Double standards (Government and media) (4)

This post is on the BDSM Activism web board.

Sun 1 Jun 08, 10:30 PM
super_loulou
UK(E), 3 yrs
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jun...
Good Guardian column by Catherine Bennett 'Why can't we stop the spread of degrading adverts for sex?' The article is about how the ASA rejected complaints about a billboard ad campaign featuring slutty-looking table women advertising a table dancing club.
How can this Government justify this pathetic clamping down of adults viewing adults acting out being tied up/hurt etc by other adults, at the same time as allowing revolting realistic gratuitous violence on early evening TV, and Girls of the Playboy Mansion at 8pm! Now huge strip club adverts on the streets is acceptable? WTF?
Is it just a case of the Government don't make a lot of tax money from BDSM porn, and they get to look good by stamping out the bad nasty dirty pervy porn? How does viewing pictures of things many people fantasise about anyway pose more of a danger to society than the sexualisation and devaluing of women?
*~Daddy's happy little girl~*
Edited Sun 1 Jun 08, 10:58 PM by super_loulou

1 Jun 08, 10:33 PM
rubyd
5 yrs Because all those things are linked to money making machines? - dunno, call me cynical if you will!

2 Jun 08, 9:15 AM
Dimswitch3
UK, 2 yrs The authorities can be harsh on lap dancing venues. About 6 years ago there were two cases reported in the Times on the same day. One person was running a licensed lap dance bar, but he had the wrong type of licence. Somebody else was using young workers to strip out asbestos without safety equipment, training etc - guess who got the largest fine?

2 Jun 08, 6:41 PM
The_Hogfather
UK(NG), 6 yrs
Y!

super_loulou wrote:
Double standards (Government and media)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jun...
Good Guardian column by Catherine Bennett 'Why can't we stop the spread of degrading adverts for sex?' The article is about how the ASA rejected complaints about a billboard ad campaign featuring slutty-looking table women advertising a table dancing club.
How can this Government justify this pathetic clamping down of adults viewing adults acting out being tied up/hurt etc by other adults, at the same time as allowing revolting realistic gratuitous violence on early evening TV, and Girls of the Playboy Mansion at 8pm! Now huge strip club adverts on the streets is acceptable? WTF?
Is it just a case of the Government don't make a lot of tax money from BDSM porn, and they get to look good by stamping out the bad nasty dirty pervy porn? How does viewing pictures of things many people fantasise about anyway pose more of a danger to society than the sexualisation and devaluing of women?
The Gruinard employs a large number of ultra-right wing feminists on their staff or as freeelance journalists, commentators, researchers etc. Some of the wonderful women involved are responsible for advising the government on the CJIA 2008, and a few other stupid bits of legislation we have now.

3 Jun 08, 1:33 AM
doulos
UK, 3 yrs
A favourite theory of mine is the Radical Centre: "control for control's sake rather than in the service of some clear ideology."
http://www.samizdata.net/blog/archives/2006/02/u...
Basically, the Government (whether Labour, Conservative or even LibDem doesn't really matter) doesn't have a central morality to impose on people other than the will of the majority. They are centrists, believing that everyone must be forced onto the centre ground. The majority like strip bars but don't like BDSM. It doesn't have to make sense, that is the Will of the People and so it shall be enforced. Everything that is permitted shall be mandatory. Everything that is not permitted, shall be illegal. That is the future.
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard." H. L. Mencken


	©1997-2009 Informed Consent