Do the Babeshows go far enough?

As far as Bang Babes current output is (on Sky), I personally think that it is at a decent limit for an un-encrypted FTA show.
But ultra conservative channels like "Cream" are no where near explicit enough.

I guess the inconsistency across the 900 channels is what has sparked all the recent debate.

At least it is finally filtering through to forum members that "Freeview rules" are not of Ofcom's making, it is a decision that is made by the two broadcasters who air Babe Shows on Freeview to operate at a certain level.

It would be nice to hear from someone at TVX as to why their Babe Shows are far less explicit than any other channel. I wont hold my breath for an answer though.

mikedafc, if they could get into trouble for doing something that isn't illegal for anyone to do then there is no balance.

I know this has got little to do with the poll but, last night Look North did a little spot on 5 lads joining the army to go and fight in Afghanistan. Two of the recruits were 17-years-old. Now, these two 'children under 18' are apparently quite old enough to go and learn how to kill people for real or die fighting but, they're supposedly in dire need of censorial protection from such things as Playboy, 'killer games', various films including hardcore porn and, of course, TV programmes featuring naked ladies.

If you ask me, someone somewhere has got their priorities way out of line. I mean real children under 15 can watch stories on TV about murders, rapists, drug dealers, prostitution, infidelity and divorce - and that's just the soaps. But put a programme on that shows people doing what just about every human being (indeed, every living thing) on the planet does - i.e. having sex or getting naked - and apparently its going to send the kids crazy and destroy society.

We know this 'porn is evil' claptrap isn't true. In fact, we can show that kids in far more liberated countries less than 100 miles away, who can have sex at 14 and can watch adult movies from the age of 16, are actually far less likely to get pregnant or catch the clap as teenagers and, indeed, on average wait a year longer to lose their virginity than kids brought up in 'pornophobic', gymnophobic Britain.

All the 'harm and offence' bullshit is just that - BULLSHIT! It's time Britain dumped its tired Victorian family values nonsense and joined the rest of the sexually liberated world because, it would actually be far better for our kids not to grow up in this lying, scaremongering, moralising nanny state that treats kids like adults when it needs them to fight mindless wars but, treats adults like kids when it comes to having real choice and freedom in something as simple as TV programmes. Ofcom, indeed, this country, is brim full of mindless pathetic pricks - they are the real threat to freedom and democracy just like every other nationalist religious extremist! They can shove 'Britishness' where the sun don't shine.

The 'victorian' stance in Britain could almost be likened to oppression, and that reflects itself in things like we have the highest teenage pregnancy rate in Europe - that issue is for another debate for another forum for another day. Oppression causes more problems than it solves.

I am happy with what the Babe channels do, and was a bit surprised to see the landslide scores that were on the poll. The basis of my vote was that if the channels were any stronger than they currently are, it would be all too easy to pull the plug on them.

The degrees of hyprocisy throughout the TV channels are astounding. Switch on the TV on a mainstream channel after 9pm, and in most films that would be on or any other programming, someone will get their boobs out. There may well even be implied sex between characters. Movies 24 (I think its called) broadcasts erotic films from 10pm, then you have stuff like Sexerama on Virgin which generally is out at 11, and then Bravo will have stuff like Porn week on after midnight. And yet 'Disgusted from Tunbridge Wells', a right wing, God fearing, Daily Mail reading, self righteous sanctamonious prick can dictate what we, as responsible adults can and cant watch.

Perhaps we should wage war against something like Songs of Praise, but then most of us are not that small minded to go against something that wouldnt bother us.

Looking through all the channels last night was interesting. At just after 10 there were four babes on four different channels wearing see-through knickers with two of them clearly having piercings 'down there.'

On Channel 157 there was a discussion of sex in the cinema since 1980 and you saw more pubes in an hour then you'd see in a lifetime on any of the babe shows.

Sexstation online now advertises itself as 'hardcore' and Michelle Moist and Daniella have taken it to levels this week that would be unacceptable under current Ofcom regulations. It's funny watching how the cameramen work on the various channels, some nights on some channels they are encouraging the girls to get as dirty as possible whilst other times its back to the three pairs of knickers farce.

(15-11-2009 11:06 )De La Red Wrote:  I am happy with what the Babe channels do, and was a bit surprised to see the landslide scores that were on the poll. The basis of my vote was that if the channels were any stronger than they currently are, it would be all too easy to pull the plug on them.

But the basis of the poll is that Ofcom constantly make reference to "viewer expectations" and the "offence" that may have been caused when they find channels in breach.

What the poll shows, which isn't any surprise at all, is that the people that watch the channels feel they should be allowed to go further.

Therefore, the "viewer expectation" argument from Ofcom becomes totally redundant.

So, since the protection of minors, the harm that can be done to people seeing this content and now this new Ofcom stance have been shot down in flames, I presume they'll now be looking for other ways to justify their dictatorial actions.

(15-11-2009 11:06 )De La Red Wrote:  The 'victorian' stance in Britain could almost be likened to oppression ...

Yup, strangely the politicians leading calls for clampdowns (TV, pole dance clubs, kerb crawling) are usually the ones most supportive of "diversity". You can be as diverse as you like provided it is in a way they approve of. It's like allowing religious diversity, provided members of a Church of England congegation approve of the "other" religion. OK, Harman, most women are strictly one man and non-exhibitionist, but there are men with diverse needs, and women who will happily meet those needs.

Do the Babeshows go far enough?

Short answer : No
Long answer : Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

I think the rules are being relaxed by all stations so I think soon we will go back to where they were

I broke my arm at the beginning of the year so my sleep patterns where all over the place,so that's when i started to watch the channels on a regularly bases,i was aware of them but only watched them a bit,and that was manly the bordello because i fancied holly on it,what ever happened to her? just as i was losing interest as it seemed a bit tame up pops elite one night Alexa in the office so i was back in and started to phone too, it seemed elite pushed the boundary with girl/girl,showers,alleyways etc,so bang babes followed suite and upped there game 4 girl orgy,lolly badcock,even charlie monaco doing girl/girl big style,who would have thought of that of her, after her time on chatback! and now sportxxx going bottomless,but not if you got a Brazilian! im not a fan, and im not talking about the country or the football team! and now carmen whos pushed it even more,shes the best by a country mile,its must see tv when shes on,great to phone too.but sadly this is the uk,so some bugger is going to spoil the fun.so im sad to say i think it will go tame,if what they say about ofcom is true.and if your wondering it was my right arm,it was like 40 days and 40 nights

Since the channels are free to watch they are great as they are.