Posted by lucky_1 on Tue 1 Apr 08, 12:45 PM to lucky_1's blog.
This is just my guess and does not come from the horse's mouth, not that Tanos is a horse, of course, but you get my drift. 
Quite simply that if the Government succeed in passing the proposed CJIB as it is drafted then a heck of a lot of our lovely pics WILL BE CENSORED!
It's a statement to everyone here not to rest on your laurels and put up with exactly this kind of censorship.
As fave saying of mine, you get what you deserve, you deserve what you tolerate.
And having seen some of the reactions a fair few are not so keen on being censored. My question is, what have you done about it? Rather than moaning at Tanos, write to your MP, MEP, House of Lords.
Oh and I want to know why that hunk of a Dom, Damien still had his pic up? There I was, expecting Gordon and got big D instead!
xx
Edited Tue 1 Apr 08, 1:11 PM by lucky_1
| 1 Apr 08, 12:51 PM spirifer UK, 6 yrs  |
Which pictures do you think will be censored? Which pictures do you think will fall within the CJIB, as re-drafted?
It would be good to know what will be caught by the CJIB and what won't. If you can give some examples, that would be really helpful. The state has no business in the bedrooms of the nation - Pierre Trudeau | ||
| 1 Apr 08, 12:56 PM nicad2 UK(PO), 4 yrs  |
OK I think that got our attention... a WAKE UP CALL!!!
-- | ||
| 1 Apr 08, 12:58 PM hunny_Beez 7 yrs |
I think you will find that Damien picture is cached locally on you computer hold down shift and reload the page and it will change. hunnyB BDSM themed Valentine Card to print out for free http://www.dcsulture.com | ||
| 1 Apr 08, 12:59 PM lucky_1 7 yrs |
It does very much depend on exactly what ends up being redrafted, it is still being batted about between the houses at the moment (please correct me if I'm wrong) Take a still that was used to advertise the SAW movies and that would be banned. Someone has a pic of a syringe through their bottom lip, it is a photoshop creation but that too would be banned as it could cause a permanent injury if it were real, but it does not even need to be real to end up banned. How about Joanies pic of her lips sutured shut? Could cause a permanent injury i.e. scar and she'd be a bit dead if she couldn't eat hence life threatening? See just how subjective it can be. I remember when I first joined here and some of the needle pics used to make me squick because I didn't really understand them. Well the people who will be making judgements on what is acceptable will be coming from that same place. No real understanding. What is a truly magnificent pic to us may be horrific to someone else, but who are they to judge?
I'm in my own world. It's Ok, they know me here. | ||
| 1 Apr 08, 1:12 PM lucky_1 7 yrs |
oooh I've still got hunny too. That's better 
And sprifer's too, not that I look at that pic at all, ahem I'm in my own world. It's Ok, they know me here. Edited 1 Apr 08, 1:13 PM by lucky_1 | ||
| 1 Apr 08, 1:18 PM spirifer UK, 6 yrs |
Oh yes, I understand what you're saying. I thought that you had some specific IC images in mind which would be caught by the looming legislation. I suppose Joanie's picture could be caught if the prosecution could successfully argue that her mouth would be kept sutured shut permanently, but I think that might be an uphill struggle. However, the fact that it might leave a scar I would think is irrelevant, since the bill specifically refers to, "an act which results, or is likely to result, in serious injury to a person's anus, breast or genitals,". It'd be interesting to see whether the CPS would really try to argue that the suture pic "is grossly offensive, disgusting or otherwise of an obscene character", in any event. The state has no business in the bedrooms of the nation - Pierre Trudeau | ||
| 1 Apr 08, 2:02 PM popi  UK(M), 7 yrs |
i suspect most of my consensual images would have to come down http://www.popi.tanos.org.uk/pictures/dead/
i doubt it would be interesting for the poor soul whose life, career, family and future were compromised. i wouldn't like to be the person labelled a pervert by the press and dragged through the courts, in order to set a president which tries to make sence of the subjective wording used in the bill. popi xx
Edited because this blonde can't spell Edited 1 Apr 08, 2:06 PM by popi | ||
| 1 Apr 08, 2:43 PM lucky_1 7 yrs |
Some of the redrafting that I read omitted the body parts. ouch!
I think some womens rights groups would be only too happy to argue that it is offensive to sew a woman's mouth shut
I'm in my own world. It's Ok, they know me here. | ||
| 1 Apr 08, 5:03 PM alexandraa UK(NW), 8 yrs |
Odd that my stocking pic has been left alone but the ones of colorado have been spammed.... I am beginning to think it's Mr Marcus Starpp who did it!! Be careful what you wish for | ||
| 1 Apr 08, 7:28 PM MarcusStrapp UK(CB), 7 yrs |
I'll be delighted if this is all an April Fool's hoax, but I am not sure it is. In the mean time if you are in need of posting your kinky pictures there is always the Fetish Photo Album. That has not been nobbled (yet). Conventional wisdom is often more about convention than wisdom. Edited 1 Apr 08, 7:29 PM by MarcusStrapp |
