back to article Brit smut slingers shafted by UK censors' stiff new stance

UK smut-makers will be bound by a new set of rules that bans some forms of sexual behavior – but only when viewed from servers in Blighty. From now on, porno-streaming services in the UK will have to follow the same guidelines as DVDs sold in adult stores across the Queen's realm, which means certain things are out of the …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Normality

    Wow, maybe my relatively dull, unadventurous, and probably quite normal sex life with my wife* isn't so dull and unadventurous after all - we score four out of the naughty list! Talk about criminalising normal people**

    * Yes, wife, that's the biggest shocker here!

    ** Yes, I know we're not criminals for doing some of these things, but it'd be illegal to distribute vids of it. Weird.

    1. Mark 85 Silver badge

      Re: Normality

      Ah... think again. In some countries it probably would be. In certain states here in US it definitely would be illegal. Up until recently, it really was private. But, given the IoT and webcams and all that... who knows who's watching anymore. Which raises a question.. will those of the moral stance who police this be charged with watching illegal activity? :)

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Normality

        At one time in Massachusetts it was illegal for even a married couple to kiss in public and a sea captain was fined for kissing his wife goodbye before setting off on a voyage.

        When we go on about the "medieval" Taliban and ISIS, we are centuries out. The people who are still trying to ban abortions, the teaching of evolution and the like, were behaving much like the Taliban in the 17th century, and were still pretty backward about social behaviour into the 20th. In the Bible Belt, make that the 21st.

        Cameron now...perhaps this ban is so that his colleagues won't be so likely to get caught by the Sun watching naughty stuff. The history of the Conservative Party and the Liberals is full of perversion. I guess now you need to go to a public school to become a Labour frontbencher they will have gone the same way.

        1. P. Lee Silver badge

          Re: Normality

          Banning abortion? What? People think killing babies is wrong? How backward is that! The ancient Greeks and Romans thought that was ok, and that was way before the 17th century.

          Teaching an alternative theory of the origins of life on earth? Ah yes, that's just like beheading people who oppose your rule and hiding half the population under tent-clothes while the other half can do as they wish. In the name of freedom, we must smash (or censor) those who don't agree with us.

          How much more civilised we are, sending our armies off to foreign lands where they can wreak havoc on them undeserving heathens, killing them, so that they don't have to endure the dreadful atrocities their leaders inflict on them.

          1. king of foo

            Re: Normality

            Some people don't get sarcasm... Have a thumbs up

          2. illiad

            Re: Normality . Banning abortion?

            If she doesnt get the abortion, she will kill it by neglect, starvation, etc,etc... :(

            What is better???

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Normality . Banning abortion?

              To ensure neither ?

            2. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: What is better???

              Adoption?

          3. Suricou Raven

            Re: Normality

            You have to ask why ban abortion though. It is because they have reached a conclusion that abortion is inherently immoral? Or is it because they hate the idea that sex doesn't have to have consequences? There's an easy way to tell: Look at their stance on contraception. If they truely do want to minimise the killing of what they would term 'per-born children,' they should embrace contraception as the most powerful tool they have for doing so. On the other hand, if they are just a bunch of prudes who loathe the idea of sex outside of a lifelong heterosexual marriage, they will also be opposed to contraception.

            1. cambsukguy

              Re: Normality

              I think most of those wishing to ban abortion (in the US) are from the self-proclaimed 'pro-life' movement.

              This would suggest that it is not about the sexual morality. These people often want life to be considered to begin at conception which would technically make murderers (manslaughterers?) out of a lot of people. Obviously, some limitation would have to be operative.

              But, bear in mind that many (including a depressing amount of lawmakers) want abortion made illegal, even for rape victims and those that may die if they reach full term because of medical conditions.

              Even with a federal law permitting abortion (Row vs Wade), many states try to prevent it by making abortion clinics obey state laws making their operation difficult. Some states have only a few clinics in areas the size of the UK. Add to that the risk from pro-life activists (although apparently not the lives of abortion providers), and you get a serious situation.

              Abortion is reducing a lot in the US from a peak around 1990, so it does have an effect. Of course, those figures don't show the illegal abortions that almost certainly have increased, not to mention the unwanted children and attendant issues.

              The UK appears to have an increasing amount of abortion but this may just be the population increase.

            2. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Normality

              Quote: On the other hand, if they are just a bunch of prudes who loathe the idea of sex outside

              Err... You missed one. There is an extremely strong correlation between military dictatorships, putting the country onto military footing and anti-abortionist stance. To put it bluntly - though shall not interfere with the creation of new cannon fodder. Anyone waving a gun at their neighbours tends to be anti-abortion and vice versa.

              Examples - Stalin, Hitler and pre-WW2 European government - you can peg the antiabortionist laws nearly to the day to actual major "ramp-up" events as the world was gearing up towards WW2. The same was valid through the ages all the way back to the days of the early post-Roman Europe. Similarly, one of the biggest anti-abortionists today is North Korea.

          4. Indolent Wretch

            Re: Normality

            Fetus

          5. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Normality

            Dear P.Lee:

            Read my post a little more carefully. I cited the 17th century as the period when Christians were still murdering one another for being of the wrong sect, and when in New England you could be killed for being a Quaker. Pointing out that ISIS behave like Protestants or Catholics in a period which we consider to be almost modern history, rather than the Middle Ages, is I think valid. Cromwell in Ireland, ISIS in Iraq; not a lot of difference. I never suggested that teaching Creationism is equivalent to the practices of Wahabi Islam.

            But you give yourself away (and I suspect earn your downvotes) by writing about "alternative theory of the origins of life on Earth". Creationism and "Intelligent Design" are not alternative theories. They are unscientific bunk.

            Before even Charles Darwin published The evolution of the species by natural selection Tennyson wrote about "Nature":

            "So careful of the type"? But no,/ from scarped cliff or quarried stone/ she cries "a thousand types are gone/ I care for nothing, all shall go."

            It's pretty bad when supposedly educated people in the West in 2014 don't seem to understand as much as a Victorian poet who was just listening to discussions among other educated people and seeing where they led. And worse when politicians of the same period, also apparently educated, seem less open minded and more prone to unreason than the more advanced Victorians.

          6. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

            Re: Normality

            "Banning abortion? What? People think killing babies is wrong? How backward is that!"

            Potential babies aren't babies yet. And it's pretty goddamned backwards to ban abortion. Question for you: do you give a fuck about the "precious little baby" once it has exited the woman's vagina, or do you only care about it while it is part of a woman's body? If you do care about the "precious little baby" after it has exited a woman's vagina, I assume you're in full support then of universal health care, the welfare state, free post-secondary education, employment insurance and other means and measures to ensure a happy and productive life for all members of society?

            If you are not, please explain why not, starting with why a potential baby merits more concern than an actual living, breathing human being?

            "Teaching an alternative theory of the origins of life on earth? Ah yes, that's just like beheading people who oppose your rule and hiding half the population under tent-clothes while the other half can do as they wish."

            I'm glad we're able to come to an agreement about just how completely fucked up beyond all repair suppressing scientific knowledge is, especially when it is done in the name of a false god. One amongst hundreds of other false gods that madmen have dreamt up over the centuries.

            Keep up the good work!

            "How much more civilised we are, sending our armies off to foreign lands where they can wreak havoc on them undeserving heathens, killing them, so that they don't have to endure the dreadful atrocities their leaders inflict on them."

            Well, seems both sides to this argument engage in this particular bit of fuckwittery. Though, I daresay, the Islamics have claimed far fewer western scalps than we've managed to kill of them. Over a million in Iraw, was it? And how many in Afghanistan? Pakistan? Syria?

            Hmm...I think I'm going to go with "we're a bunch of peckerheads too".

      2. NoneSuch

        Re: Normality

        "Also on the too-naughty-for-Brits list is spanking, aggressive whipping, and caning. Yes, caning. Which is somewhat odd since such activities are known across the English Channel as 'Le vice anglais'."

        So the episode of Sherlock where Benedict whips a corpse with a riding crop is now classed as banned XXX smut?

      3. Bloakey1
        Unhappy

        Re: Normality

        <snip>

        "will those of the moral stance who police this be charged with watching illegal activity? :)"

        No, in the UK they will be charged with possession of swollen goods.

        I think the world has gone mad. Before we know it we will have seat belts on toilets in case we damage ourselves falling off.

    2. PleebSmash
      Big Brother

      Re: Normality

      "No female ejaculation"

      Islamic State of the United Kingdom (ISUK) established

      1. LaeMing Silver badge
        Flame

        Re: Normality

        Next up: Female orgasms banned.

        (Well if their wives can't have them, no-one can either!)

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Windows

          Re: Normality

          Mummy, Mummy, Whats an orgasm???

          I've no idea, ask yer dad...

          Badum -Tish

      2. NogginTheNog
        FAIL

        Re: Normality

        Islamic State of the United Kingdom (ISUK) established

        You do realise that the self-proclaimed "Islamic State" is about as Islamic as Hitler was a Christian, right?

        1. tony2heads

          Re: Normality

          Godwin's Law strikes again

          1. NogginTheNog
            Facepalm

            Re: Normality

            "Godwin's Law strikes again"

            Yup! I realised that about 15 minutes after I posted!

        2. Suricou Raven

          Re: Normality

          "Gott Mit Uns."

        3. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Normality

          "You do realise that the self-proclaimed "Islamic State" is about as Islamic as Hitler was a Christian, right?"

          errrm but - Hitler wrote: "I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.."

          1. Christopher Slater-Walker

            Re: Normality

            That's the trouble (or rather one of the troubles) with religion. It's whatever someone says it is. Generally those with the loudest mouth/biggest ego/smallest intelligence, or some combination of all three.

    3. Blitterbug
      Megaphone

      Re: we score four out of the naughty list!

      Think of the children! Even mentioning these filthy, filthy things here, where innocent kiddies might stumble on them is too horrid to contemplate.

      "Mummy, what's fisting ?"

      1. Tim Jenkins

        "Mummy, what's fisting ?"

        "It's what Daddy does on Saturdays, down by the lake, with the other men in big rubber boots"

        Oh, no, wait....

        1. SirMunchAlot
          Coat

          Re: "Mummy, what's fisting ?"

          Surely that should be 'by the pool' as in the classic Dire Straits song 'Fisting by the pool'?

    4. Colin of Rame

      Re: Normality

      Most of British law relies on test cases to prove the law.

      Please provide a link and the Reg readership can give you their verdict on your video :-)

  2. Ketlan
    Devil

    Gissa job

    I want a job at the British Board of Film Classification. It's not fair that they can watch all this stuff but I can't.

    1. Swiss Anton
      Joke

      Re: Gissa job

      Nah, I used to be employed by them but had to resign. I was bored stiff.

    2. Bloakey1
      Happy

      Re: Gissa job

      Dear Sir,

      You may have a job on our porn review panel, you must however be prepared to work a month in hand.

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    That's all right then...

    At least we can still watch HD images of tab A being inserted into slot 1, as opposed to Japan, where they have to pixelate them.

    1. Naughtyhorse

      Re: That's all right then...

      Have to?

      or choose to.... bloody weirdos

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: That's all right then...

      Ah, that explains the popularity of Minecraft then.

      1. Shrimpling

        Re: That's all right then...

        I thought they had changed their mind about the pixelating thing because of the easy access to non-Japanese porn on the internet but its not something I want to search for at work to confirm or deny my suspicions!

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: That's all right then...

          NO STRANGULATION!!! its political correctness gone mad!

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: That's all right then...

          Even cartoons

  4. John Tserkezis

    Now you know why all the jobs are going overseas...

  5. The Alphabet

    I read this article and immediately thought of this Family Guy cutaway.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZcVkYD3o910

  6. DNTP

    Nothing you saw me watch is illegal

    in the countries where it was filmed.

  7. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Please oh Alien Overlords, save us from the madness!

    And people wonder 'why?' When I say things like 'I don't want to live in this country anymore' or 'one ticket off this rock of stupidity & madness'

    It's because of inanity like this and other things that just beggar belief. But hey lets not forget we must all remember to 'protect the kiddies' & quake in fear of 'reds (sorry today read; terrorists) under the bed' so say Elgov & its legally mandated protection rackets (sorry, again for today, read; Respectable Institutions)

    Aplogies Private Eye but; If thats a sensible law, I'm a Banana

    1. LaeMing Silver badge
      Unhappy

      Re: Please oh Alien Overlords, save us from the madness!

      No self-respecting alien overlord would come near this backwater.

      Not even for laffs!

      1. Marketing Hack Silver badge
        Paris Hilton

        Re: Please oh Alien Overlords, save us from the madness!

        Sadly, the alien overlords are pretty adventurous sexually, so no you won't see them in Britain. Maybe San Francisco or Tijuana though....

    2. Long John Brass Silver badge
      Coat

      Re: Please oh Alien Overlords, save us from the madness!

      > It's because of inanity like this and other things that just beggar belief

      ... things that just bugger belief

      There fixed that for you

    3. NeilPost

      Re: Please oh Alien Overlords, save us from the madness!

      In light of systemic failings over sexual exploitation in Rotherham, Oxford, Rochdale and numerous other places, systemic failings in social services in pretty much most local authorities (but esp. Birmingham, Coventry, Harringey), failing over historic abuse in NHS, Children's Homes, BBC, Prison Service, Establishment figures and systemic failures in just about everything that South Yorkshire Police touch ..... you kind of get a beggaring belief feeling, and think they seriously have fucked up priorities.if they are wasting time on this sort of nonsense, where trivially bypassed if servers outside the UK.

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Please oh Alien Overlords, save us from the madness!

      Put AI in your routers, then let them decide what it is fit for you to see.

      No need for aliens or predators. Support your local world.

      1. Alien8n Silver badge

        Re: AI in routers

        Sounds like Virgin Media already have this, they seem to believe everything must be filtered after 6pm. That or some git's just set fire to the switch box down the road again...

  8. BenjaminHare
    Joke

    Let your betters decide

    I for one am happy to know that your UK overlords have taken the situation in hand. If people were allowed to film and distribute whatever the market will bare, who can guess at the horrid consequences. Cat's and dogs sleeping together. Mass hysteria! Such pandemonium has been averted by those better qualified to judge what is right. Hear. Hear. Hopefully this type of legislation will be extended to grammar, thought-crimes, and fashion sense in near future.

    1. LaeMing Silver badge
      Go

      Re: Let your betters decide

      What was the traditional treatment for hysteria (the one that wasn't a slap and was administered by doctors with a special medical device)? Oooooh.

      1. Chris G Silver badge

        Re: Let your betters decide

        One of the euphemisms was pelvic massage, many Victorian and Edwardian doctors 'specialised' in it.

        The forerunners of dodgy sex therapists.

        Regarding this latest item of prudery by Dave and chums; they really don't get the interwobbly thing at all do they?

        Oh! Latest News Just In! UK LOOKING FOR CONTRACTORS TO TENDER FOR NATIONAL FARADAY CAGE! HUGE ERECTION FOR BRITAIN'S COASTS!

        1. Nick Ryan Silver badge

          Re: Let your betters decide

          I'm afraid that you sir, appear to be suffering from hysteria. Off to the clinic with you...

    2. T. F. M. Reader Silver badge

      Re: Let your betters decide

      "whatever the market will bare"

      Nice. Have an upvote.

    3. Marcelo Rodrigues
      Joke

      Re: Let your betters decide

      "I for one am happy to know that your UK overlords have taken the situation in hand."

      No, they didn't. It is against the law to put your hands on the situation.

      1. Mark 85 Silver badge

        Re: Let your betters decide

        Your hand - illegal. They're hands - not illegal.

    4. dz-015

      Re: Let your betters decide

      "Cat's and dogs"

      Out of curiosity, why use a grocer's apostrophe to pluralise cats but not dogs?

  9. A Non e-mouse Silver badge
    WTF?

    WTF

    I can understand strangulation/breathplay being on the banned list as people have died from that stuff. But since when has fisting been life threatening? How many people (male or female) have been rushed to hospital (or even died) after being fisted during sex?

    And why ban female ejaculation but not male? Is female ejaculation not considered normal or natural?!?

    As to the rest of the list: WTF?!? If the participants are all consenting adults, what's the problem? Just because it's not your cup of tea doesn't mean no-one else will like it.

    1. SMabille

      Re: WTF

      Ban peanuts. Far more deaths caused by them than by breath play (or terrorist) every year...

    2. Graham Marsden

      @A Non e-Mouse - Re: WTF

      Yes, people have died from strangulation and breath-play going wrong. But that sort of thing was happening long before the advent of the internet. Meanwhile, of course, many more people die crossing the road or from smoking or alcohol related causes. Should we ban imagery of these too?

      This is the same nonsense that gave us the Extreme Pornography legislation and which may soon give us an extension of that law which will ban "rape porn" whereby pictures of anything that *looks* non-consensual could get you arrested and thrown in jail!

      PS as for female ejaculation, despite it being clinically proven that female ejaculate is *not* urine, it's obviously still too icky for The Powers That Be who don't want us to see it because they don't like it.

      1. dan1980

        Re: @A Non e-Mouse - WTF

        @Graham Marsden

        Regarding female ejaculation (I don't think I have ever typed that phrase before - thanks El Reg!) maybe they just don't like the idea that the female in question is having an orgasm and thus, presumably, enjoying herself. She is not 'lying back and thinking of England'.

        That was of course a joke. Definitely. Yup.

  10. Mephistro Silver badge
    Coat

    What???No reference to midget porn???

    PHEW!

    ;-)

    1. MJI Silver badge

      Re: What???No reference to midget porn???

      And you know what I would not be surprised if it featured a rather over exposed but very likeable British short person (and his wife).

      Ha ha ha I now have you try to not imagine it.

  11. Red Bren
    Childcatcher

    Instead of criminalising the acts of consenting adults, perhaps the UK parliament should concern itself more with the criminal acts against non-consenting children committed by those within their own ranks?

    1. Oninoshiko

      Pretty sure those are already illegal... along with consensual acts from adults who look too much like children and non-consensual acts (maybe consensual too, I start to get confused at this point) of drawings (can a drawing consent?) which appear to be youngish-looking.

    2. Marketing Hack Silver badge
      Joke

      Parliament would concern itself more with that, but then where would it's members get practice on how to treat British voters??

    3. NeilPost

      Quite, the country does not need more legislation, just adequate, proportionate and robust enforcement of existing laws.

      1. Sir Runcible Spoon Silver badge
        WTF?

        Apparently being crap at art is also illegal and you can end up in chokey, especially if you draw a sex scene and don't make the breasts on the girl unfeasibly large.

    4. theblackhand

      UK law

      UK politicians don't make laws to be enforced, they make them to win votes of whatever vocal minority they are trying to please at the time.

      Enforcement is someone else's problem...

    5. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      I'd give you two thumbs up for that, if I had two hands free...

  12. Version 1.0 Silver badge

    Double standard?

    So Watersports are out, but Waterboarding is still OK?

    1. LaeMing Silver badge
      Unhappy

      Re: Double standard?

      One is (I am told) for pleasure, the other for torture. Of course the former is forbidden while the latter is okay.

      1. MJI Silver badge

        Re: Double standard?

        Yes but which one?

  13. fearnothing

    Bloody Backward Fun Censors.

  14. Grikath Silver badge

    the next step....

    well sir.. we have noted that you have declined the Government Approved Netfilters, and are streaming from IP's [x], [y], and [z]. Would you please step over here ? Just a couple of questions...

  15. Graham Marsden
    Big Brother

    Hooray for our Morality Police...

    ...protecting us from ourselves because we're so weak minded and ethically bankrupt that we simply cannot be trusted to see naughty stuff for fear that it will cause us to do something bad...

    ... Next up: Cameron introduces the Junior Anti-Sex League...

    1. Mark 85 Silver badge

      Re: Hooray for our Morality Police...

      Will they use the Middle East model for this? In certain countries they have the regular plod who investigate crimes. Then there the Morality Plod who crack down on whatever the leadership says is immoral. From your reference, I see you prefer the Orwellian Model with jumpsuit and colorful sash/belt? Been awhile so I need to go back and re-read see what the charming lady tossed into the air while jumping on Winston.

      1. Chris G Silver badge

        Re: Hooray for our Morality Police...

        UK Morality Police will be recruited from upwardly mobile members of the Parking Warden fraternity and Community Police, they will have to have a large shiny helmet and a well worn truncheon ( Having a Blakey style moustache will be a plus including for female members of the force. Powers will include warrantless entry to any premises or home suspected of harbouring anybody who could be in posession of an orgasm.

        They will be on the lookout for; Oral sex (talking about) and pronography ( images of a lascivious nature).

        In the interest of continuing the finest traditions of British policing, it will be left to the arresting officers use of common sense as to whether and what type of offence has been committed.

        Annually for those members of the force with the highest arrest and conviction rates there will be an award of the Whitehouse Medal for Morality.

  16. dan1980

    One one hand, this is reasonable, on the other, it just draws attention to how stupid it all is.

    It is reasonable because the laws and regulations for commercially-available streaming media should accord with the laws and regulations for commercially-available physical media.

    Unfortunately, the laws and regulations in question are utterly ridiculous.

    I can kind of see the 'strangulation' part but let's not forget that this is a recreational activity - something people do for (in lieu of a better word) fun. It is, however, an activity that could result in death if it is not done correctly (if you REALLY messed it up).

    But then there are numerous recreational activities that can result in death and serious injury if not done properly and many of these are not just available on DVDs and streamed via the Internet - they are broadcast on free-to-air television. Any time you see people jumping motorbikes over things or throwing themselves out of planes any number of things. Some have a far smaller margin for error.

    Some of these depictions come with warnings not to try at home but if that's the concern then why not add these warnings to the start of pornography containing the 'dangerous' acts?

    Oh, and keep your noses out of everyone's private lives.

  17. WonkoTheSane
    Childcatcher

    What's with the Victorian moralities?

    The old battleaxe has been dead over a century now.

    Won't someone think of the grownups?

    1. Neil Barnes Silver badge
      Childcatcher

      Re: What's with the Victorian moralities?

      The moral Victorians? Weren't they the ones who *raised* the age of consent to thirteen? Who felt fine with the idea that the man of the house should have sexual access to all the female staff?

      Just askin'...

      1. This post has been deleted by its author

    2. Diogenes

      Re: What's with the Victorian moralities?

      Actually, the old battleax and Bertie had an enourmous nude collection, and enjoyed a very vigourous sex life which she very much enjoyed

  18. Suricou Raven

    Don't worry too much.

    It's basically unenforcable.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Don't worry too much.

      The problem is that this type of unenforceable law is intended to be used to lock up anyone that a slightly bent copper has decided "Looks like a wrong'un", or simply wants to 'improve' their arrest-to-charge ratio.

      This does of course really annoy the good coppers, as it makes their jobs impossible in the long run.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Don't worry too much.

        That is true, they already use 'catch all' laws to arrest peaceful protesters or anyone they don't like the look of... but still we are one of the most free societies in the world... be thankful we don't have pixelation like the Japanese, or are fighting for our freedoms like the Hong Kong chinese are right now...

        We the people can vote out the idiots (ok we have a choice between which idiots we let in i guess), not everyone has that right...

        1. MJI Silver badge

          Re: Don't worry too much.

          Which idiots do we choose?

          None of the party leaders fill me with confidence, and choosing a PM is a least worse process, not best.

          1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

            Re: Don't worry too much.

            "choosing a PM is a least worse process"

            Despite the recent politcal campaigns going "all American Presidentail-like", we don't vote for a PM. We vote for a local MP. Generally, that means we hope "our" MP is in the winning party and that his party leader becomes PM. But that doesn't have to be the case. There's no reason why the winning MPs can't choose a different MP to be PM and not the existing party leader. S/he can be ousted at the last minute.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Don't worry too much.

          "We the people can vote out the idiots (ok we have a choice between which idiots we let in i guess), not everyone has that right..."

          There is the problem,we are only given a choice of which numpty to vote for and no choice to say "no one suitable on this list"

          1. Suricou Raven

            Re: Don't worry too much.

            Not quite. Unlike the US, we do have some significent fringe parties. They are quite bonkers, of course. But when a lot of people start to support a fringe party, it acts as a signal to the major parties to steal their positions. This can be seen with the rise of the BNP, followed by UKIP. Once it became clear UKIP was getting huge growth, the coalition started to promise more measures to reduce immigration in the hope of luring over those UKIP supporters to their side. The same thing could happen if lots of people started to vote for, say, the Pirate Party. Not a hope of them actually growing to any significent size, but if they started growing at all you can expect some of the big three to start immitating their defining positions.

    2. Nigel Whitfield.

      Re: Don't worry too much.

      Unenforceable? Hah!

      While they may not necessarily go out looking for some of this stuff - and a lot of producers will move their sites overseas - it's almost inevitable that this will become the sort of stick with which to beat people when the police have failed to find something else that they can use.

      The original Spanner case, after all, came about because the police said they were investigating something different. They found no proof of that, but did find SM images and video, so prosecuted the participants.

      We appear to be living in dangerously puritan times.

  19. TheSisko
    Megaphone

    BBFC Trolling statement.......

    "the BBFC says that in the latter case it may not go hard on producers"

    Well when you get to the age of the typical BBFC member (ooh err!) that does tend to be a problem......

  20. codejunky Silver badge

    Prudes

    "violent penetration with foreign objects"

    I wonder if they had a different interpretation and thought interracial? Watersports should be banned on porn, it is very dangerous on a jet-ski! And I cannot believe how much abusive language is shown on these self gratifying shows (words like tax, politician, public expenses, etc).

    However I think we may have the wrong end of the stick and in fact they are trying to fight for womans rights! Banning female ejaculation was some junior using the wrong word because they wanted to write female ejection, to save them from being removed from a political party even if they make an embarrassing flyer or tweet.

    Tbh I think the priorities of those in charge are a little (LOADS) different from the electorate. If not I despair.

    1. Vladimir Plouzhnikov

      Re: Prudes

      "violent penetration with foreign objects"

      OMG! They've banned Star Wars!!

      1. Sir Runcible Spoon Silver badge

        Re: Prudes

        And all films where someone gets shot apparently

  21. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    do as I say !

    Its still OK for killing someone violently on TV though,something anyone of any age can watch.

    Its also OK to buy and play violent games where killing is the object of the game or compete with other players all over the world.

    Sometimes I think the law makers are blinkered and misguided or just thinking up unenforceable laws in order to justify salaries and pensions.

  22. Glenturret Single Malt

    Le Vice Anglais

    Nice throwaway comment about caning in boarding schools. Just a pity that it has been banned for about 35 years.

    1. Jagged

      Re: Le Vice Anglais

      I was caned in my State Secondary "Modern" less than 35 years ago (but not by much)

      Corporal punishment was banned in state schools in 87 but not in private schools until 1999 (in England & Wales), 2000 in Scotland, and 2003 in Northern Ireland

  23. Blitheringeejit
    Coat

    Fscked already

    May I be the first to grass up El Reg for hosting a picture of me fisting my coat..?

  24. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    hardly difficult to get around

    Its only enforceable on UK hosted servers so answer to that host it elsewhere and you cant record it in the UK well there are plenty of other places you could record it in. Not entirely sure how you would know if its in a studio or actually in the UK not like parliament will be in the background and even if it is are they going to get GCHQ to test the footage to see if its legit or a fake background. Waste of their time if you ask me but at least they will be busy doing that instead of complaining that they cant snoop on anyone illegally.

    1. Dr Dan Holdsworth Silver badge

      Re: hardly difficult to get around

      This happened in Australia with internet gambling. The government there made it illegal, so the gaming sites simply migrated offshore to south-east Asia (in the case of the smart ones, using virtual hosting, this took mere millisecnds of downtime).

      When the sites went, the tax money went as well, but aussies carried on gambling on the same sites just like before. Apparently nobody had told that government what was about to happen, so it all came as rather a shock to them.

      Since not very much UK porn is actually hosted in the UK, and most of the rest is now hosted on https sites, I dare say the Government won't actually make much difference to anyone with this legalistic masturbation. Not that enacting unenforcible and frankly idiotic law seems to bother governments any more; it is now illegal, for instance, to detonate nuclear weapons in the UK.

      1. Nick Ryan Silver badge

        Re: hardly difficult to get around

        it is now illegal, for instance, to detonate nuclear weapons in the UK.

        I will sleep better in my bed knowing this. I may even write to my local government representative and thank him for pushing through such an insightful and meaningful law that will make us all feel better.

        Of course those that would detonate a nuclear weapon in the UK don't give a rat's arse about UK laws. There goes my better night sleep :(

      2. Suricou Raven

        Re: hardly difficult to get around

        This is good, because my old home insurance policy specifically excluded any damage caused by nuclear attack.

      3. LaeMing Silver badge
        Black Helicopters

        Re: it is now illegal, for instance, to detonate nuclear weapons in the UK.

        Dang! Another nefarious plan foiled!

        And I would have gotten away with it if it wasn't for those dang politicians and their laws.

  25. theOtherJT

    Surely to god they have more important things to do than legislate over something that basically no one cares about? Porn, seriously? No one cares. We're over it. It's out there we all know it's out there, it's basically ubiquitous at this point. Just ignore it, and move on already! I couldn't possibly care less what other people are watching for their own gratification, and I certainly don't want my government telling me what I'm allowed to watch for mine.

    ...which is all before we get to the "trying to stop the tide coming in" that is regulating the availability of something on the internet. I mean that _never_ works.

  26. Yugguy

    Just to throw in a subject for debate...

    Given that average porn seems to be getting "harder", in that years back deep throat and anal was a rarity, and now it seems everyone's taking it everywhere could it be argued that today's porn is creating an unrealistic expectation in the minds of young males as to what they should expect in reality?

    Just a debate, mkay....

    1. Nigel Whitfield.

      Re: Just to throw in a subject for debate...

      Certainly, many people now have unrealistic expectations of how quickly a plumber will arrive

      1. Yugguy

        Re: Just to throw in a subject for debate...

        And disappointed with his lack of moustache.

    2. Lamont Cranston

      Re: Just to throw in a subject for debate...

      Yes, I rather suspect that it does, and we should probably be improving our sex education in schools, to help young people deal with these issues. What I don't agree with, is this crazy attempt to outlaw anything that isn't "vanilla" sex, on film.

      1. Nigel Whitfield.

        Re: Just to throw in a subject for debate...

        @Lamont, notwithstanding my earlier throwaway comment, I do tend to agree with you.

        Certainly, from some recent conversations I've had with young gentlemen, the increased openness of recent years has meant that many desire to do things that, at their tender ages, I had barely heard of, let alone seen enacted upon a sticky computer screen.

        And, you're also dead on that better education is the key. PSE (or whatever the acronym is now) should not be something that parents can opt their kids out of, and it should make them aware that things they might have seen in porn are not necessarily realistic, or everyday.

        That, of course, would involve people talking frankly about sex, and sadly too many - especially those with power - equate talking frankly with corrupting and depraving. They still cling to the idea that the mere fact of someone knowing about sex (or about any particular sex act) is enough to make them do it, especially if the knowledge falls into the hands of a teenage boy.

        This persistence in seeing sex as only something dirty, and from which people must be protected is, in my view, far more damaging than being open and frank. We'll have grown up over these things when a teacher can say "ok class, who's heard of bukake?" and engage the kids in a frank discussion of whether or not it's appropriate for a first date, matters of consent, and so on.

        Until then, because this law won't stop people seeing porn, people will continue to see things in a false context, devoid of information about consent, and safety, and it is that lack of context and understanding when it comes to sex that is the killer, not the act itself.

        1. Scott Pedigo
          Childcatcher

          Re: Just to throw in a subject for debate...

          We'll have grown up over these things when a teacher can say "ok class, who's heard of bukake?"

          If they'd asked me that in school, I would have had no idea. I guess I would have had egg on my face.

    3. Suricou Raven

      Re: Just to throw in a subject for debate...

      I think it's more a change in advertising. Sites are desperate to distinguish themselves and secure viewership and precious advertising revenue. Yet another generic porn site among thousands isn't going to stick in the viewers memory, but throw in some kinks and you're halfway to a memorable visit.

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Just to throw in a subject for debate...

      I remember copies of Private magazine being passed round our school in the 1970s which featured those acts and many more, including ones between males and she-males. So the widespread availability and the medium has changed, but the acts depicted have not.

  27. The Boojum
    Megaphone

    Go UKIP!

    Ban on penetration with foreign objects?

    Damn right! "British jobs for British objects", I say. Mind you, we probably won't be able to keep EU object out.

  28. Woodgar

    Nothing To Hide, Nothing To Fear

    When the Government starts down the slippery slope of criminalising pornography, it's pretty obvious that we all have something to hide and plenty to fear.

  29. Sir Lancelot

    Go for it, Max!

    Just asking: is Max Mosley by any chance a member (or perhaps an employee) of this British Board of Film Classification?

  30. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Come again?

    How can female ejaculation be "life threatening"? Should women get an appointment with their doctor?

    1. Blitheringeejit

      Re: Come again?

      >How can female ejaculation be "life threatening"?

      Maybe something to do with proximity to an electrical socket?

      In which case we should ensure that all electrical installations are clearly labelled with graphic illustrations of the potential hazards...

  31. Anonymous Coward
    Joke

    Books?

    If this applied to e-books would 50 Shades of Cameron be banned?

    Anyway, if this applied to all those fantasy-vampire novels we could get rid of all the overblown 5ex scenes and get on with the gorey action at last

  32. Flywheel Silver badge
    Big Brother

    Oops

    Presumably this is going to spoil a lot of our MPs "fun", but presumably they'll get around the restrictions by not videoing it.

  33. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    petition for porn "filtering"

    it is LONG overdue! After all, we all know (evidence thus unnecessary), that porn has STRONG and undeniable links with money laundering, therefore: terrorism, pedophilia, stealing music and movies from hard working tax paying corporations settled in (ex) cool Britannia and many other illegal activities. Throw in the polluting (!) of those young, innocent minds and you have a very potent concoction, I say. Potent enough to cause an explosion, and we can't allow exploding in any shape, colour or form, particularly cuming from a dark, dark net out there.

    p.s. I'm sure the current legislation is wide enough to filter filth as defined by the reliable men with their (left) hand on the filter switch!

    p.p.s. I thought that caning had more to do with canines than canes?

  34. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    brilliant way to promote hosting

    overseas

  35. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    It's none of their sodding business what people watch - providing no one is coerced or injured.

    (Yet you get people sticking skewers through themselves for religious reasons in some countries.)

    Anyway now I know that female ejaculate is real (never noticed when I've had my face in the wife's bits).

    But what on earth is the reasoning to not show it - it's a human fluid - do they think it is from Angels?

    Thye'll be banning Gilbert and George's delightful turd pictures next.

    1. Yugguy

      "Anyway now I know that female ejaculate is real (never noticed when I've had my face in the wife's bits)."

      Weird, I noticed it when I had my face in her bits.

      .

      .

      .

      .

      .

      .

      .

      .

      .

      .

      .

      The joke was just too tempting, I'm sorry. (;-<

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        well I have to down vote it, don't I ?

  36. Kubla Cant Silver badge

    Welcome back, King Canute*

    So, the UK government is banning hard porn on the Internet, the EU is going to dismember Google and Amazon. And I hear that my local Council has plans to reduce gravity.

    * Apparently the tide stunt was actually staged by Canute to show that he wasn't omnipotent. It's a pity today's rulers are less wise.

  37. Keith Langmead

    Shoddy reporting or just trying to glam up something not that interesting?

    I'm sorry Reg, have all the proper reporters left for Christmas already? Unless you can provide an actual link to back up what you're saying I'd have to say the entire article is utter rubbish.

    "The new regulations from the British Board of Film Classification"

    They're not regs from the BBFC, they're government legislation enacted by the Minister of State (as the link clearly shows) which as far as I can see simply use the BBFC's existing certifications.

    IANAL, but from my reading the only thing that's changed is that "On-demand programme services" are now legally held to the same standards as DVD's (which I thought most voluntarily did anyway), and where content is already R18 rated or would be R18 rated (so only available in sex shops) it can still be shown but only if mechanisms are in place to ensure viewers are not under 18.

    Presumably with the lack of a link to anything specific from the BBFC the rest of the article is simply BBFC's current stance on what can't even be sold in sex shops, and nothing of substance has actually changed from their point of view.

    1. Keith Langmead

      Re: Shoddy reporting or just trying to glam up something not that interesting?

      Actually to be fair, I since spent time last night trying to find any article with links to definitive facts, and none of the papers or sites I found did. Everyone seems to be quoting everyone else, some link to the BBFC guidance document, but that doesn't mention that list of banned things either. The closest I found was a blog article from a lawyer, and even then he's writing based on facts told to him by someone else, who in turn was told them in a meeting regarding the rule changes!

  38. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Seems people were right.

    First the warez, then the smut, next your freedoms.

  39. leaway2

    Luckily Guernsey, Jersey and the isle of Man have removed canning from the statues in just in time.

  40. stringyfloppy

    What? Now how am I supposed to mount my new online, streaming production of "A Christmas Carol?"

  41. OzBob

    well that spells the end

    for kink.com and it's associated websites, who seem to revel in that sort of thing. (Seriously NSFW).

  42. --. --- -..

    So, there must be some ideology or philosophical outlook behind this, other than an appeal to prudery. It looks like they are actually taking it upon themselves to mould and engineer the sexuality of the UK for it's own good. Yet in all the articles I have read on this they fail to give any detailed of their real reasoning behind their judgements. Who the fuck are they to do that ? I didn't vote for any of this. I don't recall it being on any political manifesto ?

    They need to make some attempt, based on research, to justify this social engineering. I'd say it's probably rooted in work of sociologists like Albert Bandura and such - but I can only guess because they aren't telling us.

    One thing you can say is that anyone claiming we have free speech in this country is an absolute idiot.

  43. PassiveSmoking

    So if I made a porno of ten dominatrices (<- is that the right plural) whipping and caning a tied up jihadist into submission and spammed ISIS twitter feeds with it, I'D be the one in trouble?

    And next whenever you show two people in bed they will have to leave enough space between them for the holy ghost.

  44. Dick Emery

    Function 'creep'

    They need to ban slippery slopes too! Those things can cause serious injury to your 'private' parts!

  45. Scott Pedigo
    Coat

    Does this mean no filming in boarding schools?

    I thought caning was the traditional punishment for sassy boys in boarding school. Has that been banned now too?

  46. John Sanders
    Angel

    Politicians in the morning:

    - After having his cereal and drunk his coffee:

    "Female ejaculation"??? We will not tolerate such thing! Oh no!-no!-no!-no!.

    And thus I'm now horribly curious about this subject.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Politicians in the morning:

      curious, you say?

  47. This Side Up

    Smut-phobic? The Government?

    Noooooooo. They just want to keep it for themselves. Can't have the plebs seeing this sort of stuff can we?

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019