused

    School girls

    As someone pointed out in the smutty cartoon thread this morning, are they going to out law the Brittany Spears vid where she parades around as a highly sexualised school girl?

    What about just about every fancy dress party in all of Oz, gone raid those too?

    Me, I don't want my wife to be forced to have a boob job, I happen to love her the way she is. Even if she doesn't quite score an A in the cup dept.

  32. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    lol @ australia

    This absurdity highlights the thin line porn sometimes straddles.

    One bona-fide category of porn is schoolgirl, and there are loads of legally classified movies and websites 'dealing' with the topic. They have pig tails and knee highs, and occasionally small boobs, but none are really schoolgirls. As-is, this is legal. Why should that change because of interpretation?

    Even if a perv is sat there pretending they are really schoolgirls, so what? This is just another slippery slope that ends up with imagining things being illegal.

    What if I take an aspriin and pretend it's ecstasy... same deal?

  33. Sir Runcible Spoon

    Sir

    Last year I was driving along with the top down on my convertable sports-car with the music blaring out. In front of me was a pedestrian kind of vehicle with mom & pop in the front, two teenage girls in the back (estimated to be about 15 - perhaps).

    The girls were having a jolly old time flashing their boobs at me whilst I was driving, and let me tell you that they were not A cup, more like D!

    What the hell do they feed kids these days? Most of the teenage girls seems to have huge knockers.

    Anyway, the point is, should I have reported myself to the police for

    a) not crashing

    b) not overtaking dangerously to avoid c)

    c) being thought a peadophile* by having good laugh at their antics

    *don't forget - peadophilia is about PRE-pubescent children, not sexually mature young adults.

  34. Steve Brooks

    Shemale?

    "and she thinks female orgasms are 'abhorrent'?"

    I'll think you'll find that Senator Joyce Barnaby is actually a man. Well at least he/she dresses like a man, looks like a man and walks like a man, what's actually in his britches, or not as the case may be, is, thankfully, fully censored!

    http://www.barnabyjoyce.com.au/

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Stop

      I think you'll find...

      that Barnaby Joyce is actually a tit, which brings us neatly back to the beginning of our story.

  35. ratfox
    WTF?

    They should also...

    Make breast enlargement surgery mandatory for married women. There are quite a few wives which are encouraging pedophilia whenever they have sex with their husband.

  36. Tikimon
    Big Brother

    Down with the Big Boob Nazis!

    Small is beautiful, doesn't give my Asian wife back pain or bounce painfully when we mountain bike, and doesn't sag to the kneecaps.

    Seriously, Australia and Britain seem to be racing China for most oppressive developed nation status. Unfortunately the US is only a few years behind at most.

    Someone needs to have a revolution quick. A few more years and their universal monitoring will bring the cops to your door for badmouthing the government in an e-mail.

    1. solidsoup
      Big Brother

      US difference

      I think this is impossible in US, despite us being a bunch of prudes. Not a single magazine would be removed from a shelf and the law would be quickly struck down.

      What you, and other people, overlook is that such encroachment on personal freedoms is only possible because there is no bill of rights in Australia or the UK - freedom of speech in not recognized as a right. As such, any freedom of speech aussies and brits possess is virtual. Any speech is free as long as it is not otherwise illegal. However, there is legal basis to challenge a law because it infringes upon free speech.

      Fortunately, UK has adopted European Convention in 1998, where Freedom of Speech is enshrined as a right (food for thought for all those libertarians who oppose EU). That said, it is well known how well UK observes that convention (Phorm anyone?).

      Oz problems are more serious than internet filter, outlawing Simposon's porn, or lack of Adult rating for games. It is a lack of any kind of Freedom of Speech right. Should the government tomorrow decide to censor something out of malice (rather than idiocy and incompetence as is happening now), they have zero legislative roadblocks preventing them from doing so. I would urge Australians to focus on the underlying cause, rather than its symptoms.

      1. AndrueC Silver badge
        Thumb Down

        Phorm?

        What does Phorm have to do with freedom of speech?

        'Freedom of speech' concerns what the government and its agencies will allow you to say. I think you'll find that 'Phorm' was conceived and developed by a private company so it's completely irrelevant to the discussion.

        For the same reason you can't use 'freedom of speech' as a complaint if a forum moderator deletes your posts or a pub landlord tells you to shut up.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: US difference

        "What you, and other people, overlook is that such encroachment on personal freedoms is only possible because there is no bill of rights in Australia or the UK"

        Oh how wrong you are. We had one long before you did.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_Rights_1689

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          re our bill of rights

          Sadly the part about "free speech" is just about free speech in the commons e.g. the King can't come in and have you put in the tower for what you say in Parliament.

          The common folk have no free speech.

  37. 1of10

    NEWS UPDATE

    Last update on the ban list...

    "...Australia bans woman's orgasm!..."

    Only men are allow to do them self's in the middle of the desert

    OZ laws are awful jokes!

  38. Christoph
    FAIL

    How to win over the voters

    I wonder how impressed Australian women with non-gigantic breasts are with being told that they don't count as real women? And that their husbands are vile paedophiles for desiring them?

  39. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I look forward to the impending Oz legislation

    whereby all women who fail to achieve a B-cup will receive silicone assistance at the taxpayers' expense

  40. shay mclachlan

    Please stop

    Please stop all these horrible explicit posts, please. Wont someone think the effect they might have on poor Skippy.

  41. Tac
    Paris Hilton

    Sanity

    Please could you consider censoring post like this?

    My self imposed internet filter prevents me from reading most news sites in order to avoid been reminded of the asylum that is the world.

    I'm not sure I can keep going if I have to add you to the list.

    Paris, because I'm trying to find something positive.

  42. LaeMing
    Thumb Down

    Well, there goes another career option for me!

    The politicians over here are a decrepit self-serving joke and have been for decades. But people keep voting them in, so I guess we get what the majority deserves.

  43. Anonymous Coward
    Paris Hilton

    Has the good Senator considered...

    ... tht a liking for small boobs may have very little to do with paedophilia and much more to do with latent pederasty?

    Assuming that makes it OK in some strange way...

    Paris, just because.

  44. asdf
    Flame

    lol @ OZ

    Dang I was going to flame by posting link to British beer commercial showing OZ cricket players taking bodyline shots to their crotch and ending with quote "Ohhh you pommy bastard" but better not since at work. Oh what great fun it would be to bodyline the Aussies over retarded laws like this.

    1. asdf
      Alert

      clarification

      Last sentence should say bodyline Aussie politicians. The people are only somewhat responsible.

  45. jake Silver badge

    So presumably ...

    If you are caught boinking a 13 year old in Oz, a viable defense would be "But yer onner, she has 32 C tits ... clearly she looks old enough!"

    These fuckheads need to get laid more often ...

  46. LaeMing
    Joke

    Oh, and another thing...

    Next time I am between work contracts I will be requesting a breast enlargement operation to be funded by the Dole office to increase my eligibility for work!

    No intention of going through wit the opp of course - I have no desire to have myself butchered just to satisfy the sexual lusts of some wrinkly old misogynistic has-been politician.

    We need a bill to ban men with small wrinkly willies from public office.

  47. Anonymous Coward
    FAIL

    When everything is illegal...

    I've been thinking recently, once they outlaw everything, won't the law just become irrelevant? I can just imagine a future conversation... "So you like little girls? Well I happen to like female orgasms, I guess we're in the same boat. Any idea who sells 'special' DVDs around here?" OK I'm exaggerating (at least I THINK I am), but seriously, people WILL have their porn. Pushing it all underground together hardly seems like a good strategic decision if child pornography is the uniquely horrible threat it's made out to be. Plus calling something a vile perversion just doesn't carry the same weight when you say that about everything.

  48. Doris McSquirter
    WTF?

    Like many responses here: WTF?!

    "Senator Joyce claimed that publications featuring small-breasted women were encouraging paedophilia."

    It defies logic - you really couldn't make this crap up.

    1. Winkypop Silver badge
      Thumb Down

      Hmmm

      Me thinks they protestest too much....

  49. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I know I'm whispering in a wilderness, but . . .

    To my thinking, there are only a couple of issues here.

    1. We seem to have evolved a class of people whose sexualities depend upon porn in some way. To most of these people I suggest either get a real life or get some therapy. Use of porn should be viewed as having risks in the same way as dependencies upon alcohol and drugs. There are enough studies to suggest exposure to even a small amounts porn has measurable negative effects in our social and personal lives.

    2. Our ability to educate our youth about sexuality in an informed, comprehensive and well rounded manner is hampered by the likes of those pushing for tighter censorship. This is a broadly conservative paintbrush being applied to any pink bits that hove into view, regardless of their presentation. Fix this one properly and most of the first point becomes irrelevant. Include parents in the sex education process, but let them have no say about content. Exclude the church from the process. Put the hideous airbrushed sexuality of mass media into its kennel and let our youngsters evolve in a manner unmolested by the sexual cripples on the two sides of this debate.

  50. the Jim bloke
    Alert

    large enough titles

    So, not only arent women allowed to have orgasms, but they arent allowed to even try to look younger.

    Someone set the fashion, cosmetics, and all the rest of the real female exploitation industries onto these guys. I would almost feel sorry for them - if they weren't such utter arseholes.

    we need a crucifixion icon

  51. Phil 54
    Boffin

    Apple link?

    Does anyone else think that this might have to do with the upcoming trademark battle between Apple and the Canadian bra-stuffing company?

    *Goggles because that female ejaculates stings like hell

  52. Anonymous Coward
    Joke

    Just because it has to be done!

    I believe this is now comment # 69. Just thought I'd throw that into the ring, as it were...

  53. Futumsh
    WTF?

    When did...

    Australia suddenly become a nation of puritanical, prudish retards?

    Jesus, you'd think that being a nation of crims would have yielded a different result.

  54. Peter Kay
    Thumb Down

    Ridiculous

    Whilst I'm not in favour of prematurely sexualising those who aren't sexually mature and think some of the issues underlying the 'barely legal' class of porn could well be a bit dodgy I'm not sure banning it is the answer.

    Like a prior commentator, I'd rather have someone crack one off over a young looking porn model than try and find someone underage in real life. Neither do I appreciate someone giving women yet another reason to judge their attractiveness by the size of their breasts. I do tend to prefer bustier women, but their breasts are never a deciding factor in whether I want to be friends or date them..

    I shudder to think what they'd think of people into age play, especially when both participants are clearly mature adults. Sexuality is somewhat nuanced and complex, and if one type of attraction is outlawed the affected group will merely try and find a different way of satisfying their desires.

  55. chris 130
    Coat

    Porn should only feature large breasted females, its all true

    Its a good point, obviously to save confusion, all porn should only contain the larger breasted variety of female.

    Rather 'ol boy, what !?

  56. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Two birds with the one stone?

    Flat-chested women are very much more likely to achieve orgasm and very much more likely to be among the limited number of women who ejaculate. Higher testosterone levels lead to less breast development and greater development of the paraurethral glands from which the ejaculate comes.

    So if you ban the flat-chested women, you get those who are likely to ejaculate banned at the same time!

  57. Tony Paulazzo
    Jobs Horns

    Discrimination?

    'About the Australian Human Rights Commission

    Working towards an Australian society where human rights are for everyone, everywhere, every day.'

    http://www.hreoc.gov.au/

    There's a lovely picture of a young aboriginal boy on there (and no, I'm not a paedo, tho' he is cute), just wondering if any Australian websites should be allowed to portray images of prepubescent humans - just in case.

    Evil Jobs - just because.

  58. DrCastellanos

    Secondary Sex Characteristics

    What defines an adult woman is actually pubic hair (and hair under the arms). So maybe we should revisit whether there should be any porn with completely shaved pussies! Then we can go back to the bushy 1970's. Just pointing out how short-sighted it is. We are losing sight of what a natural, non-surgically enhanced woman looks like and the variety that exists in the world. We are messing up our own minds by having increasingly more rigid standards of "beauty." Sexy is an attitude and I've seen some amazingly beautiful tiny breasts. Restricting porn based on very small breasts is ridiculous and paranoid. Pedophilia develops early in life and cannot be "created" in adulthood by watching porn.

    With the issue of female ejaculation, I consider that many people cannot tolerate watching it because they think of urination, but that does not mean it is not a natural occurrence that some others might enjoy watching in their porn. Perhaps of banning it, the porn should just be labeled to indicate that it shows images of female ejaculation (like lyric warnings for parents on CDs in the US). Or we can go back to Victorian England and put skirts on the legs of the sofa and tables so as to not get ourselves over-aroused (read: over-repressed).

    http://ReclaimYourSexuality.blogspot.com

  59. mark 177
    Coat

    Cause or Effect

    Has anyone considered *why* small-breasted women have come to dominate pr0n?

    In the old days, men's magazines could still shoot 15 year olds legally - I remember one such case and she had DD breasts!

    Now we have 20 year old women with tiny boobs wearing ribbons and their hair in pig-tails pretending to be schoolgirls (whilst the schoolgirls are all trying to look like 20-somethings).

    Why?

    I would blame the current mass hysteria over "paedophilia" (in inverted comments because true paedophiles are not interested in sexually mature but underage girls - they want children, as in 10 yr old and under). Making something forbidden, especially in a sexual context, tends to make it more arousing for some people. Before the great paedophilia paranoia bloomed, this kind of stuff was as rare as hen's teeth!

  60. cphi
    Flame

    what the f*ck is wrong with my country

    rhetorical question

  61. tyciol
    WTF?

    Wow

    This is just... wow. I've been thinking the commonwealths are all equally bad off in regards to this but Australia just pulled out WAY in front. Sorry Mr. Dundee =(

    I wonder, is this a conspiracy by the food industry and the plastic surgery industry? After all, to do as little as possible to encourage pedophilia, we should have breasts as LARGE as possible. Thus, everyone should eat as much as possible. Fat is stored in the breasts and overeating will make them very large and not look like a child's.

    But that's not enough, we should accentuate this with implants (silicone is popular I hear) to supplement, because sometimes people have high metabolisms which burn off that fat. But I don't care how much you exercise, you won't be metabolizing that silicone!

    I also suggest we outlaw male pornography. Males do not have breasts, therefore their lack of mammarial adipose will remind viewers of a child, and this is a risk we can't take! Men should need to inflate their chests through consuming extra food (I believe 'man boobs' abbr 'moobs' is the term for this) as well as consider getting breast implants as some transgendereds do during a sex change.

    Another issue which was not addressed, but which should be: body hair. A lot of porno actors like to shave hair in various places around their body. This should be outlawed! We can't have them reminding us of children! Even trimming it shouldn't be acceptable. For those actors and actresses who do not naturally grow much hair, they should need to experiment with trichological pharmacology to accelerate their hair growth.

    Furthermore, these hairless flatchested adults are not only a problem in the adult film industry. After all, pornography is NOT the only thing which arouses people. Good-looking people in the media in general tend to arouse people, so therefore we should also ban people without boobs or body hair from appearing in pictures or videos as well. In fact, we really should limit their ability to appear in public altogether, like serving in any sort of occupation that involves leaving the house.

    I also suggest we outlaw chemotherapy. Chemotherapy can cause hair to fall out. If an adult undergoes chemotherapy then they might be confused with an infant, and if we convey that cancer patients still may possess some kind of sexuality, it might turn the population into nepiophiles who think it's AWWRIGHT to go do some cradle-robbin'.

  62. RuthiV

    Quick! Ban everything in case we get any ideas!

    Of course pedophilia is to be reviled but to ban small breasted women because it encourages it? I don't think so. While we're at it why not ban talcum powder in the bathroom it might make someone think of cocaine and encourage them to develop a drug habit. Or how about ban food from an all girl's school in case in encourages bulimia binge eating, but wait! What if that then encourages anorexia! Oh no! what do we do! How about grow a brain it might encourage some thinking!

    This may be a ridiculous post but like answers like.

  63. Anonymous Coward
    Flame

    this is what happens ...

    .. when you give the state the keys to your soul "if it saves one child". This is where the path the mob who say "the government should do something about it" leads you.

    To those who insist this could never happen in the UK, I say : it can, and it will. Once we have established the principle the state has a right to pry into your privacy, it's just a question of degree.

  64. kissingthecarpet
    Go

    The madder the better

    The more crazy censorship laws they pass the better - they'll soon reach a tipping point where they become a complete joke to 99% of people, then there'll be the inevitable backlash of a tidal wave of deviancy, which can only be a good thing.

    If they really cared about the abuse of children, they'd give children the same protection that adults have from violence, i.e offences like assault. While adults are allowed to inflict corporal punishment on children legally its obvious that all the noise about paedophilia is emanating from their weird sexuality & not from any genuine desire to protect children. I'm suprised this isn't mentioned more, but then of course, there's a lot of guilty parents out there who don't want that issue addressed ever

This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like