Back To The Golden Age (If Only)

(26-11-2011 04:59 )StanTheMan Wrote:  

(26-11-2011 02:20 )eccles Wrote:  These days its sometimes difficult to tell the difference between daytime and late night fare.

I'm guessing you don't mean that in the same, positive way people were saying it two years ago?

Damm right squire! Right now Caty Cole is wearing a bra, suspenders and thong. And its a big bra. A really really big bra. To be fair shes a big girl, but even so she would almost be legal on daytime TV. Louise Porter is wearing a sturdy bodystocking. This is after 1am on Saturday night when the phones should be as busy as they ever get. No doubt the kit will come off, but its a crying shame they arent topless to start with.

Read it and weep.
http://www.bgafd.co.uk/forum/read.php?f=...100130&v=f

Quote:Author: Guilbert
Date: 12-12-06 14:22

No I dont work for one of the Adult channels, I have updated this forum in the past to say what crap is on some of the sky adult channels.

Like here from 2004:
http://bgafd.co.uk/forum/read.php?f=2&i=...eply_38511

I rarely watch the Sky adult channels, but some channels allow you to pay for just one night, and I happen to know this sky channel with live girls can get raunchy.

This particular night I got lucky and the two girls gave it all they got.

I saw:

A girl using a dildo on another girl till she had an orgasm and squirted. She did this 3 or 4 times.

A girl pouring champagne in another girls fanny and then her shooting it out.

A girl using the champagne bottle as a dildo.

Various close up fanny gaping shots.

Girls spitting into each others fannys.

A girl giving another a real good licking and fanny lip sucking.

A girl using her foot and sticking it in another girls fanny.

Plus some anal manipulation.

Both girls really seem to be enjoying it and looked as though as a pair they do live adult stag evenings.

I do believe in telling it like it is, and some of the Sky adult channels are crap, this happened to be a very good night.

(I also have it on DVD if anyone wants proof)

(07-12-2011 01:33 )eccles Wrote:  Read it and weep.
http://www.bgafd.co.uk/forum/read.php?f=...100130&v=f

Quote:Author: Guilbert
Date: 12-12-06 14:22

No I dont work for one of the Adult channels, I have updated this forum in the past to say what crap is on some of the sky adult channels.

Like here from 2004:
http://bgafd.co.uk/forum/read.php?f=2&i=...eply_38511

I rarely watch the Sky adult channels, but some channels allow you to pay for just one night, and I happen to know this sky channel with live girls can get raunchy.

This particular night I got lucky and the two girls gave it all they got.

I saw:

A girl using a dildo on another girl till she had an orgasm and squirted. She did this 3 or 4 times.

A girl pouring champagne in another girls fanny and then her shooting it out.

A girl using the champagne bottle as a dildo.

Various close up fanny gaping shots.

Girls spitting into each others fannys.

A girl giving another a real good licking and fanny lip sucking.

A girl using her foot and sticking it in another girls fanny.

Plus some anal manipulation.

Both girls really seem to be enjoying it and looked as though as a pair they do live adult stag evenings.

I do believe in telling it like it is, and some of the Sky adult channels are crap, this happened to be a very good night.

(I also have it on DVD if anyone wants proof)

Yes, it a bit sad.
You wonder what would have happened had these images been allowed to have been shown all the time.

Would UK society have collapsed to the point of a mass breakdown in morals?

How would it have affected us?
I suspect we would have seen little or no change to what we have now in our society. i.e no moral collapse etc, etc.

To me, if a major western democracy censors something in one media format, although legally available in another media format, then they must show tangible benefits from that censorship. (even if the architects of said censorship are a quango acting on the state's behalf).

Where are the key performance indicators of the benefit to UK society from the continued censorship of full R18 on our TV screens?

I suspect that there are none.

Ofcon deem R18 to be "inappropriate". No eveidence, no figures to back up their policy. Just old fashioned bullshit from a government-backed dictatorship.

Back to the Golden Age, says the thread title...

Just been casually browsing the video section and it has to be said that given the current state of these shows, it's nothing short of astonishing to think that this was Amy Williams' standard DAYSHOW on Club Paradiso.

http://www.babevideo.co.uk/play/Club_Par..._The_Movie

(06-01-2012 09:46 )StanTheMan Wrote:  Back to the Golden Age, says the thread title...

Just been casually browsing the video section and it has to be said that given the current state of these shows, it's nothing short of astonishing to think that this was Amy Williams' standard DAYSHOW on Club Paradiso.

http://www.babevideo.co.uk/play/Club_Par..._The_Movie

Astonishing indeed. How Paradiso escaped a fine I'll never know.

Come back Amy!

I started this thread less than three months ago, and in that short time the programmes have got even tamer. the number of nights that are not worth watching are growing more and more. But not everyone thinks the same, some think the programmes are still great, namely those who watch Elite. If you have the audacity to Criticise some of their favourite girls, well woe betide you. They go on mob attack. I have to put that down to them being brainwashed into thinking they are watching adult TV. And are quite satisfied with what they are seeing. But I despair with what is happening, not just TV censorship but it's everything worth having in life that is being eroded on a daily basis, from pensions in old age, to kids not being able to get worthwhile jobs. and everything else in between, And as in accepting sub- standard adult TV everyone is accepting what is happening with very little fuss. Indeed we are all being brainwashed by a New World Order. Who the conspiricy theorists have warned us about for years. Who I used to think where up there with the fairies. but not any longer.

(07-01-2012 15:06 )RESPONSIBLE ADULT Wrote:  I started this thread less than three months ago, and in that short time the programmes have got even tamer. the number of nights that are not worth watching are growing more and more. But not everyone thinks the same, some think the programmes are still great, namely those who watch Elite. If you have the audacity to Criticise some of their favourite girls, well woe betide you. They go on mob attack. I have to put that down to them being brainwashed into thinking they are watching adult TV. And are quite satisfied with what they are seeing. But I despair with what is happening, not just TV censorship but it's everything worth having in life that is being eroded on a daily basis, from pensions in old age, to kids not being able to get worthwhile jobs. and everything else in between, And as in accepting sub- standard adult TV everyone is accepting what is happening with very little fuss. Indeed we are all being brainwashed by a New World Order. Who the conspiricy theorists have warned us about for years. Who I used to think where up there with the fairies. but not any longer.

Don't worry, RESPONSIBLE ADULT, there are still a few of us left that can see what is going on in this country, and who can also still think for themselves.

As for the bit of your post I've highlighted in red - one word: Fanboys.

It is a shame the state of the channels as it creates less and less to discuss on this forum. But as i have said countless times as long as the channels are making money they will not be compelled to do anything different such as restraint of trade application or pin encryption. No point in us trying to change OfWank as they have a political mandate almost. Politicians will steer clear of any legislation in this area given they have more pressing matters to address such as the economy, Europe etc.

^^^ Sadly the NWO has benefits but also a great downside, which means a lack of freedom. Some control is needed in our world, but not to the extent that our rights and freedom is taken away.

For a scary view of the future take a look at Hungary. "By slashing the independence of the judiciary, the central bank and the media, by gerrymandering constituencies and cementing loyalists in key positions for nine-year terms, Mr Orban is ushering in a new age of authoritarian control."* Ironically Prime Minister Viktor Orban was a dissident hero in the 1989 revolution, but is ushering in unified state control of the sort they threw out when they rejected centralised geriatric control they risk giving their successors the power to make supposedly independent bodies take decisions that keep the government happy.
(Independent 7 Jan http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/lea...86248.html)

In Russia there is as absence of media critical of the government. In Italy most broadcasters were controlled by Berluscioni or his government, meaning people in the UK heard more about his bedroom antics than Italians. Tight control of the media was also a hallmark of various shades of Arab governments.

The trouble with control of the media is that too easily turns into suppression of unwelome news or spin. Repressing unpleasant news and opinions solves nothing. It just screws the lid on the pressure cooker, relieves governments of a sense that they need to solve problems.

Of course free speech is useless if that right is not exercised. Under Ofcom regional news has been all but abolished, ITV has been allowed to merge about 10 independent companies into 2 large ones, centralising control. One of the largest broacasters and platform controllers (Sky/NI) controls 40% of the papers and at one stage had a 28% stake in ITV.

Five is a Public Sector Broadcaster and is expected to have strong element of News and Education, as well as its renouned documentaries. Does anyone think of Five in terms of serious news? And thats just PSBs. There are large numbers of entertainment channels on Freeview (state controlled), Virgin and Sky with zero news, current affairs, childrens content, original drama, education or anything that might make people think. And because those channels are free of the PSB overhead they have a competitive advantage. ITV is dying a slow death. Four and Five could follow unless they go down market. Give it a few years and UK TV news could be the sole preserve of the BBC (trusted but state appointed) and Sky, a severe contraction of current plurality and concentration of power.

But what about the papers? Surely the will still be free to publish? Given time the papers will be replaced by TV and mobile services. Both of which will be subject to more control than papers ever were, starting with licencing.

Id better stop there. Am I suggesting that the likes of Dave, Sky Atlantic and Psychic Today should show News and Current Affairs? No, not really, though I thibk they should be allowed to at the drop of a hat, without formality and without an application process if they want. (Shopping channels are BANNED from having editorial content). Apart from anything else, you cant force people to be interested in news. One option might be for channels that opt out of social content to pay a 1% cross subsidy, though that might lead to dire PC social worker controlled dross like local theatres. Or the current free for all might just work, it seems to for papers and magazines.