Brit regulator Ofcom put at helm as hosting platforms threatened with hefty fines for violent videos The UK government has threatened hosting platforms with big fines for providing access to unpleasant videos and will task UK comms regulator Ofcom with looking after how that happens. The rules will come into force from 19 September in order to comply with European Union regulations. They will be in force until 31 October. If …
I checked out the site and, apart from blurb assuring how good they are, it is quite light on technical details.
From what I understand, you prove your identity to AgeChecked by " a range of options" (not telling, though), and then AgeChecked vouches for your ID and age to other sites who ask them - for a fee, of course.
The complete lack of technical details make this look like a racket to get money with minimal expense.
and obfusctaced likely to hide the links between those that make the laws and those that run agechecked / other "verification" providers......
Already had an cllr (a rad fem none the less) tell me "you cant expect me to believe that you'd be happy about your wife/sister/daughter being a lap dancer" she went off in the huff when I told her quite clearly that provided they did it of their own free will I'd trust them to make their own decisions and I strongly believe in women being free to do WHATEVER job they want, not just those anti sex rad fems like her deem "appropriate and wholesome"
She might also have stropped off after I suggested that she could start the junior anti sex league and mandate everyone does party approved "wholesome" activities like route marches or such.....
(yes she was SNP for anyone whose wondering.....)
This post has been deleted by its author
"you cant expect me to believe that you'd be happy about your wife/sister/daughter being a lap dancer" she went off in the huff when I told her quite clearly that provided they did it of their own free will I'd trust them to make their own decisions and I strongly believe in women being free to do WHATEVER job they want, not just those anti sex rad fems like her deem "appropriate and wholesome"
I don't think I would be terribly happy if I had a daughter and she went to work in the sex trade/lap dancer. I would feel like I hadn't done my job as a dad properly. Although they can make a lot of money, and I'm sure I heard they were in the process of unionising, it's still a seedy and potentially dangerous line of work in and around drunk and lecherous men.
All the support in the world ain't gonna change that.
Maybe she thought you were just being obtuse (or an idiot).
Also I'm not sure many women WANT to be lap dancers. More an order of necessity one would guess.
Ask any girl growing up what they want to be and I think I can confidently say that not many will reply
"I'd really like to grind up and down on a sweaty strangers groin for money while naked, that's always been the dream"
Try talking to a few women about that (in fact say verbatim what you posted here), not many would consider her a "rad fem" but they would consider you a dickhead.
There is a very small proportion of people in the country who are doing the job they dreamed of. Sometimes, necessity is stronger than desire. Personally, I'd be much happier if my daughter became a lap-dancer than going on benefits - I'd be happier if she became a prostitute than going on benefits, to be honest. Just as long as she doesn't become a politician, I'll be happy.
Actually I know plenty of sex positive and anti censorship feminists who share my views and get equally hacked off the moral puritanism of people like her, and their attempts to create a female led Gilead (as one put it)
I know plenty who get abusive comments about their clothing choices etc, not from men, no but from anti sex feminists and some pretty nasty stuff at that and the vindictiveness is something else, stuff like complaining to your employer, making false allegations to your landlord, keying cars, starting rumours about that person.....
No she believes strongly men are ALL guilty of "oppression of women", that ALL lapdancers are trafficked and unwittingly exploited (even those who are unionised), that anyone woman doing this work "normalises misogynistic abuse of other women" - what the Americans call "slut shaming" and thats a direct quote.
I do support womens rights, I just don't support anti sex feminists (radical and otherwise) trying to control the conversation and be the sole voice of women and drown out anticensorship and sex positive feminists from the conversation, particularly when using the levers of the state to push their puritanical views onto everyone else. My wife takes exception to their claims that "all women find being out at night a frightening experience" - she commented "I don't and you can't live your life in fear, anyone tried anything they'd be loosing an eye and or testicles in response" (yes her parents taught her well, her sister is just as assertive and has "corrected" physically a few guys who tried to get "touchy feely" without consent....they didn't try again....I'm told she has a mean right hook)
In what way is it any different for women to tell other women what they can and can't do, can and can't wear, can and can't go vs past structures where men set rules to women?
Its substituting a patriarchy for an authoritarian matriarchy and its frankly pathetic tbh.
I support the rights of anyone to do any job they want, provided its of their own free will.
Id have less of an issue with a daughter working as a lapdancer than stacking shelves al for minimum wage and on an artificially low number of contracted hours with permanent mandatory overtime - people who haven't worked retail don't see the abuses that go on - contracted for say 10 hours a week, required to do 25-30 hours overtime a week every week, go on holiday, only get paid for 10 hours, union utterly in the pockets of management and as soon as you take any time off sick your card is marked, whether you were injured at work or not, rampant health and safety violations, if you refuse your suddenly "managed out of the business" usually via shifts being constantly swapped at short notice and being hauled over the coals and written up for ANY mistake, no matter how minor.
Don't see many folk saying their dream job is stacking shelves or sitting on a checkout the rest of their life but plenty end up stuck there with no rights...
59 per cent of children have already started using platforms such as Facebook and Twitter before the age of 10 – despite the minimum age requirement being 13
Which just goes to show how quickly the target group will get around the restrictions
(Note gmail minimum age is 13, despite most secondary schools [starting age 12], assuming that your child can be contacted via email )
The entire problem is that so far there has been no sane way of validating age/identity online. You can scream that it is the fault of the parents but equally the providers have ignored this from day one because it is too inconvenient and will hurt the bottom line. Proper age verification also puts the responsibility squarely with the provider of the server and when they get caught because people have lied or used false documents they stand to be liable. All too often now parents do not give a toss about what the kids are doing online as it keeps them quiet and out of the way. This then perpetuates as the next generation comes through, just at ever-younger ages.
Before the Internet if you went into a shop to try and buy porn and were underage, generally you did not get it. The advent of the internet and the total absolution or responsibility by the likes of Facebook has created the mess we are in.
It is not about "think of the children" it is just common sense. Once someone has seen a video or images depicting violence, sex or abuse you cannot easily erase them. The impact of that is there for years to come.
You can easily lock down your internet. It is the fault of the parents. If the parents are oblivious, it's still their fault. You can always choose to only have internet on your phone and not provide one(smart phone) to your child. There are ways. It's just that many parents ca n't be bothered doing their responsibility that the government legislators feel they have to do something.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
