Porn Mag Ban

My sister used to get a magazine called Just17, it sometimes featured barely legal naked women. I used to borrow the magazine for some private reading from time to time

Going through puberty without a single babe channel on the telly. Times were hard in my day - Kid's today eh..........They've never had it so good

In my younger days I used to work in Germany and France a lot,
You could walk around any train station newsagents in Germany and see quite openly on display numerous hard core porn magazines of every description.

In France supermarkets had hard core videos and magazines on open display on the shelves.

I have yet to see all the children and poor women from either country being harmed beyond repair because because of all this `utter filth`being on open display!By now there should be a few billion I`m sure.

There is a certain factor in this country which believes that sweeping pornography under the counter will control it.

I would ask all of these so called `saviours of our morals`the people who walk around with a `look at that,that shouldn`t be allowed` kind of attitude to take a moment to reflect when alcohol was banned in America,and all the underground black market racketeers were born.

Would they like to see the same kind of forced unmanageable dictatorship laws in Britain?

Then we would see every kind of degenerative porn imaginable and guess what? It would still end up on the streets.

I think a lot of these women who want these type of mags banned are just jealous of the women on these type of mags. Not always the case, but I think a lot of it goes back to insecurity about their own looks.

Interesting post from Scottishbloke about workers embarrasment, but it is not just confined to sex mags. What if a schoolkid sees their married teacher buying Gay News? Or a really nerdy bloke buying Star Trek Convention News and Caravan Weekly? What about the known drink driver buying a half bottle of spirits? Or the wife beater buying a six pack of - better not mention a brand name - beer?

Only a few years ago Boots, a Catholic owned chain, refused to sell condoms (OK, many years ago), now condoms, flavoured lube and vibrating cock rings are openly sold in major supermarket chains. A while ago a middle aged cashier tried to hide sanitary towels that I was buying for a friend because they were "embarrasing". Yes, but part of normal life.

As someone who used to buy mucky mags before the internet was invented and unlimited porn became free in small and random doses, I agree under 18s should not be selling porn, good customers will avoid going to the young female cashier, bad ones will deliberately target them and ought to know better.

But at the end of the day, I dont want the shopkeeper to decide what I can and cant buy. Back in the 90s Mary Whitehouses lot tried to get Gay Times off the shelves by threatening individual shopkeepers with private blasphemy prosecutions. (The notion of gay Jesus was in vogue). A billionaire threatened the distribution companies with libel cases if they distributed controversial magazines. Either tactic could have been effective censorship - the cornership is not going to risk £200,000 legal costs fighting someone elses battle, not is the distributor. Noticably the publishers - who would have fought - were not targetted.

If embarrasment really is a problem mags could be sold in sealed plastic bags with just the title showing. It is already law that magazine covers must not show nipples, pubes or fanny.

My understanding of the BBC write up is that "lads mags" was a polite emphemism for porn mags, but I could be wrong. I hope not, targetting lads mags really would be a big step.

What worried me was the feminist groups claims to have 11 lawyers lined up.

Publications should either be legal or not, and if not the publisher should have to account for it. To have some strange middle ground where publications are legal but selling them might not be would open the door to all sorts of backdoor censorship, mainly of ideas.

(27-05-2013 16:16 )Scottishbloke Wrote:  The worse thing I hated most about the magazines was having to put them out, I'd always make sure I had a peoples friend magazine in front of it so as to not shock the customers and spare my own blushes too in the process.

Lads mags make you blush! What a sensitive soul you are, Scottishbloke. Anyway it will be interesting to see how those targeted by this threatening letter (i.e. Tesco, Sainsbury’s, Asda, Morrisons and WH Smiths) react to it.

(27-05-2013 18:29 )shutty1971 Wrote:  what is this country coming to when the sight of the female body is classed as offensive are all the ministers gay or what

Dont know if Gay is the right word there. I am sure Gay people both men and women like to ogle at semi naked and naked bodies of their preferred taste just as much as normal straight people do. The problem is more akin to the fact that these people have a problem with the human body in its naked state for whatever reason. They think they have the right to force their moral values on the rest of society. OK maybe the mags could be packaged in a certain way that shows less on the display on the shelf to spare the blushes of some people and minors. But banning them just falls into the nanny state that Barbara Whitehouse dreamt of all those years ago when she started trying to get the Kenny Everet show banned. If they get a foot in the door there will be no stopping them. It will be skirts below the knees from here on in.

(28-05-2013 09:25 )Kenilo Wrote:  

(27-05-2013 18:29 )shutty1971 Wrote:  what is this country coming to when the sight of the female body is classed as offensive are all the ministers gay or what

Dont know if Gay is the right word there. I am sure Gay people both men and women like to ogle at semi naked and naked bodies of their preferred taste just as much as normal straight people do. The problem is more akin to the fact that these people have a problem with the human body in its naked state for whatever reason. They think they have the right to force their moral values on the rest of society. OK maybe the mags could be packaged in a certain way that shows less on the display on the shelf to spare the blushes of some people and minors. But banning them just falls into the nanny state that Barbara Whitehouse dreamt of all those years ago when she started trying to get the Kenny Everet show banned. If they get a foot in the door there will be no stopping them. It will be skirts below the knees from here on in.

i agree, sexual repression is the problem not sexual orientation.

(28-05-2013 01:45 )eccles Wrote:  My understanding of the BBC write up is that "lads mags" was a polite emphemism for porn mags, but I could be wrong.

You won't find any porn mags in Tesco. This campaign is aimed at Loaded, Nuts, Zoo and FHM.

Many groups are offended by all types of products. Does that mean Sainsbury's and Tesco will have to stop selling pork, seafood, beef and unleavened bred as well?

What about military history magazines and pacifists? You may think I am being flippant, but if it starts with Nuts magazine, where will it end? Would a member of the Labour Party have a case being forced to sell the Telegraph? Would a UKIP member be "entitled" to refuse to sell pro-Europe publications?

(28-05-2013 09:32 )admiral decker Wrote:  

(28-05-2013 01:45 )eccles Wrote:  My understanding of the BBC write up is that "lads mags" was a polite emphemism for porn mags, but I could be wrong.

You won't find any porn mags in Tesco. This campaign is aimed at Loaded, Nuts, Zoo and FHM.

Well spotted. And rather disturbing. A campaign against lads mags might be laughed out of court, though many shops would settle out of court to avoid the hassle, but worrying because that suggests a campaign with a very wide scope.

Can I sue the NHS for forcing me to sit through Loose Women last time I was in causualty?