back to article Sex in the Noughties: How was it for you?

When it comes to sex, New Labour claims that the last decade has been about the rights of sexual minorities and support for victims. In the last few years, however, that view has been challenged by a gathering dissent that includes many supposed beneficiaries of such liberalism. An alternative demand for sexual liberation is …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Sir Sham Cad

    Good article. Can be summed up by:

    "Harriet Harman has a shit sex life so we have to, too."

    What if David Cameron released the Conservative election manifesto as "I have *awesome* sex. Vote Conservative, and you can, too!"?

    Maybe that explains why Berlusconi keeps beng elected.

  2. asiaseen

    Not like

    the 20th Century Noughties then.

  3. This post has been deleted by a moderator

    1. Red Bren
      Coat

      2nd Amendment

      "We seriously need an equivalent of the US second amendment aka the right to bear arms"

      I assume you mean the right to bare arse?

      I'll have the dirty grey mac please.

  4. Cameron Colley
    Unhappy

    This government need a hard fisting in the ring.

    I am actually ashamed of this country and its pathetic, prudish and oppressive laws. We should be living in an enlightened, free and accepting society -- instead we're living in a giant reform school where we're not allowed any freedom of expression or action "for our own good" so we "don't hurt ourselves".

  5. Number6

    The Safety Elf

    They missed an opportunity here. BDSM should be perfectly legal provided there's been a proper risk assessment beforehand, checking the softness and length of whips, and requiring Doms to go on a training course so that an inspector can certify that they don't hit too hard (or soft, I guess). Subs will be required to register their safewords with a central database.

    There's a whole industry waiting out there, along the lines of PAT testing for electrical kit, to calibrate and check the performance of various implements.

    1. Ted Treen

      For once....

      I can honestly say "Not my fault, Guv." I never voted for this shower of incompetents and clearly remember back in 1997 (when I were advising any liberal-wet acquaintances that it would all end in tears, and that Tony was a phoney.

      Hate to say "Told you so", but...

      1. Ken Hagan Gold badge
        Flame

        Re: Told you so

        That would be you and three-quarters of the population then. Did you vote for a party with a credible plan for changing the system so that a small minority of fundamentalist prudes could no longer lord their hang-ups over the rest of us?

        Memo to the British people: you'll keep on getting *crap* governments as long as you persist with a system designed to produce *strong* governments. The current system is explicitly designed to give dictatorial powers to the largest single minority. Yes, you read that right -- minority. Logically, that implies that the system is *designed* to *prevent* the majority opinion from carrying the day.

        Parliamentary democracy looks like a fine system of government. Can we have some please?

    2. N2 Silver badge

      Unfortunately

      Thats what you get with socialism at its very worst

      Weve probably got a term of Conservative government, during which Im off to France and not coming back

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Thumb Up

    Ah, the Register

    Thanks guys, a happy new year to you all from the openminded demographic who are always pleasantly surprised to find such excellently expressed and contextualised sentiments on a 'vanilla' IT site ;-)

  7. Anonymous Coward
    Heart

    Gay? Who cares

    As a sign of the changing of the times. The recent report in the Daily Mail that a BBC newsreader is gay was followed by many comments stating "Who cares". This is what equality should be about. Who cares what sexual orientation you have or how you prefer to have your sex. Gays should not out themselves, nor should straights. If someone outs themselves as gay, that is basically pushing their sexuality in your face. What would the PC people say if a heterosexual did that to a gay?

    Heart for peace and love to all.

  8. Boris the Cockroach Silver badge
    IT Angle

    Remember

    its not about politicians trying to protect this or outlaw that, its about politicians appearing to do something in order to appeal to the B3 to C2 group of voters in the 50 swing seats

    If gardening was more into growing certain plants for their decorative smell and done while wearing leather outfits, you could be damn sure there would be laws passed about it as soon as the first "morally depraved gardener in smell overdose" story appeared in the daily m(w)ail.

    <Prime minister>"we in this coming term of parliment promise to force all jasmine growers to register under the controlled garden plants act, and make it illegal for these people to work with pensioners under the basis a few militant gardeners have been known to plant jasmine around old people's care homes"

    <whispers> "there, that should pick up a few votes from the stupid brigade"

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    The law is an ass

    While the new sex laws have the best intentions, they fail because they are two vague, or dishonest.

    I can watch a person being disembowelled in many a horror picture, but be prosecuted if two individuals take part in light consenual BDSM for sexual pleasure, because someone else considers it "extreme". I can watch all manner of violence on TV in the evening, but I still can't watch hardcore porn on a cable channel that is passcode protected, in a house with no kids.. even though most kids can view porn on the Internet with little trouble, and probably do.

    The child porn laws may have the best intentions, but people have already been jailed for producing cartoons of kids having sex (eg. the Simpsons case), on the mistaken pretext that a real kid may be harmed. And if I owned a baby photography of myself showing my genitals, I can be prosecuted for owning child porn, even though there was no child abuse when it was taken, and there is no abuse now I am an adult. There are also millions of adults who lost their virginity when under age to an older person (ie. to what would now be called a paedophile), and consider it a blessing, rather than abuse.

    If people really cared about abuse, there would be better laws against bullying which happens in every school every day, and makes some kids lives a misery.

    The law is an ass.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      At Last!

      I have been saying this very thing for years. The double standard is ridiculous.

      I can remember when Texas Chainsaw Massacre was deemed so sick that it was banned outright in this country (you couldn't even buy it on video) yet now that very same film can be shown on mainstream terrestrial television without anyone even batting an eyelid.

      Meanwhile if you took the most pedestrian sex film from the exact same era, there is still no way it could be shown on TV today. Hell, you can't even show a semi erection on TV never mind any kind of actual sex act.

      The most sickeningly extreme violence and torture can be shown (even in Hollywood movies) and yet "love" scenes still have to have sheets sellotaped to the actors to cover up their "rude bits" lest the audience be emotionally scarred for life.

      Both censors and lawmakers really need to get a clue.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Which do you want?

        Do you want the sex scenes to be shown or the violence to be banned? Personally, I'd be happy with the latter, although both would be fine.

        1. Greg J Preece

          A cracking idea...

          "Do you want the sex scenes to be shown or the violence to be banned? Personally, I'd be happy with the latter, although both would be fine."

          Replace one form of puritanism with another. Awesome.

          If you want to throw another double standard into the ring, how about video games? I can watch Rambo maul people and shred them to bits with machine guns, but if I do it, I'm a potential KILLER! Aaaargh! RUN!

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Thumb Down

      As a sign of the not changing times ..

      "If someone outs themselves as gay, that is basically pushing their sexuality in your face. What would the PC people say if a heterosexual did that to a gay?"

      Like straight men endlessly talking about breasts? Seems to be a fair amount of that on El Reg.

      Tell me, do you get shouted at when you walk down the street holding your girlfriend's hand? Do you get things thrown at you? Do you ever find yourself in the farcical situation of having to physically defend yourself simply because you happen to like someone and some bunch of men (and it is ALWAYS men) happen to disapprove of your private and personal choice? It is only ten years since my local was bombed. Forgive me for having a slightly different take on what exactly has changed.

      Of course, I should keep all that hand-holding malarkey where it belongs ... in the bedroom.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        IT Angle

        Men?

        You live in a very sheltered area if you think gays only ever get abuse from men.

      2. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

        Endless breasts on El Reg ? ... You cannot be serious? Too much of a good thing would be an abuse.

        "Like straight men endlessly talking about breasts? Seems to be a fair amount of that on El Reg." .... John Dee Posted Saturday 2nd January 2010 10:02 GMT

        Err, as someone who has been reading/studying El Reg extensively for more years than I would care to remember, I would have to say that that statement is totally false, John Dee, which would then raise the question of your agenda in pimping the disinformation.

        You have though correctly identified the planet's problem, bunches of idiotic men, who would not really be men at all but rather more acting like ignorant and arrogant undereducated disturbed children, and the world is full of them, with them being full of themselves and imagining themselves to be important and a leading force. And quite Delusional in the Extreme are they ..... which I suppose is just a reflection of their not being very bright.

    3. Baying Lynch Mob
      Heart

      I'm Alex, and this is Bob

      Peoples' sexuality shouldn't be newsworthy. However...

      ``Gays should not out themselves, nor should straights.''

      People "out" themselves every time they let the gender of their partner be known, and I don't think such behaviour should be forbidden.

  10. ElFatbob

    Re: Mike & SNP

    There is nothing remotely Christian about the SNP - but they are a socialist party and as such have the same authoritarian 'we know what's best for you' bent that our current communistic national 'leaders' have.

    Agree with your sentiment tho...

  11. Graham Marsden
    Big Brother

    "the rights of sexual minorities"

    Howls of derisive laughter, Bruce!

    What "rights" have been "protected" by laws such as the Dangerous Pictures Act making it a crime to possess so-called "Extreme Pornography"?

    This was just one of the many examples of the Nanny State saying "We don't like this, so you shouldn't be allowed to see it/ do it even if there's no absolutely no evidence that it would make you do something nasty".

    The only "right" that this Government has "protected" is *their* right to interfere in what consenting adults get up to in private and to tell us that anything that is unacceptable to their prudish "moral standards" should be illegal.

    Regrettably, when they're booted out at the next election, it's distinctly unlikely that the Tories would do anything to roll back Nu Labour's moral agenda...

    1. Arctic fox

      Believing in rights

      "Regrettably, when they're booted out at the next election, it's distinctly unlikely that the Tories would do anything to roll back Nu Labour's moral agenda..."

      Particularly since the Tory party's blue-rinse wing have since time began been social authoritarians to a degree which makes the current government look like libertarians.

    2. Martin Owens
      FAIL

      Right/Left?

      Does socialism have anything to do with Authoritarianism? Other that an easy way to erect co-operation by force rather than by agreement?

      Who's going to vote Tory, you are! yes you are.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Clarification

      Not normal christians, no...."Free church of Scotland" Christians yes....where being born is a sin, and which you must atone for, for the rest of your life and ergo authoritarian fascist muppets.

      I thought it was so stupid that they kicked out a councillor for shooting a rifle in pakistan, on a range where it is perfectly legal.....because it was an "evil babeee murdering gun thingy and we dont like them, ban guns ban guns..wa wa wa wa"

      Frankly the whole lot of politicians are hopeless

  12. Paper
    FAIL

    Ummm no

    Anonymous Coward: "If someone outs themselves as gay, that is basically pushing their sexuality in your face"

    No it's not. Gay people are a minority and being straight is the initial assumption, that's society's own ignorance. It makes no difference to you whether they say they're gay or not, so why do you care?

    I'm not sure which is worse...that you think all gay people are activists come to rub your face in it, or that you think no one should ever express their uniqueness for the purposes of equality. You criticise PC people - but that's the pot calling the kettle black

  13. Anonymous Coward
    Flame

    @Paper

    "...straight is the initial assumption, that's society's own ignorance..."

    Well, maybe you have missed a science class or two, but every successful species, such as ours, has to have majority of its population "straight"* to prevent dying out (as a species, we are not dying out, are we?). Hence, such an assumption is not "ignorant", but "informed".

    *) of course, there are also other factors in play, such as distribution of number of offspring per female, but there are no significant gaps there (i.e. either 0 or 10+ offspring with median >2 for survivability).

    "...It makes no difference...whether they say...why do you care?..."

    It's called spam. There is certainly no big harm to you when someone tries to peddle some blue pills, but when there are many such someones, it's getting overbearing, isn't it? I don't care whether someone likes it to do with hamsters, but why should I be informed actively about that?! Or even being told that it is cool, because some fashion shops want to peddle some drags targeted to that demographic?

    1. John Ozimek

      So many presumptions...

      I like the phrase "successful species": would that include mankind, because we have conquered technology? or ants, because if our technology fucks up, there is a good chance they will inherit the earth.

      How about lions, who top the food chain in many areas, but are not expecially numerous compared to many other species?

      And what is this about the majority of the population needing to be "straight" to prevent dying out. I guess, technically, you may be right, as it helps for most females to be straight...but in most mammalian species, it is the fact that males produce lots of sperm whilst females produce relatively few eggs that is key.

      one (biological) strategy, given such a state of play, is monogamy. Another is pack or herd groupings, within which a small number of alpha males ...sometimes just a single one... rise to the top and get awarded the right to shag to their heart's content, whilst the majority of males are condemned to a life of lonely celibacy.

      Or shagging other males.

      I have no idea whether homosexuality is a "natural" behaviour...personally i find the attempt to split sexual behaviours into natural and unnatural both daft and fraught with bear traps: but there is plenty of evidence of it existing in the wild as a natural response to a given species' breeding strategy.

      That said, I am not sure I am aware of any species for which tying their partner down prior to love-making and applying a riding crop to their sensitive bits is recorded as a viable mating strategy.

      So moralists may yet take some hope from the biological determinist agenda.

  14. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    RE: Outing as Gay debate

    Surely the point is that all becomes equal when the concept of outing is no longer understood?

  15. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    @Boris,

    Whilst I agree that some acts of legislation are passed by politicians to try to gain votes, in Harman's case, she's a known feminist and has some ideas which even women often regard as stupid. That is, she's not doing it to gain votes, she's trying to force upon the masses her way of thinking and trying to create legislation to achieve that.

  16. Rab Sssss
    WTF?

    @paper

    Huh paper you take stuff to extremes much?

    There are plently of fairly unpleasnt people that will use whatever reason (gay, overweight, red hair, whatever) as the reason that few people like to be around them and will use this to beat people over the head with whatever "it" happens to be.

    I have ran to a couple like this and its really fucking annoying...mind you the converstions normally ended with "no its because your a <insert what ever profantiy came to mind>"

    Ao what if someone is "whatever" unless its going to impact on me why should I give a flying fuck?

  17. Anonymous Coward
    FAIL

    Criminalizing the under-16s

    Unfortunately, and as missed in the article, the Sexual Offences Act 2003 also outlaws kissing and cuddling between consenting under-16s. This is a sort of catch-all to allow the police, CPS and government to have discretion over what pubescent behaviour they consider unacceptable. However, instead of a parent sending a child to their room, it's potentially prison and the sex offences register.

    This socialist government is giving us a very predictable cultural revolution.

  18. Anonymous Coward
    Thumb Up

    Thanks Reg

    There aren't many places a considered article like this appears these days. Taking my 3-year-old goddaughter to the park recently made me feel a bit awkward - man on own with young girl - when there is, of course, no reason to feel this way. I know this (of course) and so do her parents - they know me well enough (and have for 20 years) to completely trust me with her.

    This is the country we have become, in the past fifteen years or so. And remember: no matter what we do, those who wish ill, in whatever form, will still manage to achieve it (this applies to so many areas doesn't it? Terrorism, for one springs to mind.)

    In my opinion the one positive difference this government has made since 1997 is the banning of smoking in public places; ironically this is yet another prohibition they have imposed, even if it's one I agree with. Confusing world, isn't it?

  19. Jonathan McColl
    Thumb Up

    Plus ça change

    Good article that.

    An earlier-generation man I knew often bemoaned the way you couldn't tell a man from a woman now that they all wore jeans. I asked him what his motives were in wanting to know?

    Nowadays it would be ditto gay/straight/ambidextrous. Ditto Catholic/Protestant/Other. I'm glad we're free now.

    I wish they'd leave the Naked Rambler alone to do his naked rambling. I wish protectionist laws weren't later applied to areas they weren't designed for like using RIPA to stop people moving house to get their kids into a school that they want to get them into because of published league tables to let people know where the good schools are.

    Vetting to stop anyone seeing kids unaccompanied by politicians who wouldn't know one if it bit them. DPA and HASAWA to stop nearly anybody doing anything. I'm so glad we're free now.

    I've been very mild in this post so that I can't be accused of a hate crime. I daren't say I love children or I'd be a paedo. I daren't say I love everyone or I'd be a sexual deviant. Deviating from what? I'm far more confused now than I was a decade or two ago, when laws still included the word 'reasonable'.

    1. Ken Hagan Gold badge

      Re: Thanks Reg

      "Taking my 3-year-old goddaughter to the park recently made me feel a bit awkward - man on own with young girl - when there is, of course, no reason to feel this way."

      I expect her father feels the same way. More power to your (and his) elbow.

      It is really ironic that a Labour government born of the Women's Lib generation should have got into bed with the small-c conservatives of the country to pass laws that reinforce the socially unacceptability of *parental* childcare. And then they have the cheek to wonder why women aren't rising to top jobs!

    2. Ken Hagan Gold badge

      Understood

      You mean, an objective test? Gosh, that's dangerous thinking, you know.

      Someone (an African statesman from a few decades ago, I believe. I'm sure one of you will be able to tell me, but I can't google it up, so that gives you an idea of how long ago it was.) once said something to the effect that "I'll know we've got racial equality when I can shake someone's hand and no more notice the colour of their skin than the colour of their hair."

      I've never thought of myself as racist, but it struck me when I first heard it (about twenty years ago?) that I failed the test (and I'm still failing it, and before you ask, no I don't particularly notice blondes unless they are blokes.). Of course, I blame society, but if I were black I'd be pretty pissed off with smug gits who describe themselves as non-racist but nevertheless take note of my skin colour and then blame "society" for them doing so.

      It's a fair test.

      1. Stuart 18
        Happy

        @Ken Re:Understood + my own twaddle for fun

        It sounds a bit like Nelson Mandela to me from the early 80's. Thanks for making me feel old mate. I have to now contend with the fact that this was a few decades ago and accept that I was around before the pervasive acceptance of the InterWeb and Google as being the moral compasses in our society.

        -Yes it sounds like I'm bitching, as that is the one sign of a brilliant comment; in that: it includes irony with the broaching of a new topic to further your own social agenda.

        -Oh stop whining and shut the F up -make a change- we have a fair(?go on flame me?) system of politics vote/mobilise/petition/DO SOMETHING!!

        With all my tender love Stu

        -regardless of if your hetero/homo/bi/hermaphrodite/whatever I love you all xx

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Alien

        "I have a Dream"

        <quote> Someone (an African statesman from a few decades ago, I believe. I'm sure one of you will be able to tell me, but I can't google it up, so that gives you an idea of how long ago it was.) once said something to the effect that "I'll know we've got racial equality when I can shake someone's hand and no more notice the colour of their skin than the colour of their hair." </quote>

        "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."

        Dr Martin Louis King - 1963

        http://www.usconstitution.net/dream.html

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      exactly

      Prosecuting the naked rambler was and is a total and utter waste of taxpayers money and his time. Solely to keep a few old bats happy, last time less than 10 complained, and the judge in perth (dimwits central) said pretty much "I think nudity is a perversion and people should not be subjected to naked men, so off to jail with you"

      Another judge told him to cover up, which he refused to on a point of principle so again with the stalinism "naughty naughty man, off to jail with you"

      Frankly this country has become a total and utter farce and a disgrace, sometimes think the septics should have waited a few more months before pulling our backside out of the fire in ww2, perhaps then some of the inbred "ruling" classes would have been eradicated in an invasion....sad when things like that seem like a positive step eh? :-(

  20. ElReg!comments!Pierre Silver badge
    Pint

    Rape, consent and drugs

    I didn't realize at first, but it seems that doing an intoxicated person is a criminal offense in the UK now. The question is, doesn't it outlaw sex altogether in most of the country?

  21. Anonymous Coward
    Big Brother

    Good balanced atricle

    The big problem is that most people haven't had the benefit of hearing such a balanced view or being informed about what is actually happening in sex law - the tabloid reading public see headline after headline about dangerous perversions which treaten them and their children and feel saffer in the knowlege that the4 government is closing the noose arounf the necks of all those dangerous miss-fits.

    I'm lobbying for a vote for change at the next election; a concerted effort to cause a hung parliament and Lib Dem / labor or tory coalition which might actually bring some scritiny to future legislation and block or improve the bad stuff that has sailed through Parliament over the last 12 years.

    Please join the group here to give your support...

    http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=215927229917

  22. alain williams Silver badge

    article rating

    How could I rate it anything other than: orgasmic!

    We have lost a lot of liberty in the last decade, this is all part of the same story. We won't regain it until the majority of sheeple in this country wake up.

  23. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    anonymous_coward@thanks_reg

    I get exactly the same when walking with my grandaughter.

    And in the shops.

    In fact, walking alone in the park is "dubious" now....although if I'm walking the dog it seems that I'm an "ok" type of guy...............go figure that ?

  24. Thomas 18
    Joke

    uhh...

    "Sexual violence and childhood sexual abuse are amongst the most serious and damaging crimes in our society"

    Just below copyright infringement right?

  25. dave 81
    Thumb Down

    New Labour are useless at every single thing they do.

    So why do people vote for them? Stop blaming the incompetence of government, and put blame where it is due, the idiots who keep voting for them.

  26. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    After 12 years all Labour.....

    Have done is destroy the Country and now they bleat about "bew" policies that, if they were any good, they should have brought in 10 years ago at least. All this is about is trying to get back in for 5 more years of destruction and filling thei OWN pockets with taxpayers cash.

    Get lost Brown we dont want you, Mandleson or any other of your incompetents.

  27. Jerry H. Appel
    Thumb Up

    Baggage, Baggage, Baggage

    Sounds to me like life on the other side of the Pond is hopelessly mired in Victorian views and its double standard. It took the US Supreme Court one decision to settle the issue more than ten years ago: what happens in the privacy of your abode between consenting adults is nobody elses business. Now that is what I call liberating.http://www.theregister.co.uk/Design/graphics/icons/comment/thumb_up_32.png

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Not quite

      The day we look to America for a moral compass we may as well just jump in the Atlantic and end it all.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      FAIL

      Re: US Supreme Court

      Ah, this is the country that has the "Defense of marriage act", where same sex partners are not entitled to the same federal rights as heterosexual couples, with "don't ask don't tell" polcies. The country where it's illegal in some locales (eg New York City) for private citizens to own handcuffs. Where "18 USC Section 2257" requires intensive record keeping to "prove" the person in the picture is over 18....

      The US position is far from settled (and, indeed, may be going backwards). Sexual equality and tolerance is a LOT more than just bedroom privacy.

  28. Doug Glass
    Go

    England Swings

    And here I was thinking the Mother Country was all about civility, justice and respect for the commoners rights. We got nothing on you guys when it comes to oppressive laws and Big Brother. After all, George Orwell was an English author and journalist

    Good old GB has replaced USSR for me when it comes to freedoms and naming a country we could be living in to be worse off.

  29. Anonymous Coward
    Troll

    Let's be brutal

    I don't want to put in flies in your ointments but...

    Regardless of the law the majority of people may do or wish as they please when it comes to who they have sex with and why. End of story. Governments have historically always imposed some form of control over sexuality and indeed this maybe an artificial extension of natural attempt by primitive communities to control sexual bonding and practices. Freedom, what is freedom? It certainly isn't some dream of a past age where man/woman roamed free through the world naked and unashamed. From Humans to Higher Primates we all have rigorous controls on sexual practice. Furthermore it is apt to say that just as in Chimpanzee and Gorilla culture so to in human culture does power and social order play a role in sexuality.

    Homosexuality, Bi-Sexuality, Heterosexuality all play predominant roles in primitive cultures and animal communities. It is safe to say that a flux between those sexualities is the norm for most mammal species at least. In some primitive cultures homosexuality is acceptable in others for reasons rational or irrational depending on environmental adaptation and/or intra-irrational-belief-systems based on primitive religious doxologies they are profane.

    So what about our culture ? our society ?

    Sex as an integral part of our culture can serve both society and the individual in positive and negative ways. Homosexuality can be positive and negative for both the individual and society as can heterosexuality and bi-sexuality. Within these defined categories there is a diverse array of different individuals with their own ideas and unique brands of Gay/Straight/Bi from which wan can view the worse excess of human cruelty, vanity jealousy and capriciousness as well as the best, Love, Kindness, Trust, Passion.

    These laws only deal with the consequences of a failure in individuals and society to eschew those negative aspects that affect all sexuality. One need only go to a Gay Club in any town or the Local Meat Market to see Homosexuals and Heterosexuals, being cruel, capricious, deceptive and down right nasty to one another. The consequence of all this is one of the highest teenage pregnancy rates in the Western World and a LBGT community that puts depression up their with AIDS and HIV as their main fear. The downright shallow self serving and lustful attitude of many of those across all sexualities that eschew responsibility, kindness and all those good things is the root of the problem.

    When we stop treating each other as selfish objects of sexual gratification maybe I will accept that we deserve the Freedom, If anything the Governments controls are nought in the face of a mass culture that saturates all forms of media for anyone 5+ with sex devoid of responsibility one only has to pick up a girly magazine, mens health or watch a music channel for five minutes to see that sex, violence, self loathing and hate rule the culture of those of us in this generation and below and it makes for sexual enslavement to the power of these things.

    If like me of course you de-programme our cultures repressive elements and it's hedonistic/selfish elements from your mind and go for some honest love, passion, trust, and kindess you'll find life is sweeter on the other side be you gay/straight/bi/tran/fervert whatever :D

  30. Anonymous Coward
    Big Brother

    No discussion. No dissent.

    It took a while at first, but once police and governments woke up to the myriad possibilities for control and legislation offered by the mythical presence of online child pr0n, well the sky's the limit. NuLabour here in the UK have embraced the 'think of the children!' mantra especially enthusiastically, enacting increasingly hysterical legislation designed to 'safeguard' children, whilst - by happy coincidence - also further restricting public privacy and increasing government and LEA control of the net.

    At the turn of the century all the talk from police here and in the US was of a 'huge global commercial child pr0n industry' worth $billions. Somehow, that reality never quite managed to materialise and is still somewhat conspicuous by it's absence, despite some particularly ill-advised repetitions, from time to time, of such claims by over-zealous coppers, but it served it's purpose when it still carried currency: hence the creation of organisations like CEOP and many others like it around the world.

    First you create a public fear (terrorism, child abuse, whatever takes your fancy) - whilst never having to substantiate any of it and making it clearly impossible (and dangerous and illegal) for others to attempt to do so - and then you build your infrastructure. Problem is, as CEOP are now discovering, that once you've secured that annual £multimillion budget from the taxpayer and from private sponsors keen to hop aboard the populist 'think of the children!' bandwagon, you then have to produce meaningful results on a fairly regular basis.

    So we're still waiting for CEOP and their colleagues around the world to expose the titanic, highly organised, heavily networked child pr0n 'industry' it has been banging on about for almost a decade, but we are also - by law - powerless to demand explanations off them. This doesn't stop CEOP from having been behind almost all of the new laws John mentions in his article.

    I've read most of the consultative reports and one can almost always find CEOP at the table. The new laws against 'indecent' cartoons and drawings, for instance, was a cause very close to their collective heart, CEOP having been noted in the consultation report as one of the respondees most keen to push for sentencing to reflect those currently applied to possession of actual photographic CP. And remember, we are talking about cartoons, anime, drawings and CG renders here - no actual, real children - but CEOP would still like to arrest you, shame you, lock you up and ruin your life for merely looking at them. You never touched or saw a real kid, you never paid for or encouraged others to supply, but CEOP says you are a dangerous criminal who must now be treated with more contempt and lack of justice than a violent criminal, or a serial rapist.

    It might be worth pointing out that in the very same report it was also noted there is little to no evidence or research suggesting that anyone who looks at 'indecent cartoons' goes on to offend against actual children in the real world. One can only imagine this was a minor detail to CEOP. They pushed for the new law, anyway, and, sure enough, they got it. Why they felt the need to add yet another 'catch-all' piece of legislation to their already substantial armoury is anyone's guess, but as with all government structures, CEOP's 'remit' continues to widen - year by year.

    The problem is that the public either don't care or have been cowed into submissive silence - and I include the LGBT community here: unless the issues directly affect their particular agenda they don't seem to care whatever else the government and it's police agencies get up to. One mention of 'kids' and every special interest group instantly shuts up, changes tack and falls meekly into line. It's a perfect system and police and government know it. A magic button that, if the argument isn't going too well, need only be pushed. No discussion. No dissent.

  31. Sarah Davis
    Stop

    Please consider this,..

    while you have the freedom to enjoy sex the way you like, a 16 year old boy is being put to death for having gay sex. At the link below you can find an email address and a pre typed letter to send, it will only take you 2 minutes, less time than it takes for you to cum ... thank you

    http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=245320772888&ref=nf

  32. breakfast
    Boffin

    The problem is, it's complicated

    We have a lot of people in this country interested in sex, from the religious right, fundamentalists of many creeds and religions, women's rights groups, men's rights groups, the police, prostitute's action groups ( for and against ), the various communities associated with different sexual practices or the same ones with different people and pretty much everyone else, although most people get on with their lives and don't worry too much about it.

    The government, if it is to do it's job of representing the public, have to try and find out what is going on and how best to balance out the interests of everyone involved. It is an incredibly difficult task and you are going to upset a lot of people no matter what you do.

    That isn't to condone the way things have gone over the last 12 years, but I know some people who worked on the SORT report and it was a very tough balance to strike.

    There is a clear marker of the way progress has worked over the time New Labour were in power in the words of Tony Blair- when they first came to power he came out with a quote along the lines of "What we're interested in is policies that work, things that we have evidence for" by the time he left power he said "At the end of the day, the only guide you have is what is in your heart." The quotes are around to find exactly if you have the time and the inclination but it indicates the entirely dangerous trend from evidence-based policy making to policy-based evidence making that has been a hallmark of this administration.

    I don't expect the tories to be any better, but I'll be glad when these tired, ideologically comatose political dead-ends are gone.

  33. Peter Kay

    'appearing to be normal'

    It may at first glance be true that certain minority groups have been accepted only because they 'appeared to be normal' as the author says.

    The truth is not that the group 'appears to be normal' but that they /are/ in most cases normal. Sometimes there may be certain cultural differences, especially from a vocal and visible minority, but a large majority of people simply want to get on with their lives. The fact some people make (for example) uncommon clothing and hairstyle choices does not stop them going to work, buying food from the supermarket and going for walks with their partner.

    Sexual orientation, gender and sexual behaviour are topics that the general populace are simply unwilling to debate, currently.

    It's worth bearing in mind that fully legalising certain sexual acts or relationships styles would shine a highly unfavourable spotlight on *both* non heteronormative and heteronormative relationships, or in other words : assuming that lifestyles such as BDSM or polyamoury are broken is based on the mistaken belief that vanilla heterosexual relationships are not deeply flawed. If it's ever properly addressed expect deeply unpleasant debates about consent, gender and sexual role stereotyping, ownership, responsibility and relationship definitions.

    Also realise that one of the reasons for the diversity in the queer or BDSM community is that by and large its members have had to question their sexuality, which can then lead on to pondering other aspects of your life. Those that never have to question their own sexuality are generally blind to the flaws in their relationship style, although, granted many who practice alternative lifestyles are also remarkably reluctant to address certain topics.

  34. John Sanders
    Thumb Down

    All of this is boring

    Guys come on, this is boring.

    As long as it is the government who's trying to fix society's "problems", this can only end with public liberties even more diminished.

    Leftist love to criminalize others, based on politics, sex, religion, age, copyright claims, or simply because they do not like the colour of your tie.

    The only think "los politicos" should do is ensure there's no ground for legal discrimination. If someone doesn't like gay or straight people, no law on this world will make that person like them.

    And before sending someone to prison for an alleged sex crime, remember about the old fashion innocent until proven guilty on a fair trial.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Big Brother

      There is no 'Innocent until proven guilty'...

      For allegations made of certain sexual offences. That particular train left the station ten years ago in the mire and misery of Operation Ore and I'm afraid it's been very much the modus operadi of the child protection zealots ever since. God forbid anyone here ever has cause to have to defend themselves against such allegations: justice? That's just some people talking. Guilty until you can prove yourself innocent, and never forget it.

  35. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Well...

    Step one: Remove Church as much as possible from public life.

    Step two: Regret not having a platform thats widely accepted to preach morals at people.

    Step three: Enshrine your moral views in laws. Cause you know best.

    I hope the church steps forward and becomes a moral light for people that want it. Moral guidence if you want it. If you don't want that moral guidence - that great. But please, keep moral guidence out of law.

    1. breakfast
      WTF?

      Que?

      So you want laws with no moral component? What would those laws look like?

      If I say "theft is wrong" that is a moral judgement, there is no universal rule that states theft isn't something that all humans shouldn't be doing constantly, but it would certainly jam society up somewhat if we did.

  36. Gannon (J.) Dick
    Joke

    Universal Math

    http://www.rustprivacy.org/UniversalMath.pdf

  37. Grozbat
    FAIL

    necrophilia

    In spite of this journalist's assertion that there is no evidence that necrophilia exists, a bloke in Sweden was found guilty of it a few years back. Evidence enough, I would have thought.

    1. John Ozimek

      Necrophilia

      I didn't assert the non-existence of necrophilia...the Home Office said there was no evidence it ever happened.

  38. Ammaross Danan
    FAIL

    If church ideology was law...

    If "church" ideology was imposed as law as often as the sectarianism world believes, things would be a bit different. (of course, it would depend on the "religion" in question, as I'm sure the Church of the Jedi and the like would have little-to-no stance on some things...)

    1) LGBT would be outlawed. Period. Those found guilty would be put to death (for those Old Testament or Qur'an followers)

    2) Theft would be enforced with more than a fine or light jail sentence/probation (Mosaic law anyone?)

    3) Divorce would be a punishable offense (good old Catholic no-divorce, ever, there)

    4) We would have laws for "Crimes against Mother Nature" (I'll let you fill in the religion for that one...)

    5) Oh, and don't forget legally-compulsory church attendance, since the government would be the most likely to adopt the "sitting in a church makes you a saint" stance, while I try to make the box sitting in my garage an Audi...

    Enjoy the chafing this may cause and any warm responses that may follow. :)

  39. Paper
    FAIL

    @Anonymous Coward

    "every successful species, such as ours, has to have majority of its population straight"

    Then you agree, if gay people want to correct an "informed" assumption, they've got to say something. And I suppose many gay people come up to you and say "Hello, I'm gay and my name is..."

    I have no idea why you feel gay people coming out to be overbearing. Do you feel the presence of black skinned, blond haired or female people to be overbearing?

This topic is closed for new posts.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019