Gay Patriot Header Image

Welcoming the State into the Bedroom

Posted by V the K at 9:33 am - May 15, 2018.
Filed under: Big Government Follies

Britain is implementing a law that would force people to get a permit from the state before viewing pornography.

On the one hand, I really think the mainstreaming of porn has been terrible for society. We would better off in many, many ways if porn were still considered sleazy and taboo. For one thing, watching porn would be more of a thrill. I mean, the fact that every hausfrau thinks nothing of watching a video gangbang really takes the edge off.

On the other hand, (see, I’m so into this topic I’m using both hands), the idea of asking the Government for permission to watch pornography is wrong on just as many levels.

I’m not offering any solutions, just pointing out how effed up this whole situation is.

Share

30 Comments

  1. “Ihre Ausweis, Bitte.”

    Comment by Ted B. (Charging Rhino) — May 15, 2018 @ 9:41 am - May 15, 2018

  2. So now the government and pornography companies will be working together to monitor your credit card information. What could possibly go wrong?

    Comment by Ignatius — May 15, 2018 @ 9:58 am - May 15, 2018

  3. Whatever happened to “There’ll always be an England, and England will be free”?

    And who was dumb enough to actually pay for porn in 1998, let alone 2018?

    Comment by Matthew — May 15, 2018 @ 10:22 am - May 15, 2018

  4. That’s what you would do if you’d want to increase crimes of all sorts.

    Morons.

    Comment by Cyril J. — May 15, 2018 @ 10:26 am - May 15, 2018

  5. another law making another thing illegal passed by the people concerned with mass incarceration.

    Comment by salg — May 15, 2018 @ 10:30 am - May 15, 2018

  6. I bet this law was supported by the feminists in the UK who have come to realize that blokes would rather hang at the pub with mates, go to a mate’s place for a video game session and then return to their own homes for a good porn wank session than to navigate the hostile waters of dating women.

    Comment by TnnsNe1 — May 15, 2018 @ 10:36 am - May 15, 2018

  7. anybody see a pornography tax in England’s future?

    Comment by salg — May 15, 2018 @ 10:38 am - May 15, 2018

  8. So, it’s intolerable to let people watch porn without the state bureaucracy to have a say on it (before more stringent positions about it come forward), but it’s okay to have long bearded men marry several teenage girls and receive govt welfare checks to help grooming them as “spouses” — hmm, where else have I seen that sort of societal pattern?

    “Britain”? Funny, why do I think geography books may need an update?

    Comment by Cyril J. — May 15, 2018 @ 11:12 am - May 15, 2018

  9. What a peculiar thing to watch — suicidal nations.

    Or what?

    Comment by Cyril J. — May 15, 2018 @ 11:16 am - May 15, 2018

  10. Never go Full Britain. Or Sweden. Or Germany. Or…

    Comment by Cyril J. — May 15, 2018 @ 11:18 am - May 15, 2018

  11. @7 that goes without saying.

    Comment by Cyril J. — May 15, 2018 @ 11:25 am - May 15, 2018

  12. It still has oCd and it’s increasing. It just won’t take a hint and is very similar to a co-worker of mine who appears at my elbow chattering away about nothing of substance. Whatever it is in real life, it’s behavior here is moronic.

    GP has been known thought out comments, expanding on simple topics or discussing complicated situations. It’s What attracted me to the site in the first place. Different from cheap threads which are nothing more than ad hoc chat rooms.

    I can only assume that it is starved for conversation or is terribly lonely. I’m not sympathetic.

    Britain isn’t trying to add crimes and none of this has anything to do with child marriages.

    Sincerely, StheFU

    Comment by Hanover — May 15, 2018 @ 12:00 pm - May 15, 2018

  13. the idea of asking the Government for permission to watch pornography is wrong on just as many levels

    Obviously. What these cretins will never understand is you don’t correct people behaviors in society just by making laws either way, prohibitive or affirmative. If that was this easy, we would have found out 2,500+ years ago (if only for the west), when the Greeks started toying with the idea of translating “popular opinions” into laws.

    The law ought to be negative only when one forces their flaws or infringe on others’ right.

    If some find porn an undesirable form of procrastination for the long term effects it has on individuals and society at large, sure, there is a strong case to be made about that — just like those who let alcohol or other drugs destroy them.

    At best, one can only hope to get people correct themselves by leaving them alone with their vices, but also let them be fully responsible for the price they will have to pay later for their self destructive or counterproductive behaviors.

    Anything else is crying for strings after strings of unintended consequences.

    But of course, I’m no dupe. They couldn’t care less whether porn is bad, very bad, or catastrophic for people. All they want is power. More power. Accompanied with more looting.

    That’s what social engineers do for a living. That’s all.

    Comment by Cyril J. — May 15, 2018 @ 1:16 pm - May 15, 2018

  14. And one last thing. The elephant in the room, of course, being that today’s dereliction into porn is nothing more (and nothing less) than symptomatic of much deeper societal regression.

    But our genius new wave of public-safety prudes (read: self serving hypocrites) will never admit that.

    Ah. Low resolution lenses are so much more convenient to look at our PC condition these days, in good old Europe — never mind what 5 centuries of humanism and enlightenment has already put on bookshelves to discuss these issues.

    Comment by Cyril J. — May 15, 2018 @ 1:41 pm - May 15, 2018

  15. Je conçois qu’il faille éviter les plaisirs qui entraînent de grandes douleurs et convoiter les douleurs qui débouchent sur de grands plaisirs.

    I conceive that pleasures are to be avoided if greater pains be the consequence, and pains to be coveted that will result in greater pleasures.

    Michel Eyquem de Montaigne (1533-1592), “Essays”

    Comment by Cyril J — May 15, 2018 @ 2:04 pm - May 15, 2018

  16. @15

    Presumably, Montaigne, an humanist, was thinking of individuals to take on that sort of higher order human task, by and for themselves.

    I seriously doubt he was counting on faceless bureaucrats to give the plebe the proper direction. Or I totally misread him.

    Comment by Cyril J. — May 15, 2018 @ 2:17 pm - May 15, 2018

  17. Back on topic — and I used to think the British were economically smarter than the rest of the E.U., quote:

    “The 16-digit passes would be available for £10 from newsagents and corner shops, and could also potentially be used to buy other age-restricted products such as alcohol, tobacco and knives, according to a report in the Telegraph on Sunday. To purchase a pass, buyers would have to present a passport or driving license to prove they are over 18.”

    Genius.

    What a nice way to boost the demand for forged documents.

    Porn.

    How didn’t we think of that before?

    Comment by Cyril J. — May 15, 2018 @ 3:06 pm - May 15, 2018

  18. Level 2018 Genius.

    Comment by Cyril J. — May 15, 2018 @ 3:07 pm - May 15, 2018

  19. A brilliant scheme until some geniuses figure out they can write down card numbers and pass them around. And the news agents won’t ever sell to a straw buyer. Even the dullest schoolboy will figure this out.

    Rob, burgle, steal, pimp underage girls, mow down the occasional kafir on the pavement and no big deal. But stream porn on the internet without a license? Whoa, mate.

    It’s been a while since I read 1984 but didn’t the Party have some sort of operation that produced porn for the proles?

    Comment by KCRob — May 15, 2018 @ 7:19 pm - May 15, 2018

  20. British news agent:

    https://brentwhite.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/dana-carvey-snl.png

    Comment by KCRob — May 15, 2018 @ 7:22 pm - May 15, 2018

  21. Porn has been detrimental to society and I know that I have and sometimes still do struggle with porn. However, I do not like the idea of government meddling in this.

    Comment by James — May 15, 2018 @ 9:05 pm - May 15, 2018

  22. Several things:

    @19: Yes, KCRob, you are correct, Big Brother did most certainly provide porn and whores to the proles.

    I am surprised that no one has thought this through: If you need to have to have a code for porn, that means no more free Pornhub or Redtube or XNXX or whatever. Everyone will have to pay, and no one will want to, and those sights will go out of business. Or, everyone will pay, those companies will make more money, which means that the government will be able to tax them more, and therefore have more revenue to play with and give to others.

    Also, this card is not just going to have 16 digits, although that might be just the start. Soon, everyone will complain about having to type the number in every time, so what will they do? They will add a bar code. Then, you can scan the card not just for your porn, but for anything you want to buy…so, once again, the government is tracking you and what you buy…keeping tabs in a very Big Brother fashion.

    Hanover….this type of law has many implications in regard to bureaucracy, government involvement in our private lives, and being able to keep tabs on regular citizens…I’d say it is a good topic of discussion because it requires thought in all of these areas.

    Comment by Tadford2 — May 15, 2018 @ 9:41 pm - May 15, 2018

  23. Once you legally can require a permit to watch porn, you can require ever-more expensive and onerous permits on blogs and news-sites.

    The technology is the same, it’s just the filtering…

    Comment by Ted B. (Charging Rhino) — May 16, 2018 @ 12:57 pm - May 16, 2018

  24. Let the games begin.

    Now the prosecuting Brits have the never-ending circus of arguing in court, before a jury, about whether the watcher was viewing porn or art or research. And the best part is the precise definition of porn and whether it applies in the cited case or not.

    And then each member of the jury will have to be given explicit instructions about what differentiates soft porn from hard porn and blah, blah, blah.

    Comment by Heliotrope — May 17, 2018 @ 2:16 am - May 17, 2018

  25. @24 Indeed.

    The “rule of law” has such a way to get its priorities straight in some places, you wonder why people keep showing up at work and pay their bills.

    Comment by Cyril J. — May 17, 2018 @ 8:58 am - May 17, 2018

  26. I really think the mainstreaming of porn has been terrible for society. We would better off in many, many ways if porn were still considered sleazy and taboo.

    Perhaps I’ve been reading too much of the Reason blog this morning, but I have to take a contrarian view. The fact that porn can now be viewed in the privacy and convenience of one’s own domicile without having to procure it outside of that domicile is a good thing. It largely eliminates the debates about what stores should be allowed to carry what and where and how they should make them available for sale (thus relieving business of one regulatory burden), and it reduces (and hopefully eventually eliminates) the endless zoning debates about where certain types of establishments should be located (and whether they can exist in a geographic area at all).

    The downside to the universal availability is of course the propensity for it to be available to those not of the age of legal majority. However, in many respects, this is a parenting issue and demonstrates the need for today’s parents to become actively involved in their children’s lives—both on and offline.

    Comment by RSG — May 17, 2018 @ 12:02 pm - May 17, 2018

  27. @26

    However, in many respects, this is a parenting issue

    “Well, duh” / slash / “Amen”.

    Now, that coming from the same sort of people who couldn’t care less about parental responsibility (except in the peculiar conception of sexualizing kids as young as possible towards the latest trendy whims of ideologues who couldn’t tell their next 24 hours truth from an overused Turkish bathroom) …

    … well, then, there ya go — Big Bro Government to the rescue!

    It’s millions upon millions of spankings that have been missed 40 years ago, if you ask me.

    Comment by Cyril J. — May 17, 2018 @ 1:15 pm - May 17, 2018

  28. I agree that it is a step toward taxing watching porn (controlling it, making money off of it, and potentially using it for black mail is a Leftist standard).

    If they really want to get rid of porn it should be forced to be PC porn. Where porn can only be made with ugly untalented people and feminist women who don’t shave (at all and inch long leg hair is required) and who instead of yelling encouragement and having sex with the men in the porn film just stand there and belittle them.

    Also you have to pay extra if you want the people to wear as much clothes as possible with a bag over their head. The gay porn would also be forced to be as PC as possible. /s

    Then the govt could force TV channels to put PC porn on tv at random times unless people pay not to see it. Imagine watching the big soccer game on tv and the winning goal is about to by played then interrupted by an eye bleach PC porn moment. That would be the end of it.

    Comment by Sandra — May 18, 2018 @ 1:15 am - May 18, 2018

  29. This PC porn comment I made above reminds me of an acquaintance from college. He decided to take an elective that was a pornography class. Essentially the class consisted of watching one or more porn films each class and then discussing it. I can recall when we were all at lunch that he was ecstatic and could not wait for class to start.

    After his first class he came to dinner and was really subdued. We were asking him what happened as he was all “OMG, I can’t believe I am getting an elective credit in humanities for watching Porn”. It turns out that for the whole semester only one class would be what he would consider porn and that was probably going to be from the 70s.

    His first class porn film he said started off with an older couple in their late 80s going for a picnic which turned out to be a 80s plus nudist picnic with friends and then an orgy of all sorts including some type of pump to help the guys be functional. He was then trying to figure out ways to drop the class which we all thought was funny.

    Comment by Sandra — May 18, 2018 @ 1:33 am - May 18, 2018

  30. @28 indeed, that’d be quite a repellent.

    Only thing is you’d then have to provision for the treatment of the subsequent PTSDs…

    Comment by Cyril J. — May 18, 2018 @ 9:36 am - May 18, 2018

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.