A grave threat to our freedom

[steve25805 126,021]

I must alert all UK members to a grave threat to our freedom.

Many of you may already know that it is now illegal in the UK for UK based operators to produce many kinds of porn, including consenting adult stuff. This includes watersports, which is now illegal to produce and host in the uk, and technically illegal even to possess.

However, this law has no jurisdiction over non-UK sites, or UK residents' ability to access such sites. Including this one.

BUT, I have just learned that there is something much more draconian being considered by the UK Parliament as we speak.

A little something called the Digital Economy Bill, will cover all porn from anywhere in the world entering the UK, and the list of material likely to be banned includes pee porn. And worryingly, internet service providers are going to be mandated to block access to any site with such content. So we as individuals won't even get the opportunity to flout such a draconian law. ISPs will be required to enforce it on the state's behalf. We won't be able to access it even if we want to risk flouting the law.

Not only could we in the UK find every pee porn site blocked by our Internet Service Providers, but access to forums such as this could be blocked too.

I myself, and every other UK member, could - worse case scenario - start disappearing off the radar.

Worse still, if our government gets away with this, other governments might view it as a "successful model" to impose upon their peoples.

This is the gravest threat to our sexual freedoms thus far, by some distance.......

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/porn-sex-acts-banned-government-restrictions-full-list-fisting-periods-urine-public-a7433931.html

[norfie654321 69]

and yet there was no coverage of this from anywhere in the UK...the outlets were more bothered about the Autumn Statement and the story of Jo Cox's murder...there has to be a way to prevent this from happening surely...i refuse to believe that the government are doing it 'for our best interests' because frankly this is a serious impeachment of my personal life, however if we do the same to the government its a criminal offence (Julian Assange, Ed Snowden etc), how dare the government dictate what i can and cannot watch/like in my life, this is meant to be a free country yet our basic liberties as being slowly ripped from under us...i may send an email to my local MP to attempt to discuss this in a civil matter

[Brutus 2,206]

Good lord. Steve this is horrible. They are literally herding people into a tunnel of censorship. I have to say that this is crossing a line that no government should be allowed to even approach. This is Tyranny. And you are absolutely right that other countries will follow suit if the UK pulls it off. Right now they want to ban porn, next it may be violent movies, then it may be stating your opinion. This is a dangerous road to go down, this kind of heavy hand censorship is never a good sign. The internet can be a powerful thing though so maybe if enough people start an online movement that finds it's way to ground level, this can be stopped. Won't be easy but my point is that when governments in past eras subjugated their people they didn't have to fight the internet. It is very powerful and Steve, I would definitely look into contacting people and seeing what's out there. The UK may have to take to the streets eventually because it's only going to get worse. I don't want to see you disappear.

[lugia 228]

There's little need to think about this.  Your government is flexing its censorship muscles in the digital age.  This isn't about taking away your porn to edify your soul, because as we all know from doing it three to five times a day, pee is probably the most natural, safe, and victimless fetish there is, except possibly the foot thing.  I'm going to be an optimist and predict that this will be a repeat of the United States Eighteenth Amendment incident, which was followed swiftly by the Twenty-first Amendment. Y'know, I can't help but wonder how it would be like, having a public world court hearing about the legality of computer porn. The UK is dragging something into the light that really should have been left in the dark, and now its Parliament must seriously consider the consequences of messing with taboo. Rest assured, the people will not stand for this.

[Brutus 2,206]

@lugia

Well you definitely have a high level of optimism toward the government. Any time they flex their censorship muscles, they are trying to silence and weaken the people. The fact that it is a normal fetish and that everyone does it will not stop them from trying to vilify it and shut it down. Lastly, I wouldn't trust the people to not stand for it. It takes a lot of abuse by the powers that be before the people rise against them. There are dictatorships in many countries where citizens are treated like garbage. It happens slow. One freedom this year, another taken next year. The gradual decline keeps people from reacting to it properly. So right now they just want to ban porn. 30 years from now, it may be illegal to have sexual urges at all and result in prison time. I just read recently that Iceland has outlawed strip clubs and I expect other countries will follow.

This just bothers me. I hope you are right and this either blows over or is quickly undone once the government witnesses the financial blow of websites, ISP's and porn film studios having a drastically smaller consumer base. In their hunger to rule over peoples sex lives through porn, I don't think they are understanding how much revenue it all generates. Even something on the periphery of porn like this forum.

[Admin 14,788]

I am curious about how this would work exactly. The IP address of the server that hosts this site is hidden behind CloudFlare, so they wouldn't be able to effectively block the site by IP. If they try to block it using the domain name, I could always create a generic sounding domain name and redirect it here. 

[Scot_Lover 1,876]

I use a Multiple Exit VPN when I need to, it just doesn't play well with Microsoft Azure.

Wouldn't Cloudflare be directed to kill access? This makes me want to build an onion site (Tor Network) for this kind of thing. First the movie companies in the USA tried to own the Internet, this didn't work. Then governments cripple credit card companies to limit access to porn, and now this. The only thing I could find was this Independant thing, came up empty anywhere else, is this a valid report? Is it a slow news day and they had nothing better to print? Let's hope so ....

 

[steve25805 126,021]

5 hours ago, Admin said:

I am curious about how this would work exactly. The IP address of the server that hosts this site is hidden behind CloudFlare, so they wouldn't be able to effectively block the site by IP. If they try to block it using the domain name, I could always create a generic sounding domain name and redirect it here. 

Let's hope that it proves unworkable, as you seem to suggest.

At least if my access gets blocked I have your email address so can let you know what is happening. Generally and historically the UK is much less censorious with written content, so the forum side of things will probably be fine anyway. It's the pics and vids that could be a problem. There seems to be an international censorship plan being put into action. Because it seems like the kind of content likely to fall foul of UK law is almost identical to that which the US government has pressured payment processors into not accepting payment for. A mere coincidence? I wonder.

[steve25805 126,021]

4 hours ago, Scot_Lover said:

I use a Multiple Exit VPN when I need to, it just doesn't play well with Microsoft Azure.

Wouldn't Cloudflare be directed to kill access? This makes me want to build an onion site (Tor Network) for this kind of thing. First the movie companies in the USA tried to own the Internet, this didn't work. Then governments cripple credit card companies to limit access to porn, and now this. The only thing I could find was this Independant thing, came up empty anywhere else, is this a valid report? Is it a slow news day and they had nothing better to print? Let's hope so ....

 

Sadly, the government Bill is very real.......

https://services.parliament.uk/bills/2016-17/digitaleconomy.html

[LPee23 35]

I think the people who really want to watch peeing porn will be able to find it if they are determined to work around the system using VPNs, Tor, or similar services. However, there is no doubt that the Digital Economy Bill would make it harder, and many people would probably not be motivated enough to work around it. Traffic to sites would be down. Plus, accessing paysites through a VPN or Tor can be a pain from what I hear. If your IP address changes with each log in, they are pretty quick to block you. That is what people in many Middle Eastern countries have to deal with when using VPNs at paysites. 

 

 

[steve25805 126,021]

What gets me is the total conspiracy of silence going on here in the UK. I am something of a newshound yet I never heard a word about this. It is simply not being discussed in the media at all, and is on no one's radar here. Indeed, there appears to have been only a single report in one solitary UK newspaper, though once you are aware, confirmation that the repressive government Bill is real is easy enough to find via google. But we have to go looking for this news. It is not being reported to us.

Indeed, I only became aware because a member from outside this country - spurt20 - I am guessing probably from America but could be elsewhere - made a comment about it in chat. And this is what induced me to start google searching.

Thanks for the heads up, by the way, dude.

The media silence is baffling.

[Scot_Lover 1,876]

Gawd, I read that thing and it gave me a headache. 

If the site has age verification in place, does that mean it's allowed?

Given the nature of the Internet, I can't see how this would be enforced. If the data came through a major telco, for example, and the whole domain was blocked, wouldn't this affect hundreds of other people not looking at porn? Has this 'age verification regulator' been set up yet?

ISP's are supposed to block content here, 4chan.org was a prime candidate for blocking. It has not happened, torrent sites have not been blocked (friendly ISP's will send you a letter telling you not to do it again) but that's as far as it gets.

Really, short of taking an axe to the main internet cable into the country, how would it work?

This will not stop underage people from looking at porn either, every kid on the planet over the age of 12 has a mobile phone, what's to stop them making their own? There have been some juicy scandals over this on our news, even the armed forces had a go, lots of outrage, but nothing was done to stop it.

[Adyguy6970 877]

If this comes to pass it will be a very bad day indeed.  Grown folks should be able to access consensual adult material of their choice, unhindered by nanny.  My guess is that whole thing will simply prove unworkable and end being abandoned - at least that's what I hope will happen.   

[F.W 5,734]

So,everybody in the world pees,yet youre not allowed to see it?Wasnt homosexuality illegal once?Whats going on?Its not paedophilia is it?Which is rightly disgusting.

[P-Spud 1,352]

I suspect that very few enthusiasts (us!) would be willing to go public enough to openly complain. I'm sure that the authors of that bill are counting on it.

[spurt20 100]

Some more links from a serious source about this horrible threat:

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/nov/23/censor-non-conventional-sex-acts-online-internet-pornography

and - one article by someone who deserves our full support -

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/23/niche-porn-sites-sex-spanking-website-videos-pornography

[paul66 171]

This are bad news,but every sword cut both ways........When the Web (virtual live) is restricted,the people going more back in the reality,that would be mean, they got more sex in real, they dont only dream about peeingin naughty places( I know almost all girls got the urge for)

in future the web gives no more satisfaction, they do it in real......look back in the 20is, it was the victorian time, a moralistic time,...only the surface,......this time the people got no electronic media, they fuck in their free time so much they can, on every corner in public parks under the gas laterns, on every fence,or wall, on every meadow, in every barn.....the girls this time dont wear trousers, and often no underwear,for better accsess, also, for easy peeing everywhere.

What ever, yes the censorship, is attac to our freedom,and Im not glad about that,but the goverments used it to do, a lot of  sozial platforms spy out people for long time about her sexual behavior,for example EP,  I tell you a long time before,but the most of the people laughing about me, or thinking Im nuts, EP was  a project from echolon, but that was only one..... A lot owners of pornsites are arrestet, ...or dead, but the sites still running , often by the police, or the goverment, for use what?.....For spy out people.

[paul66 171]

The other thing : the islam got to much influence in our systems,

The Playboy always was a man magazin, with naked woman inside,.....Hugh Hefner run it, now his daughter chrissy run it.

2015 2016 there are NO more naked woman inside, BUT a Islam whoman with BURKA.

The End of our freedom,.........Obama and Merkel killed our freedom,done !

[LPee23 35]

I think they are sticking with their current definition of R18, so solo peeing would hopefully still be allowed. Watersports would be censored like it is now. It is definitely a shame though. The biggest difference will be enforcing the age verification with blocks on foreign and domestic sites.

I think David Cameron and anti-porn crusader Gail Dines are most to blame for this backwards trend. Cameron set it in motion at a time when Dines was having a significant influence in the UK. It is too bad that Dines got so much attention. Dines has been criticized by many academics for the inaccuracy of her work: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gail_Dines#Reception.

Edited November 27, 2016 by LPee23

[foxyguy56 2]

It sounds like your country is turning into a dictatorship. They can try to censor this site and block others but there are ways to get around this. Whatever happened to freedom of choice. This site is very clean as far as sex goes and there are many people out there with the same fetishes as we have. This site helps us by bringing us together so that we can talk to each other about our choices in life. I for one have had this fetish since I was a young teen. Back then the internet didn't exist. I am glad to have found others with the same fetishes as I have. Now I don't have to keep it a secret and I can tell others of what I enjoy about watersports. This is who we are. Just because one person has their opinion, why should they dictate how we should live our lives. Watersports is not harmful in any way to people and we choose to enjoy life in this manner. If a person doesn't like what we do they don't need to visit sites like this one. There are far too many people trying to force people like us to do what they say. Hopefully your country will come to their senses and allow people like us to choose what we want in our lives as long as no others are harmed.

[P-Spud 1,352]

On 11/26/2016 at 2:51 PM, paul66 said:

The End of our freedom,.........Obama and Merkel killed our freedom,done !

I don't see how you can blame Obama or Merkel either for burkas in Playboy or repressive internet restrictions. These laws are the work of conservative/religious zealots.

[Sephora 2,372]

I don't look at pornography as it doesn't interest me. However, i find this law or soon to be, stupid. Many politicians make me laugh when they want to add a law or a new tax for some stupid reason which most of the times makes no sense. They remind me of bullies that want's your lunch money so that you have nothing to eat.

[Brutus 2,206]

On Sunday, November 27, 2016 at 3:41 PM, P-Spud said:

I don't see how you can blame Obama or Merkel either for burkas in Playboy or repressive internet restrictions. These laws are the work of conservative/religious zealots.

And its not just one person, its the government machine that ruins our freedom one day at a time. Its also the peoples fault. Most of us are too complacent or distracted by social media bs to realize we are being ass raped by the guvment. Its easy for them to bend over a nation of mindless drones that are more concerned with selfies than their well being.

[norfie654321 69]

For all of those who're interested, the main .GOV petition got over 100,000 signatures and the government responded officially. Here is their response:

"Government responded

The Investigatory Powers Act dramatically increases transparency around the use of investigatory powers. It protects both privacy and security and underwent unprecedented scrutiny before becoming law.

The Government is clear that, at a time of heightened security threat, it is essential our law enforcement, security and intelligence services have the powers they need to keep people safe.

The Investigatory Powers Act transforms the law relating to the use and oversight of Investigatory powers. It strengthens safeguards and introduces world-leading oversight arrangements.

The Act does three key things. First, it brings together powers already available to law enforcement and the security and intelligence agencies to obtain communications and data about communications. It makes these powers – and the safeguards that apply to them – clear and understandable.

Second, it radically overhauls the way these powers are authorised and overseen. It introduces a ‘double-lock’ for the most intrusive powers, including interception and all of the bulk capabilities, so warrants require the approval of a Judicial Commissioner. And it creates a powerful new Investigatory Powers Commissioner to oversee how these powers are used.

Third, it ensures powers are fit for the digital age. The Act makes a single new provision for the retention of internet connection records in order for law enforcement to identify the communications service to which a device has connected. This will restore capabilities that have been lost as a result of changes in the way people communicate.

Public scrutiny

The Bill was subject to unprecedented scrutiny prior to and during its passage. 
The Bill responded to three independent reports: by David Anderson QC, the Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation; by the Royal United Services Institute’s Independent Surveillance Review Panel; and by the Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament. All three of those authoritative independent reports agreed a new law was needed. 

The Government responded to the recommendations of those reports in the form of a draft Bill, published in November 2015. That draft Bill was submitted for pre-legislative scrutiny by a Joint Committee of both Houses of Parliament. The Intelligence and Security Committee and the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee conducted parallel scrutiny. Between them, those Committees received over 1,500 pages of written submissions and heard oral evidence from the Government, industry, civil liberties groups and many others. The recommendations made by those Committees informed changes to the Bill and the publication of further supporting material.

A revised Bill was introduced in the House of Commons on 1 March, and completed its passage on 16 November, meeting the timetable for legislation set by Parliament during the passage of the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act 2014. Over 1,700 amendments to the Bill were tabled and debated during this time.

The Government has adopted an open and consultative approach throughout the passage of this legislation, tabling or accepting a significant number of amendments in both Houses of Parliament in order to improve transparency and strengthen privacy protections. These included enhanced protections for trade unions and journalistic and legally privileged material, and the introduction of a threshold to ensure internet connection records cannot be used to investigate minor crimes.

Privacy and Oversight

The Government has placed privacy at the heart of the Investigatory Powers Act. The Act makes clear the extent to which investigatory powers may be used and the strict safeguards that apply in order to maintain privacy.

A new overarching ‘privacy clause’ was added to make absolutely clear that the protection of privacy is at the heart of this legislation. This privacy clause ensures that in each and every case a public authority must consider whether less intrusive means could be used, and must have regard to human rights and the particular sensitivity of certain information. The powers can only be exercised when it is necessary and proportionate to do so, and the Act includes tough sanctions – including the creation of new criminal offences – for those misusing the powers. 
The safeguards in this Act reflect the UK’s international reputation for protecting human rights. The unprecedented transparency and the new safeguards – including the ‘double lock’ for the most sensitive powers – set an international benchmark for how the law can protect both privacy and security. 

Home Office"

Heres the official link if anyone wants to see it for themselves https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/173199?reveal_response=yes

[Alfresco 11,630]

This is certainly very worrying.   I understand the desire to protect minors, but adults should always have free choice.