Sport Channel - Furry Rules

(10-04-2010 17:30 )lucent-x Wrote:  

(10-04-2010 15:46 )mdevil316 Wrote:  

(10-04-2010 11:23 )lucent-x Wrote:  

(10-04-2010 01:18 )H-H Wrote:  

Quote:...What Ofcom doesn't like is labia...

Curious that really, they don't seem to have the same problem with the male genitals. If you watch things like the already mentioned Eurotrash or either of the Sex(..) shows on Virgin1 for example, you'll never see a penis blurred out... perhaps Ofcom are a just bunch of latent homosexuals? In fact those programmes can show more than the Babe channels and at an earlier time, you may occasionally see an unblurred 'groove' but any sight of lips is still a no no.

thats something to do with it being ok to show cock aslong as it isnt erect or semi erect.

Yes, but why do they deem the sight of a non-aroused cock acceptable but not labia(?). In fact that just adds to the mystery as to why lips cannot be shown, aside from a detailed closeup (or small puddle) you can't really confirm any sign of arousal from the labia - but then maybe that's why they don't allow it to be shown, "you can't tell if the woman is aroused or not, so best not to show it at all just in case" - Ofcom have obviously not yet developed the 'sliding pink scale of arousal'.

It all comes back to arousal though, nudity = arousal = sex, and sex is wrong wrong wrong. I can see programmes that are designed to make me laugh, make me cry, educate me, entertain me, scare me; so why not also arouse me(?). Europe has far more sexualised content on tv than the UK, but then I guess our far lower teenage pregnancy rate shows how Ofcom are justifed in their censoring, oh no, hang on...

my thoughts exactly, how can you tell a pussy is aroused unless you can see its wet, if its that thats the problem why not allow nudity without touching because lets face it, half the girls dont get aroused by the calls.

and about the teenage pregnancy, maybe if teenage boys could see fully naked girls on the 900's they'd be less likely to have sex as they'd have free wank material lol

(10-04-2010 15:46 )mdevil316 Wrote:  

(10-04-2010 11:23 )lucent-x Wrote:  

(10-04-2010 01:18 )H-H Wrote:  

Quote:...What Ofcom doesn't like is labia...

Curious that really, they don't seem to have the same problem with the male genitals. If you watch things like the already mentioned Eurotrash or either of the Sex(..) shows on Virgin1 for example, you'll never see a penis blurred out... perhaps Ofcom are a just bunch of latent homosexuals? In fact those programmes can show more than the Babe channels and at an earlier time, you may occasionally see an unblurred 'groove' but any sight of lips is still a no no.

thats something to do with it being ok to show cock aslong as it isnt erect or semi erect.

Whilst there will always be comparisions on content between the babe channels and general entertainment/film channels the rules governing them are miles apart. Babe channels are classified as 'advertising' and therefore much more restricted on content.
This was Selena in all her glory



Hair or no hair this is satisfactory as 'H-H' stated as long as genitalia (labia and clitoris) is not on show nor displayed for sexual arousal.
People will be sexually aroused by images of hirsute ((adjective) hairy,shaggy, bristly) women the same as those with a foot fetish.
Don't get me started on the rules because until OFCOM are challenged in front of an independant authority we will continue to see various degrees of nudity and ridiculous decisions by the regulator.

The vid to the photo above will be posted in Selena's own thread.

Quote:my thoughts exactly, how can you tell a pussy is aroused unless you can see its wet, if its that thats the problem why not allow nudity without touching because lets face it, half the girls dont get aroused by the calls.

That's exactly how the Babe channels should be, i've never been one for porn really, I just like naked chicks. It would be nice for the threat of fine and/or licence revocation to be lifted from the channels, of course it then all depends on how much they want to show us - we shouldn't forget that these channels are selling phone-sex, and given the visually-turned-on creatures men are i'm sure they wouldn't want to broadcast too much visually arousing material or else the calling revenues may drop.

It's been the age of the internet for years now, within seconds you can find any type of porn like, naked ladies on the tv at 1am in the morning is nothing.

Sex education was shit when I was at school, and it's probably still shit now. It's the outdated British societal attitude to sex that's the problem. Until several older generations die out we're still going to have the pro-censoring, 'oh i'm offended', miserable bastards ruining modern Britain for us.

(10-04-2010 18:24 )lucent-x Wrote:  

Quote:my thoughts exactly, how can you tell a pussy is aroused unless you can see its wet, if its that thats the problem why not allow nudity without touching because lets face it, half the girls dont get aroused by the calls.

That's exactly how the Babe channels should be, i've never been one for porn really, I just like naked chicks. It would be nice for the threat of fine and/or licence revocation to be lifted from the channels, of course it then all depends on how much they want to show us - we shouldn't forget that these channels are selling phone-sex, and given the visually-turned-on creatures men are i'm sure they wouldn't want to broadcast too much visually arousing material or else the calling revenues may drop.

It's been the age of the internet for years now, within seconds you can find any type of porn like, naked ladies on the tv at 1am in the morning is nothing.

Sex education was shit when I was at school, and it's probably still shit now. It's the outdated British societal attitude to sex that's the problem. Until several older generations die out we're still going to have the pro-censoring, 'oh i'm offended', miserable bastards ruining modern Britain for us.

i do agree with you and think that even if the rules were lifted and the girls could do anything they like, a lot of them wouldnt want to as is proved by their websites and as you say the channels wouldnt allow too much as people would just watch and not call. perhaps allowing the girls to get naked if requested by the caller and then putting the pants on when not on call would be a happy medium for the channel op's themselves

Quite right, the strength of the babechannels website varies from night to night, depending on what the individual girl is comfortable with. The old strip pubs acts used to vary not only with the girl, but also her mood and how friendly the audience were. The Turkish channel Live24 used to vary from night to night when it was on.

It would be nice if a presenter had the option to play with herself if she felt randy.

(10-04-2010 19:10 )mdevil316 Wrote:  i do agree with you and think that even if the rules were lifted and the girls could do anything they like, a lot of them wouldnt want to as is proved by their websites and as you say the channels wouldnt allow too much as people would just watch and not call. perhaps allowing the girls to get naked if requested by the caller and then putting the pants on when not on call would be a happy medium for the channel op's themselves

As is demonstrated on Sex Station and the frequency with which the knickers go back on after the call has finished, which is fine... we all like to unwrap our presents don't we

(10-04-2010 19:10 )mdevil316 Wrote:  

(10-04-2010 18:24 )lucent-x Wrote:  

Quote:my thoughts exactly, how can you tell a pussy is aroused unless you can see its wet, if its that thats the problem why not allow nudity without touching because lets face it, half the girls dont get aroused by the calls.

That's exactly how the Babe channels should be, i've never been one for porn really, I just like naked chicks. It would be nice for the threat of fine and/or licence revocation to be lifted from the channels, of course it then all depends on how much they want to show us - we shouldn't forget that these channels are selling phone-sex, and given the visually-turned-on creatures men are i'm sure they wouldn't want to broadcast too much visually arousing material or else the calling revenues may drop.

It's been the age of the internet for years now, within seconds you can find any type of porn like, naked ladies on the tv at 1am in the morning is nothing.

Sex education was shit when I was at school, and it's probably still shit now. It's the outdated British societal attitude to sex that's the problem. Until several older generations die out we're still going to have the pro-censoring, 'oh i'm offended', miserable bastards ruining modern Britain for us.

i do agree with you and think that even if the rules were lifted and the girls could do anything they like, a lot of them wouldnt want to as is proved by their websites and as you say the channels wouldnt allow too much as people would just watch and not call. perhaps allowing the girls to get naked if requested by the caller and then putting the pants on when not on call would be a happy medium for the channel op's themselves

That's why the channels need advertising income, not caller income. But they won't get big budget advertisers unless they are JICTAR registered, unless Sky has a better way of measuring audience numbers.

It now appears that this year in particlar there appears to be more freedom on what you can and cannot show on the babe channels with a number of them now showing full nudity without it being explicit, maybe this is because they all know that ofcom is on its way out anyway and the power now has been given back to the model as some as you will gave noticed go all the way while others choose only to go topless. I must admit the babe channels have'nt been this interesting since 2006.

Nudity fine, hairy growlers ghastly. Might appeal to some fetishists and older men by the smooth finish is the option for most women I know.

Hi. First time poster and I hope you don't mind a bit of a play on words.

What I'm interested in is the rules regarding pubic hair shots. This morning (Friday the 18th) one of the channels had a model showing all her pubic hair.

No I don't mean to sound ageist, but the channel was one of the 40+ ones. The lady had blonde hair. (Collars and cuffs not matching!!!)

I'm wondering if this is within the rules, and the reason the other girls don't bother is they have nothing to show. Or was this model pushing the boundaries of acceptability?

Like many other posters, I don't see the problem with a live model being a bit more explicit. For example it's 3.30 in the morning. There are plenty of nudity for the sake of it shows on, sexcetera, naked office, EuroTrash and so on. But for some reason because this is a live model, it comes under a different catagory.

This thread could easily go in the rules and regulations section, so if someone wants to move it, that's fine.