Mainstream TV nudity vs babeshow nudity

(18-11-2012 22:33 )mrmann Wrote:  Did you guys ever see this one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gxpgez6bk...re=related

It was before the other clip which was posted here in the past, with the same woman.

Were the British flag nipple graphics added during the live show by someone in the control room, or were they added just for Youtube?

Looking at it again I cant help wondering why it is OK for Brittney to wear a sheer body stocking with subtly concealed nipples but not an unknown. Double standards?

(18-11-2012 22:33 )mrmann Wrote:  Did you guys ever see this one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gxpgez6bk...re=related

It was before the other clip which was posted here in the past, with the same woman.

Were the British flag nipple graphics added during the live show by someone in the control room, or were they added just for Youtube?

It seems incredible this was allowed on mainstream tv,if it had been a babe channel all hell would broken loose,it must be because mainstream channels dont grass each other up to score points with Ofcom.

Full English on 104 now, showing uncensored cartoon penises.

I guess this is OK for people to watch, but a nude female body on the adult channels is not?

What is baffling is our local theatre (well it's a sports hall really!) is showing the Vagina Monologues, where the audience are encouraged to swear out loud including a rousing chorus of c u next Tuesday. They had puppetry of the penis a while back, and only banned under 14s. My far from prudish colleague said it was basically porn and the audience was full of women frothing at the gash and gay men. This entertainment is fine in a local theatre but banned from TV after midnight. Why?

Inside Spearmint Rhino

Pick TV (Sky 152)

Sunday 11-11:30 and 11:30-12
(Sorry, bit late for the first one, but there is always +1)

Just caught the end of the first one and saw a woman wearing just a thong sliding down a pole. Yet to see how hot or tame the full show is. Purely for research.

Sex Week On More4

Mon 11:05 Great Sexpectations: The Sex Education Show - Am I Normal?
(No, normal is smaller)

Tues 11:05 More Sex Please Were British
(documentary about a sex toy factory)

Weds 11:05 Fifty Years of Bad Sex
(what is and isnt sexy? A look at 5 showbiz Titans that have exploited sex)

Thurs 11:05 Fifty Shades of Grey

Friday 11:00 Father Ted
(priests)

All of the programmes on mainstream TV that have been mentioned are there to entertain. Whilst all the adult channels are just there to create rich pickings for what is viewed as a somewhat seedy industry, and for owners that are just there to fleece as many people as they possibly can. I would like to back up that statement with an example of what happened to me. I have never rang these shows, and never will, but one night I was persuaded to pay a fiver to see a so-called uncensored show by a favourite model of mine, Chelsea French. But before I completed the signing-in procedure I came to my senses and aborted the call before I was given the code that would enable me to tune in. But I would guess you would know what happened, they still took my fiver, plus whatever else they chose to take, "eight pounds plus in all". Could these sort of practices be a reason why Ofcom are so hard on these channels. Because all what these programme makers think about is profits, and nothing else. One pound fifty three per minute to call up a model who doesn't give a toss who she is talking to, or should I say, 'mumbling a load of verbal shite' to is a lot of hard earned cash for some people. As I have said on these forums many times before, these programmes in their present format should be banished from the schedules. But as long as some people are still willing to give them money then they will carry on shoving out their crap. So there you have it, my take on why Ofcom want them of the air.

Channels vary and there have been complaints about some in the past, but I dont think thats it. Financial issues could also be cause for complaint about psychic, shopping and gambling channels. There are people who get a brief kick from buying tat and have homes full of the stuff. A few fraud cases have even featured sad middle aged women who have stolen thousands of pounds and spent a sizeable portion on hideous garbage with limited resale value. One recent Ofcom sanctions case was about a channel with a health show where people rang up on a premium rate number. Among other things they were fined for giving medical advice without seeing the caller. In its defence the channel said if they did not give advice callers would keep ringing back (at premium rates) until they got it. These days there are a lot of roulette and poker channels. Many religious channels solicit donations.

All of these have potential for viewers to run up large bills, possibly unaffordable bills, and have little or no entertainment value in the traditional sense that would keep Drama teachers and Arts luvvies happy.

Despite this it is rare for Ofcom to even investigate psychic, gambling, teleshopping or religious channels. When they do the focus is hardly ever on financial aspects, despite potential for harm.

No, Ofcom gives babe channels a hard time because it dislikes sexual content, and no other reason.

Flicked onto Deal or No Deal the other day and Noel Cuntface was standing in lycra doing yoga or something and said some creepy one-liner and pulled out a banana and two oranges from his pants. 4 o'clock in the afternoon.

I find it staggering that something like this can be shown. If the babe channels showed a bearded twat opening their box and pulling stuff out Ofcom would be all over them like a teenager at a strip club.