egafd.com

Well according to the bloody media it is, any incident in the News with a Peadophile is invariably linked to the abusers liking use of 'Pornography'. Any incidence of Child Abuse is invariably linked to the abusers use of of 'Pornography', Any incidence of some phycho killing a teacher is linked to the murderers use of 'Pornography'

I don't know about anyone else but I'm fucking sick of being categorised along with Child Abusers, Murderers, and generally any other sick bastard. I am a law abiding member of the public with a respectable job whose never bloody done anything to anyone apart from liking of adult movies between consenting adults, thoughts please.

JP (A little bit Pissed)

Have you noticed whenever a "glamour photographer" is featured in a cop show, he's invariably the rapist/kiddy fiddler?

mary whitehouse and longford said all this yrs ago,but longford could see no wrong in myra hindley could he?

It's just laziness as far as TV writers are concerned---like the drunks always had to be Scottish or Irish.

In fairness to the family of the murdered teacher, they were calling for the shutting down of certain internet sites---ones which catered for those interested in violence, rape, strangulation, necrophilia. These are sites which would disgust anyone with respect for women. In the same way as we do not want to be categorised alongside the filthy paedophiles, nor should we want to be considered the same as these violent psychopaths.

The family of that young woman had to sit in court and hear her killer describe how she was a willing participant in his strangling fantasies. Whether she was or wasn't is besides the point. He claimed she died in an accident, but instead of calling for help he hid the body, and visited it on a number of occasions to violate it.

This crime was horrendous, and I can understand the family's feeling that so long as there is an outlet for violent sexual acts, there will be people who will find trouble distinguishing the line between real life and fantasy.

And that's where we come in. Defence lawyers use the "pornography was no longer enough to satisfy my client's needs" argument---the inference being that it was pornography that turned a law-abiding citizen into a monster. By implication, anyone watching an adult film or reading a girlie mag is a ticking timebomb.

The internet caters for all tastes and types. Anything involving pain or degradation sickens me. What kind of turn-on is it when you know someone is in pain?

I can sympathise with the family, and anyone who rightly abominates violent behaviour, whether sexually-orientated or not.
But we're back to 'thin end of the wedge' territory here, and the notion that adults should be able to access any images or information they desire, as long as someone's prepared to supply it in a consensual context, regardless of how aberrant it may appear to most of us. The fact that some (presumably already) damaged individuals then blur the line between fantasy and reality is NOT the fault of the images.

By banning the lot, or at least making it much harder to access.
See my points, above.