Jump to content

Recommended Posts

That'll be Alan Moore in trouble then


Lost Girls


I saw a fascinating documentary on this a while back. It looks to be difficult material for sure but his work is usually brilliant


I'm not QUITE sure how some line-drawings can "be" under-age mind you - do you have to draw a little number next to teh drawing (age 15) instead of (age 16)

Similar discussion going on regarding the work of Bill Henson and part of the argument in the film Capturing the Friedmans. I think you could argue that it could be categorised into a) art b) tittilation and c) obscene. Trouble is HOW and WHO defines the differences. You're never going to stop the wrong kind of people getting hold of this material and I agree this kind of law treats us all as one rather than looking at the context.

As it happens a very strange man has just favourited one of my photos on flickr.

If it was a photo of a mates child, I might be inclined to block a stranger, but I have no titillating photos of children, and of course it might just be a broody girl or just someone who liked the photo (I uesd to have a lovely photo of mrs mockney's niece on there, ut her mum got very antsy about it, mostly in case her estranged father found it and used it as some sort of ammunition)


Aaaanyway, this photo is of a hoover. chap in question clearly derives some sort of fetishistic pleasure out of it. Like i say, if it was a photo of child I'd definitely block this chap, but it's a hoover, does that make my photo hoover porn?!


PHWOAR



A Catalogue of his obsession if you dare (SFW, just a bit weird).

The current legislation extends to "pseudo-photographs" which means "an image, whether made by computer graphics or otherwise howsoever, which appears to be a photograph", so already no requirement for an actual image of an actual child.


The new proposals will go further but the principle i.e. criminalising the possession of the material regardless of whether an actual child was ever involved, is already there. Putting the 'art' argument to one side it does create a worrying situation whereby an individual with a taste for child porn has no incentive to use fabricated images, where no real child has been involved, and so arguably demand will not lead to more actual abuse, rather than real images, where that is a likely conseqence.

Personally I defy any parent of young girls, or even other single women like me, to read Lolita without crying.


While I don't like the idea of censorship, my own observation is that when any undesirable activity that doesn't directly harm anyone is tolerated, it normalises the next level and starts to legitimise the exploitation needed to achieve it. Look at how the porn industry has mushroomed, increased in obscenity and moved into the mainstream in the last 10-15 years as a result of proliferation on the web. Soft porn hardly exists any more.


Why on earth would anyone think these images, even if hand- or computer-drawn, aren't exploiting and endangering children? The fact that they don't directly harm children doesn't make them OK.

I came across a story over the weekend that made me cringe. It involved a herion addict that has given birth to 3 children. The last child she gave birth to died a horrible and agonising death according to the coroner who also lambasted the mother for her reckless and thoughtless attitude. If this story is accurate,then I've never come across a more deserving case for enforced sterilisation. If a person chooses to put poison into their own body, fine. But don't put a baby through what must be a horrific death. Yet another story that makes me despair of the human race.

This has been a popular story over the other side of the Irish Sea

Jim Corr goes all David Icke


While we're on the subject of Ireland, I thought this a very good article in yesterday's Sunday Independent.

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/con-houlihan/words-are-the-bricks-of-thought-1393811.html

Here?s the last one if anyone?s interested.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/jun/04/economicgrowth.banking


If there is one thing that can be taken away from this series of articles it is this:


?It is time to remember that banks and other large corporations are creatures of law, and it is the public's right and duty to supervise them.

Furthermore, they, the financial New Olympians, have had their chance. The result of letting them off the leash has been a disaster.?

Woah! Political geeks alert!


Shadow Home Secretary David Davis MP is resigning and standing down as an MP, triggering a by-election in his seat.


Rumours suggest he may fight it himself in a bizarre attempt to challenge the Govt on 42 days detention. LibDem leader Nick Clegg offering not to put up a candidate.


Highly strange. In fact, monumentally strange.

Just heard his speech. Blimey.


Protesting at the increasing and insidious erosion of civil liberties - the most intrusive ID card scheme in the world, largest DNA database in the world, the erosion of the right to trial by jusry, one CCTV camera for every 14 people, and now a threat to habeus corpus being made for political (and not security) reasons.


He has confirmed he will re-contest his seat solely on this issue.

(but his party will be doing the same if they get in)


Amidst the blather Michael refers to was the speculation that David went off script/ further than agreed last night in stating that the Tories would repeal the 42 days if it was passed and they got into power.

Sean, the speculation was that Cameron was looking for Davis to portray a more open position to allow the Tories to do just as you describe if they needed to - but that Davis overstepped the mark by outright saying they would repeal it.


In other words, Davis wanted to up the ante in opposition to the proposed law - against wishes of Cameron/ advisors.


I couldn't really care if this is about one man's principle's, a hissy fit or power politics. It seems sure to boost this issue up the news schedules and give it a proper airing.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • It worked. Corbyn did similar although not to the same degree. Momentum had a purge too when Corbyn got in. All his political life he opposed the EU but when it came to the crunch he publicly backed them during the referendum. I believe that was to appease the middle classes that he was appealing to. He messed up big time when wooing the middle classes at Glastonbury whilst ignoring his core working class voters up north. They also happened to be leave voters. He got starstruck and forgot about his politics. Corbynmania was thing, a movement but it was also the making of his downfall. For the many and not the few came back and slapped him right in the face. 
    • Nothing to do with the tories overspending whatsoever eh! Blame the last 10/11 years of blatant mismanagement, incompetence and willful deceit on the poor bastards that were left with the fall out of a complete car crash tory government.   One PM after another falling on their sword. Open corruption and piss taking throughout covid and a legacy of huge debt and destruction yet in your view it will be labour's 4 years in power that bankrupts us in 2029.  Another one that must think people are blind and stupid.  Rejoice rejoice. It's a pity he and his fellow clowns were completely annihilated at the ballot box. I mean they were doing so well after all 🙃🙃
    • Where did I say he did a good job? Yup and Corbyn was very close to Len McCluskey and funded by Unite wasn't he...they're all as bad as each other... Labour have to purge their party of the far-left - they're a disaster. Allan Johnson summed it up so well on election night in 2019....  
    • Thank you for the detailed advise @trinidad It is definitely damage we are concerned about. I don’t think Evri would agree to pay the bill to fix our gate or letter box if they were to be damaged as a result of their delivery drivers helper. Our doorbell can be heard from outside when rung so we don’t quite believe the aggressive simultaneous door/letter box banging is necessary. It can be quite a shock it is done very aggressively.  I’ll definitely action the steps you’ve kindly provided along with a phone call tomorrow. I do sympathise with the role drivers have and how busy they are, which is why we tried communicating directly with her but sadly we haven’t succeeded 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...