Rendered at 17:45:16 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Cloudflare Workers.
tavavex 1 days ago [-]
The title fails to capture the absurdity of the situation. It's not even just regular incest, it's people "pretending to be related". The UK is banning acting and pretend play between consenting adults, and putting anyone cursed with this unholy imagery of adults engaging in what they consented to in prison for up to two years.
The fact that a Western country is doing this and there's almost no attention given to it (comment threads are filled with "yeah I personally don't like it, let's ban it and ruin people's lives") is a sign of what's to come, both in the UK and elsewhere.
_345 1 days ago [-]
It would be really interesting to see if incest goes down after this using now as a baseline...
rasz 1 days ago [-]
"Step not a mom/sister" titles became popular some time ago.
DANmode 1 days ago [-]
…how are you measuring?
Also: why?
throw310822 1 days ago [-]
Especially that between stepson and stepmom, or between stepsiblings. /s
impossiblefork 1 days ago [-]
The strangulation thing very clearly is harmful, so I think that part is good, maybe the incest stuff is, maybe it isn't.
I hope the ban is well-considered, but a ban on strangulation and choking in pornography is a good idea. Allowing production or sale of media reinforcing something that dangerous would not have been super smart.
exceptione 1 days ago [-]
Let me introduce you to sports. (table tennis and curling should get a free pass though)
impossiblefork 22 hours ago [-]
I don't quite see the danger there.
Even soccer and other dangerous stuff isn't like choking people.
kelseyfrog 19 hours ago [-]
Steel-manning the choking in sports angle, I could see a case for UFC fights being blocked as they use various chokeholds techniques[1][2][3][4][5][6].
Yes, I think some of these competitive MMA things are illegal here in Sweden.
But when I think sports I think things like soccer, tennis, swimming, wrestling etc.
These things you bring up are very niche, and I don't understand their relevance to whether it's a good idea to use the law to make choking in pornography less visible.
tstrimple 13 hours ago [-]
I practiced BJJ for a couple years. I was much more comfortable with chokes than joint locks. There seems to be a lot of misconception around blood chokes which I attribute mostly to movies. You'll see someone grab another person in a rear naked choke and they are unconscious (or dead) for as long as is convenient for the story to continue. Blood chokes come on fast and they go away fast. I've choked two people unconscious in training accidentally. Both recovered in under five seconds and just seemed confused and didn't even realize they had been caught out.
Joints don't have that amount of forgiveness. If you over-apply a joint lock then the joint or bone or ligaments are damaged. Period. Literally no one has ever died in modern combat sports from a choke. No one. Zero. None. But there are plenty of deaths and traumatic injuries from other combat sport actions. The only way to accidentally kill someone with a choke is to hold it for multiple minutes while they are unconscious as was the case for Jordan Neely.
None of this comment has anything to do with choking in pornography.
1 days ago [-]
khelavastr 1 days ago [-]
But strangulation in cheap thrillers is fine. Such a dishonest law. You can look at the politicians who support this as failures of human beings, and implicate their families for not controlling them better.
baranul 1 days ago [-]
> Such a dishonest law
Exactly! For the sake of the children (by their logic), it follows to make play-acting of any such kind in movies and plays illegal too. Clearly such violations are happening all the time in other kinds of movies and plays.
There's a huge difference between actually doing such a thing and actually being related, versus pretending, which should be common sense.
throw310822 8 hours ago [-]
I am not entirely sure about this. For one, pornography is not exactly fiction- it's not interested in narrating something but rather in showing real acts (as much as possible). Also, it's the most exposure people have to something that they do in real life without much other social learning. So I don't find it incredible that people learn and reproduce what they saw in porn.
The incest stuff is ridiculous instead. That's just tacked on contextual information nobody cares much about.
Havoc 1 days ago [-]
And yet first cousin marriage is still both allowed and fairly common in some circles in the UK.
God help you if your pixels aren't the government approved kind though...
yawpitch 1 days ago [-]
Well now that’s an interesting workaround for keeping the more “personal” videos of the extended Mountbatten-Windsor clan into public view.
AbuAssar 1 days ago [-]
[dead]
NotGMan 1 days ago [-]
[flagged]
greggoB 1 days ago [-]
> they will ban females from the industry.
This just sounda oxymoronic. Overall, hard to know if this comment is intended as satire.
nickslaughter02 1 days ago [-]
[flagged]
Yacoby 1 days ago [-]
Given that the UK has banned this, but as per your numbers 6 percent of the country is Muslim, so it seems that there are other more major factors in this decision than the Islamic religion?
I'm not sure if you were insinuating that this was the cause of this current ban? Or have just posted something tangentially related with no data or logical chain of reasoning to support it?
nothercastle 1 days ago [-]
In a democratic system it Doesn’t take much to swing the needle on a divisive issue. 6% might be enough if they vote as a unified block
cindyllm 1 days ago [-]
[dead]
0dayz 1 days ago [-]
Right, I assume the same advocates will also ban cuckolding since the entire kink is unhealthy relationship?
And I'm also not surprised that stuff like "CBT" isn't included.
The fact that a Western country is doing this and there's almost no attention given to it (comment threads are filled with "yeah I personally don't like it, let's ban it and ruin people's lives") is a sign of what's to come, both in the UK and elsewhere.
Also: why?
I hope the ban is well-considered, but a ban on strangulation and choking in pornography is a good idea. Allowing production or sale of media reinforcing something that dangerous would not have been super smart.
Even soccer and other dangerous stuff isn't like choking people.
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guillotine_choke
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rear_naked_choke
3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arm_triangle_choke
4. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sode_guruma_jime
5. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gogoplata
6. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North%E2%80%93south_choke
But when I think sports I think things like soccer, tennis, swimming, wrestling etc.
These things you bring up are very niche, and I don't understand their relevance to whether it's a good idea to use the law to make choking in pornography less visible.
Joints don't have that amount of forgiveness. If you over-apply a joint lock then the joint or bone or ligaments are damaged. Period. Literally no one has ever died in modern combat sports from a choke. No one. Zero. None. But there are plenty of deaths and traumatic injuries from other combat sport actions. The only way to accidentally kill someone with a choke is to hold it for multiple minutes while they are unconscious as was the case for Jordan Neely.
None of this comment has anything to do with choking in pornography.
Exactly! For the sake of the children (by their logic), it follows to make play-acting of any such kind in movies and plays illegal too. Clearly such violations are happening all the time in other kinds of movies and plays.
There's a huge difference between actually doing such a thing and actually being related, versus pretending, which should be common sense.
The incest stuff is ridiculous instead. That's just tacked on contextual information nobody cares much about.
God help you if your pixels aren't the government approved kind though...
This just sounda oxymoronic. Overall, hard to know if this comment is intended as satire.
I'm not sure if you were insinuating that this was the cause of this current ban? Or have just posted something tangentially related with no data or logical chain of reasoning to support it?
And I'm also not surprised that stuff like "CBT" isn't included.