Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

EU To Vote On Proposal That Could Ban All Online Pornography

timothy posted about a year and a half ago | from the easy-enough dept.

Censorship 853

An anonymous reader writes "The European Union is voting on a proposal next week that could lead to a blanket ban on porn in member states, and it seems the measure may well be approved. The proposal, called 'Eliminating gender stereotypes in the EU,' mentions issues such as women carrying a 'disproportionate share of the burden' when raising a family, violence against women as 'an infringement of human rights,' and gender stereotypes that develop early in life. From the proposal: "Calls on the EU and its Member States to take concrete action on its resolution of 16 September 1997 on discrimination against women in advertising, which called for a ban on all forms of pornography in the media and on the advertising of sex tourism." Update: 03/07 19:05 GMT by T : Pirate MEP Christian Engström writes on his blog that citizens writing to the European Parliament about the proposal are not necessarily being heard: "Before noon, some 350 emails [on this topic] had arrived in my office. But around noon, these mails suddenly stopped arriving. When we started investigating why this happened so suddenly, we soon found out: The IT department of the European Parliament is blocking the delivery of the emails on this issue, after some members of the parliament complained about getting emails from citizens."

cancel ×

853 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Cookie Law mk2? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106181)

this will end well..

Re:Cookie Law mk2? (4, Funny)

sycodon (149926) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106673)

You can have my pr0n when you pry it from my dead, hair covered hand.

The Dworkin Agenda! (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106203)

Up next: EU proposes new law that says all sex is rape.

Re:The Dworkin Agenda! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106309)

That's just copying US law.

Re:The Dworkin Agenda! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106341)

Silly AC, PIV is already rape according to the gender equality experts(read:feminists). Good thing in 20 years all males will be castrated at birth, and cultural marxism(a.k.a. white genocide) will be the norm. Thank goodness for progressive and tolerant states such as Sweden for setting an example us heathens will one day follow.

if it's all about women's protection... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106245)

then gay male porn is all good, yeah?

Re:if it's all about women's protection... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106427)

No, they discriminate against women by excluding girls...

Re:if it's all about women's protection... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106429)

Not really, no.

I much prefer seeing some poor unsuspecting girl go for a 'casting' interview and end up with a load inside her inside her insides.

Or something, I don't know, I don't watch the pornos.

Re:if it's all about women's protection... (5, Funny)

TheRaven64 (641858) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106785)

a load inside her inside her insides

Recursion porn?

Re:if it's all about women's protection... (5, Insightful)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106817)

The porn industry thrives on variety and niche. People usually end up seeing roughly the type of pornography they seek. If they like seeing women bound, subjegated and abused, that is what they get. If they like romance and cuddling, they get that too. If they want story, they can have it - and if they don't, they won't. Hah, with the right search terms I could ask the internet to bring me pictures involving My Little Pony, dubstep, machines of some type and a sandwich - and there's a good chance that exists, somewhere.

Re:if it's all about women's protection... (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106521)

Sure.
Animal Planet for instance is years old and nobody complains.
As long as it's a guy and a woman, it will be illegal.

I wonder how they'll enforce it. And perhaps those people are receiving money from RIAA, because I think ,TPB and the like, will be the first to be targeted, not the websites that actually sell these movies online ...

If they want to see female degradation, then going to the nearest muslim suburb would be enough. Oh, wait, that's called religious freedom.

Is it just me? or if you become a biased, loud mouthed, bigoted, mysoginistic, fanatic, gun totting right-wing nutcase, you'd have more rights than the average Joe?

Re:if it's all about women's protection... (1)

makomk (752139) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106523)

Not a chance. They'll just come up with some argument that gay male porn is also about demeaning and degrading women, if they haven't already.

Re:if it's all about women's protection... (4, Funny)

interkin3tic (1469267) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106829)

Anyone know of any of those "pray away the gay" camps that will allow me to take the treatment in reverse order?

All this technology (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106257)

And yet the EU is still committed to moving backwards as a society. Why do governments seem to be oblivious to the concept of using scientific findings to make decisions?

Re:All this technology (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106399)

Because power isn't about taking enlightened logical decisions for the greater good.

Re:All this technology (5, Insightful)

amiga3D (567632) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106705)

You know they can't even get rid of the child porn out there and somehow they think they'll succeed with porn in general? Luck with that.

What word is translated "Pornography"? (2)

alphaminus (1809974) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106271)

I doubt that it is erotic imagery or copy that they are banning.

Re:What word is translated "Pornography"? (5, Interesting)

alphaminus (1809974) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106345)

I understand that it is a legal document that exists in several languages including english, i guess I'm just wondering if the EU definition of the term is any less nebulous that the US's "I know it when i see it."

Re:What word is translated "Pornography"? (5, Insightful)

operagost (62405) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106491)

Does it matter? It's censorship. Why do we think any intrusion on people's private lives is OK?

Re:What word is translated "Pornography"? (0)

BasilBrush (643681) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106661)

Most people accept that children should't see pornography. Square that circle with the internet allowing unrestricted access to porn. Without saying "it's the parents responsibility". Most parents don't have the ability to restrict what their children see on the internet. A net nanny on the home computer isn't enough.

There's no good answers here. And thinking censorship is never justified is just as bad an answer as the rest.

Re:What word is translated "Pornography"? (3, Informative)

phantomfive (622387) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106779)

It's not about 'think of the children.' Read the article. It's about protecting women's rights. It comes from the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality. Some feminist groups oppose porn, for various reasons. The Committee on Women's Rights and Gender Equality is one of those.

Among other things, if you read the article, they feel pornography encourages the culture that allows women to make less money than men.

Re:What word is translated "Pornography"? (4, Insightful)

HornWumpus (783565) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106797)

The internet wasn't built for children.

It is the parents problem, period.

The net is an adult destination, simple as that. Don't let your kids lose here unsupervised. It's not that hard, most just don't want to know.

I would no more leave a kid on an unfiltered net connection then I would leave him at a titty bar for babysitting.

Re:What word is translated "Pornography"? (5, Insightful)

mcgrew (92797) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106613)

"Porn: anything the powerful doesn't want plebes to have." And here I thought Europe was civilized and we Americans were the dummies. How could they ever enforce this, have a Chinese style firewall around Europe? Do they think all the porn comes from Europe?

Idiots. Just like us, passing totally unenforceable laws.

i think the 'porn' thing (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106277)

has to do with topless women peddling orange juice in adverts on television.. not "porn" in general.

Re:i think the 'porn' thing (5, Insightful)

Joce640k (829181) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106431)

Yep, it says "in the media".

They may have a point. It's hard to turn on the TV in Spain after 11pm without seeing women in a state of undress or being "sexualized" in some way (even if it's only getting some bimbo to express her views on society so they can mock her).

I'm all for pornography/eroticism, but there's no need for that...

Re:i think the 'porn' thing (4, Insightful)

operagost (62405) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106531)

Media is everything! TV, DVD, Blu-Ray, Internet, paper!

I'm all for pornography/eroticism, but there's no need for that...

Says who? Oh, you. And them. I'm sure that your personal opinion is not censorship.

Re:i think the 'porn' thing (1)

Joce640k (829181) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106717)

I can tell you're not a smart, good looking woman who's looking for a job.

Re:i think the 'porn' thing (2)

HornWumpus (783565) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106537)

Why don't our international channels put Spanish TV after 11pm on American cable? Sounds good.

Re:i think the 'porn' thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106711)

Why don't our international channels put Spanish TV after 11pm on American cable? Sounds good.

It may sound good to you, but believe me, it is not.

Re:i think the 'porn' thing (2)

HornWumpus (783565) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106815)

Watch it with the volume off.

Re:i think the 'porn' thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106699)

I'm all for pornography/eroticism, but there's no need for that...

It is done for some reason (likely profit). So apparently there IS a need to do this or who would waste their time?

As a prudish American I'm not privy to what's on over the air TV in Spain after 11 PM, but I can tell you that there is some pretty bad stuff on American Cable TV at that hour (any hour for that matter). I don't think this requires a law to control because I just turn it off or change channels if I'm offended.

Agenda 21 (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106289)

They really want to remove the "family" unit from society.

What of violence against men? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106297)

Why is it that so few leaders are willing to ignore violence against men, one form of which is the forced circumcision and genital mutilation of boys which remains legal in many countries that protect girls from similar. Can't violence just be opposed in all it's forms without regard to sex?

Re:What of violence against men? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106515)

Great question.

Re:What of violence against men? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106551)

Stop raping me with your comment!

Re:What of violence against men? (5, Insightful)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106651)

Because... it's a cultural thing. It doesn't have to make sense! It's only mutilation if the other tribe does it. If we do the same, it's a perfectly respectable practice.

Re:What of violence against men? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106693)

Can't violence just be opposed in all it's forms without regard to sex?

I'm sure one form of violence that we can all agree to support is violence against people who misuse apostrophes. No matter how much violence and degradation they receive, it's both justified and not nearly enough.

Re:What of violence against men? (1)

HornWumpus (783565) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106837)

Im all for pendent violence. Nothings too bad for them.

Re:What of violence against men? (2, Insightful)

BasilBrush (643681) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106731)

Indeed, I've always thought the US fad of circumcision is barbaric. I can't understand it at all. The Jews have a religious tradition, but what's the excuse for the rest of the parents? "It's traditional in the USA so it's OK?"

Re:What of violence against men? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106771)

Politicians and press are still afraid to offend jews and muslims, so they kowtow to their brutish blood rituals. But the general populace of Europe is increasingly antipathetic to them [pewglobal.org] , so there's still hope for a future in which we stop listening to those nutjobs and have the damn thing banned.

Good luck with that... (5, Funny)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106299)

Next on the lawmakers' agenda: requiring all politicians to be honest, and banning all people from eating junk food.

Re:Good luck with that... (4, Interesting)

sycodon (149926) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106655)

Back in 1993, the European governments got together and said, "we don't have enough politicians making up useless, feel good, and inane laws. So let's create a ginormous bureaucracy that can do it for us." And then they created the European Union.

America, get out of the EU. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106305)

Stop with your attack on sexuality as well. Your silly law will get laughed out eventually, even if it does pass.
People are also going to touch themselves even harder, just to spite you.
I'm buying 5 sex dolls as we speak!

Thank you, The Not-Entirely-Insane-But-Still-More-Sane World.

Re:America, get out of the EU. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106359)

What makes you think this is America's doing? Sure, they're pretty prudish as a culture but as this ban wouldn't affect business with the EU in any way (and in fact, would harm the porn industry, which is fairly lucrative) I'm not seeing how this is an American interest.

Re:America, get out of the EU. (1)

firex726 (1188453) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106575)

YEa, lot's of America's porn comes from overseas.

Plus we've already given up on the rest of the world as some heathen Atheist haven, why would we care if they make porn for us to jack off to after church?

What is this? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106317)

What is this, British tabloid journalism?

Re:What is this? (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106713)

No.

If you really want to see British tabloid journalism, try dailymail.co.uk.

Male porn? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106319)

What about Male porn and Animal porn?

Preventive measures needed! (3, Funny)

jmsp (1987118) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106329)

I'm quickly downloading the Internet before it becomes contraband here.

Re:Preventive measures needed! (1)

bobbied (2522392) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106459)

Your ISP is going to love that....

Expect a rise in sex crimes if this passes. (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106333)

Porn is a release, not an inspiration.

This is not true (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106393)

Banning sex trade advertisement does not equal banning porn.

Re:This is not true (1)

operagost (62405) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106553)

The resolution says "pornography in the media". Yup, it's banning porn.

Re:This is not true (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106741)

That depends how they define 'media.' It's a legal document, so common sense doesn't apply - you'd have to read it to work out how broad the ban is. It might be limited only to advertising, or it might include just about everything written, recorded or published.

First step is to agree on a definition (4, Insightful)

It doesn't come easy (695416) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106397)

I travel in Europe occasionally and some of the commercial billboards I have seen in airports would be considered pornography in the US...

Re:First step is to agree on a definition (2)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106505)

Just to be safe, ban anything that offends anybody. Unless the ban or banners are offensive - then it doesn't count.

Re:First step is to agree on a definition (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106823)

You mean, we have to be agnostic to everything. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RUmnkYF0fG8

Re:First step is to agree on a definition (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106539)

I consider some advertisements in the US borderline porno and have grown used to looking the other way. Don't know why we need a law...

Re:First step is to agree on a definition (1)

operagost (62405) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106597)

I thought that was because we were a bunch of prudish Puritans here.

Re:First step is to agree on a definition (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106825)

> I travel in Europe occasionally and some of the commercial billboards I have seen in airports would be considered pornography in the US...

I don't believe you. Please post examples.

Re:First step is to agree on a definition (2)

Quila (201335) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106869)

And here I considered Europe more enlightened with their attitudes towards this, and now they're sliding down to the US's level. The only difference is motive: instead of puritanical Christians it's liberal political correctness run amok.

This is why these days I don't think the political axis of liberal and conservative is as important as authoritarian and libertarian. A lot of liberals are getting quite authoritarian, and it's just as scary as when the conservatives do it.

Also banning impure thought, donuts. (5, Insightful)

gestalt_n_pepper (991155) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106405)

And speaking of women's rights, are they going to ban Berlesconi too? I mean, I'm in favor of banning him, but not for that reason.

Re:Also banning impure thought, donuts. (1)

Antipater (2053064) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106501)

Well, he did just get sentenced to a year in prison.

Re:Also banning impure thought, donuts. (2)

Jeremy Erwin (2054) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106861)

Don't worry. He'll appeal, and appeal, and finally, some judge will opine that the statute of limitations will have expired during the appeals processand he'll get released, and he'll be elected president, and will save Italy, until it's discovered that he's mixed up in anther crime. And the whole cycle will repeat.

Setting aside the porn thing for the moment... (4, Insightful)

neiras (723124) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106413)

I'm getting tired of "Violence against women" being portrayed as a special case worthy of special laws at the expense of everyone else.

Violence in general is the problem. All violence has victims. Violence typically occurs where society needs new rules and new norms. Right now there is lots of violence against against women, more in some cultures than others. It's ugly.

Still, when we start getting laws designed to combat violence against group X that end up doing violence to the rights and freedoms of people outsideof group X, we're doing it wrong.

By all means, let's make rules that discourage violence against everyone - childredn, the elderly, women, men, pets, gingers, neckbeards. Short of widespread deployment of G-23 Paxilon Hydrochlorate [wikia.com] , though, humans will keep bashing each other. There's a limit to prevention.

Re:Setting aside the porn thing for the moment... (3, Insightful)

Ardeaem (625311) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106617)

I'm getting tired of "Violence against women" being portrayed as a special case worthy of special laws at the expense of everyone else.

Violence in general is the problem.

Eh, yes, but it is not very productive to ignore that different kinds of violence have different causes and thus probably different solutions, and that some kinds of violence are more pervasive than others. I'm not defending the specific policy in question here, but your knee-jerk "all violence is bad response" is a sign that you might want to consider more nuanced ways of thinking about the world.

Re:Setting aside the porn thing for the moment... (5, Insightful)

operagost (62405) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106635)

Even if violence against women were the most important issue today, this resolution is lacking some sort of reference to actual SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE that pornography is the cause. For years, people have been blaming games, movies, and TV for everything with no actual reasoning behind it.

Re:Setting aside the porn thing for the moment... (5, Insightful)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106735)

And yet the countries where women are most unequal are also those which have heavy restrictions on pornography,

Re:Setting aside the porn thing for the moment... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106749)

You're a straight white guy, aren't you?

Re:Setting aside the porn thing for the moment... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106845)

ad-hominem much?

Re:Setting aside the porn thing for the moment... (2, Funny)

schwep (173358) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106773)

I thought they didn't have violence since they have very strict gun control laws...

Saturday nights for Euro nerds looking bleak (3, Funny)

Grayhand (2610049) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106421)

Xena reruns only go so far.

Consolidation of power (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106437)

This is exactly why consolidation and centralization of power is so dangerous: it leverages the injustice that inevitably results from coercive authority. Whatever flavor of injustice is currently in fashion will be extended and compounded by orders of magnitude. Instead of the isolated cases of injustice that result from small independent states, what you get with consolidation of political power is a nuclear explosion of injustice.

Of course, for the elite few at the top of the pyramid, consolidation of power is the road to riches.

Re:Consolidation of power (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106755)

are you still talking about a large number of people huddled infront of their computers with one hand down their pants?

From the article (4, Insightful)

phantomfive (622387) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106481)

The propsal to ban pornography already passed in 1997, according to the first link in the summary. This one merely calls on the states of the EU to actually take concrete action towards that goal. Also, it's not clear that this proposal is binding at all, even if it passes; it seems more like a 'call to action', encouragement, than anything else. Someone who has deeper knowledge of the EU than I do can clarify. Here is the quote from the proposal:

17. Calls on the EU and its Member States to take concrete action on its resolution of 16 September 1997 on discrimination against women in advertising, which called for a ban on all forms of pornography in the media and on the advertising of sex tourism

I'm not sure anything at all will change even if this passes.

And this is why we came to America. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106483)

And this is why we came to America. We came to escape these totalitarian regimes and live in tolerance of others. Good luck socialists. I see how that is working out for you.

Falkvinge and Engstroem (5, Informative)

SgtChaireBourne (457691) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106519)

Rick Falkvinge of the Swedish Pirate Party has a good summary of the attempt to ban porn [falkvinge.net] as well as a call to action. Apparently getting e-mail through to the parliamentarians is not as straight forward as one might wish. Christian EngstrÃm, MEP, also of the Swedish Pirate Party has a good analysis of the attempted ban [wordpress.com] . Basically it's a grab at control and censorship under another guise.

Re:Falkvinge and Engstroem (1)

fredprado (2569351) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106577)

And if it doesn't work you can rest assured that the next one will be about child porn.

Ah shit! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106557)

I suppose they won't be happy until you can't tell the difference between men and women.

I guess I am too old to adjust to these new ideals. :(

I can't wait for the far-right revolution (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106583)

This is proof beyond a shadow of a doubt that feminism needs to be stamped out with extreme prejudice.

I can't wait for the Golden Dawn to seize power in Greece and then spread the far-right revolution far and wide, toppling the EU and eliminating feminism.

Other proposal (1)

Nightjed (1102995) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106585)

Dear European representatives, please vote for the Sun not to continue radiating heat after 25ÂC, I'm quite sure it will be at least 5 times easier to implement than banning porn, thank you

Not the church (1)

Tailhook (98486) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106589)

Hey Hatta [slashdot.org] , is this also not "real" Feminism?

Because "Eliminating gender stereotypes" sure sounds like the feminist newspeak I've been subjected to since birth.

Whatever. You signed up for this when you submitted to these euro-statists. Enjoy getting criminalized.

Impossible to enforce (5, Informative)

magic maverick (2615475) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106593)

Two words only are needed to show why any attempt to ban anything on the Internet is doomed to fail. Both words are proper nouns. The first is "Tor", an onion routing system that means it can be virtually impossible to connect an end user with a particular server. Moreover, there are "hidden" services that do not even show on the main web. The second is "Freenet", the distributed peer-to-peer encrypted network (with built in darknet for those who want or need it). A third word, "Bitcoin", allows a thriving marketplace, and when proper laundries are in place, an effectively anonymous marketplace.

The mere fact of countries like the USA, where pornography cannot be banned, means that any attempt to ban it in another freeish place will be quite difficult.

But that's technical stuff.

While I can understand the desire to eliminate gender stereotypes, and it is something I fully support, I don't see how banning pornography in the media can help. I also think that it's a wrong-headed move from a free speech point of view.

Pornography is not just men fucking women for the pleasure of other men. Human sexuality is so broad and varied, and porn is, as a consequence, broad and varied. Personally, I see porn as a positive thing in society, allowing people to experience their sexuality in the privacy of their own bedroom. A young teenage boy wondering whether it is really wrong, as his class mates, teachers, parents, and community say, for boys to like other boys, can find solace in the Internet. And jack-off to gay porn. And that's a good thing. Maybe a young teenage girl is wondering if her feelings towards some of her friends are normal. She can find lesbian, bisexual, and varied other porn on the Internet to help her confront her feelings. And that's a good thing. And the stories can be much broader than those as well.

I do object to a lot of porn out there. The degrading humiliating porn. The stuff where it looks like the female actor is actually not enjoying herself at all. But that does not mean the answer is to ban all porn.

Enforced With Kinect (4, Funny)

FrankDrebin (238464) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106609)

No need to monitor the internet, just monitor the users. Apparently Kinect can now detect a clenched fist.

RTFA (4, Informative)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106619)

The proposal is not calling for porn to be banned. It is saying that mainstream newspapers should not contain porn, like the Sun in the UK does. For those that don't know the Sun, Britain's most popular newspaper, has a picture of a topless women on page 3 of every edition.

Porn is also used extensively in marketing, even of children's products and during daytime TV viewing hours. Banning ads for sex tourism should be a no-brainier I would hope.

Internet porn will not be banned. That is absolutely not what this is about. It is merely trying to remove negative stereotypes from everyday media. The media has been given countless opportunities to clean up, to stop using stick figure models and heavy photoshopping, to stop using porn to sell things, but it has largely failed to do so. If anything it has become more mainstream now.

It isn't about being puritanical, it is about protecting people from well understood psychological harm.

Re:RTFA (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106679)

You seriously believe the left-wing manufactured lie that sexuality is "negative" and causes "psychological harm"? You make me sick to my stomach.

Anyone who considers sexuality a bad thing--anyone who denies the most essential part of nature--should be purged when the far-right revolution comes.

Re:RTFA (2)

supercrisp (936036) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106835)

Anyone who wants to blame "sex negativity" on the left wing needs to do some reading. Yes, some feminists are anti-porn, but that was one issue where conservative and liberal feminist women agreed. There's history there I too damn shiftless to cite. But, hey, I'm responding to AC here anyway. I'll also point out that, in general, it's your conservative types who are sex negative, with a burning itch to get their little bible-thumping paws up in our no-zone and an associated wide stance on censorship.

Re:RTFA (2)

Nightjed (1102995) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106863)

Last time i checked i could turn the TV off, in fact i barely even watch TV these days these days because watching though the net, playing a game or doing anything else is a much better use of my time

I'm as tired of these sort of commercials as the next guy but i would not ban them, i feel its a personal choice and not a place for government enforcement, it opens a dangerous door for them to start telling us what we can and cannot watch, listen or read in the name of psychological health

What's the algorithm? (1)

Un pobre guey (593801) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106621)

The EU should first hold a public contest with a large monetary reward to develop an algorithm that can reliably and objectively distinguish between porn and not-porn. Good luck, though.

So, what about gay porn ? (1)

mbone (558574) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106625)

How does gay porn discriminate against women? (Or, if it does, then how does straight porn discriminate against women?)

It seems to me that you can have it both ways (not that these idiots wouldn't try).

Re:So, what about gay porn ? (2)

TheSkepticalOptimist (898384) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106723)

This is the EU, obviously gay porn is acceptable.

Ban the Bible (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106633)

It doesn't only depict gender discrimination; it even glorifies it, presenting it as law, albeit an antiquated one. You can call it history, or art, or fiction, or material for cultural studies, but it's no less "discriminating" than pornography.

And if you think this is going to happen.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106647)

I want some of what you're smoking.

all in favour. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106721)

ending this blatent exploitation of men has to be a good this. the freeing up of productive time, bandwidth and money for more productive use would be a social and economic boon.

As usual (3, Interesting)

Vinegar Joe (998110) | about a year and a half ago | (#43106761)

"the dark night of fascism is always descending in the United States and yet lands only in Europe." - Tom Wolfe

Misandry is cool, misogyny drools (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106781)

Easier to fight against men's innate desires than to fight for the rights of woman who NEED the help.

Oh well. They'll probably wonder why prostitution and sexual abuse will rise after this, and try to pin it all on the men again.

CSI A-OK! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106807)

So I can turn on the TV at any time of day and see someone brutally murder someone on CSI, and there is nothing wrong with that, but some woman taking a picture of herself in a mirror and posting it to the internet is a criminal act? What. The. Fuck.

100,000 years of tribes around a campfire (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106841)

Children in our ancestors natural environment saw everything, the internet just makes it possible again after a brief x00 years of privacy.

Keep the reality in Virtual Reality (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43106877)

I have seen far too many problems lately from people ignoring the reality of things. The reality that the internet is what it is in part, because of p0rn. I don't like it. I don't want women disrespected. Private things should be private, not a picture for all to see. But the reality is, it isn't. And a law saying what you can put on your machine, and what I can put on mine, because we choose to connect to the internet, will not fly. It will work because it is not real. Better to put a a "clean" site where the actors are paid well and know what they are doing and are legal age, etc, and then shame everyone who goes anywhere else. Keep the reality of the internet part of the internet. Who do they think they are to even make laws effecting the net? Be real.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>