+- The UK Babe Channels Forum (https://www.babeshows.co.uk)
+-- Forum: Channels (/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Forum: UK Babe Channels (/forumdisplay.php?fid=9)
+---- Forum: Broadcasting Regulations (/forumdisplay.php?fid=138)
+---- Thread: Ofcom Discussion (/showthread.php?tid=14756)
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394
RE: Ofcom Discussion - mido - 03-05-2013 20:51
(03-05-2013 20:23 )matt38 Wrote: The case i refer to is Daniel Bartlam,from last year, who killed his mother with a claw hammer, copied from a street storyline, but having said this the kid was into violent films and console games.
...and the sort of "adult entertainment" certain posters want to see wouldn't encourage people to think certain acts are acceptable in the real world?
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Scottishbloke - 03-05-2013 21:32
Well moving on from the scandals involving the BBC and the ITV. I was watching eurotic tv last night on the webstream and I have to admit their show was absolutely light years from the shit which we were being dished up. Now I know I like to post my fair share of cap's but that doesn't neccessary mean that I'm 100% impressed with the shows.
On eurotic tv we seen full frontal nudity, naked 2 for 1's and really just a general feeling of freedom as the models were free to move freely around the set without giving a second thought to any repercussions from any kind of miserable TV censor.
I've just been watching Live At The Apollo and this comedian summed up the babe channels perfectly and gives mention to the £150,000 fine which Bangbabes were hammered with at the time of this show going to broadcast.
He gives mention to the babe channels at 1 minute and 50 seconds into his routine.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Scottishbloke - 03-05-2013 22:53
A couple of snapshots of Eurotic TV tonight. But just why would this type of show here in the UK be deemed offensive ?
![[Image: E01.jpg]](http://s19.postimg.cc/z44xki5ub/E01.jpg)
![[Image: E02.jpg]](http://s19.postimg.cc/g0bm45t03/E02.jpg)
I have to say the blonde strikes a very strong resemblance to Lucy Zara
RE: Ofcom Discussion - mido - 03-05-2013 22:56
Jason "proven multiple internet sex scandal" Manford being the poster child for the fight against Ofcom is living proof that watching the babeshows causes less problems than watching corrie with ken "currently unproven allegation" barlow
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Scottishbloke - 03-05-2013 23:11
Yes and he's not the first either in a long list of comedians to be poking fun at ofcom's expence. The fact that the mere mention of Babestation always get's a laugh just goes to show the madness that ofcom seem's to think that they are offensive. In the history of the channels they have never been and never will be offensive.
Fact - They bring a lot of happiness to many people in this world of extreme paranoia. It's about time Ofcom just backed the fuck off them and allowed them to entertain us without let or hinderance. We're all old enough to make our own choices as to what we choose to watch without some facist bastards telling us otherwise
RE: Ofcom Discussion - eccles - 03-05-2013 23:30
There is a basic honesty about babeshows that makes them less dangerous but also less acceptable than other forms of entertainment.
Ultimately they exist to help with short term sexual gratification. Wives and girlfriends might not like the competition, but they also dislike having a frustrated bloke around desperate for sex, or worse, a man whose pent up sexual tension spills out into aggression. Within limits releasing sexual tension makes a better life and more harmonious relationship for both the man and woman.
But many women dislike seeing what looks like "the competition", particularly as many are insecure about their appearance and relationship. On top of that women are brought up to be sexually restrained and demure, so seeing naked women or hardcore porn goes against the grain.
Compare that with an action movies that shows a vigilante going round killing drug dealers, soaps that normalise drinking every lunchtime and every evening, or "reality" business shows that show wannabe tycoons cutting ruthless deals, pushing people into working 16 hour days, sacking people for failing to deliver miracles and opening complete new businesses in days.
IF people are influenced by TV then the action movies would result in deaths and beatings. At the very least some people would go out on a Saturday night all fired up and get into violent fights. There are serial thugs whose idea of fun is to go out and pick a fight with a stranger. Occasionally lives get ruined. But no one says violent TV and DVDs should be banned. (I am not saying TV is the cause - these people are just thugs. But people who say sexual TV is a negative influence cant have it both ways).
Back to the point - much drama slips sex scenes in. Banshee featured the star with his head deep between a womans thighs and a lot of breast. The same plot point, that they were in a passionate relationship, could have been made much less graphically. But it spices the show up with the result that some grown up families would watch the sex scenes together.
Time and again Eastenders, Holby, Waterloo Road and other soaps send out the message that if any man and any woman (between 20 and 60) are together more than twice they have a sexual relationship. That is far more damaging than babeshows because they are less obvious fantasy and the message slips in. Some men start to believe that's how there lives should work.
And some men start to believe the message from ordinary film and TV that normal men are having sex all the time. If they are surrounded by people who fawn on them and have a bit of glamour that can translate into groping any woman who comes near, unwitting assistance and victims being afraid noone will believe them.
It is ordinary every day TV with its unreal sex lives wrapped in every day surroundings that is dangerous, not obvious fantasy from babechannels.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - SCIROCCO - 04-05-2013 06:46
On a slightly different note are we about to see TVX, PB or the nightly services hit with a fine or warning sometime soon? Watched Playboy Lesbian last night for first time in ages and it was cut to pieces compared to the last viewing. Virtually no close ups, almost zilch penetration with toys or fingers and not even much open leg. Utter drivel.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - mido - 04-05-2013 09:03
Eccles I agree with most of your post, however there are always people who cannot see what is pure fantasy, and in some cases what they see on the babeshows is not that to them.
Take recent examples we have had:
An unemployed man believing that he was real friends with the girls spending over £100k on calling them before the penny dropped that they don't call him back and wouldn't even turn up at his funeral.
A member here photoshopping himself into an innocent friends wedding pictures (badly!) to pretend to the girls a fantasy that he had a wife and showing them pics of made up kids and wasnt any danger at all
What goes on in the heads of these viewers who are obviously that hell bent on impressing the girls they would face bankrupcy and personal ruin.
This is before we get to the people we have all seen on here who spend fortunes sending in Christian Louboutin shoes and Tiffany jewellery which we all know probably all goes on ebay for the end of year xmas party.
People whos facebook and twitter stalking of the girls should really have them locked away
Those who genuinely write epic novels on the girls blogs about how they will have sex with them (regardless if they want to or not in some of those I have read)
And then there are certain characters who associate themselves to to the shows and girls, we all know them who just seem to be a complete danger to themselves and society
And this is just from watching a girl wave a phone, There needs to be a line drawn, as you suggest there will always be copycats who see on tv and have to then do, and there are always people a bit unhinged when it comes to seeing people on tv (Jill Dando killer as an example) so you cannot dismiss something as "obvious fantasy" when you dont know the mental stability of the viewer
referencing your comment : "But no one says violent TV and DVDs should be banned" this isnt the case, films have been banned plenty over the years I remember in the early 90s computer games being banned because they were too violent, although the rules have slackened up a bit over the years.
Its my human right to sit at home, "black up" and watch the black and white minstrel show but its just not the done thing in 2013. Time change as does whats acceptable in society
RE: Ofcom Discussion - MONEY BANG - 04-05-2013 10:24
I agree with the post by Mido, there is a minority who have become thoroughly addicted to "Babeshows".
Even though this is a minority, the industry itself needs to take a certain responsibility.
Millions of UK residents enjoy betting/gambling without becoming addicted to that activity, yet the gambling industry part funds http://www.gambleaware.co.uk/ for those who have become/are becoming addicted.
Millions of UK residents enjoy drinking alcohol without becoming addicted to that activity, yet the drinks industry part funds https://www.drinkaware.co.uk/ for those who have become/are becoming addicted.
It is time the "Babeshows" stood up, realised that a minority of their consumers are utterly consumed by the "shows" and need therapeutic help. Perhaps 1% of revenue could be used to fund a help group for the needy.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - mido - 04-05-2013 14:19
(03-05-2013 23:11 )Scottishbloke Wrote: Fact - They bring a lot of happiness to many people in this world of extreme paranoia. It's about time Ofcom just backed the fuck off them and allowed them to entertain us without let or hinderance. We're all old enough to make our own choices as to what we choose to watch without some facist bastards telling us otherwise
I watched your clip of Manford, he seemed quite entertained by what he was getting at the moment to be honest.
MONEY BANG has hit the nail on the head though with what is needed. We can say "we are old enough" but there is the mental and psychological element where age makes no difference, the shows even in the current state should carry a warning and a foundation needs to be set up for those members who are in an addicted state and people cannot be ashamed of admitting this.
Until measures are in place to protect the girls away from the shows, we do not deserve to see more