egafd.com

On checking the latest BBFC decisions on R18s, I noticed that they have required heavy cuts (about 19 minutes) to 'Un-natural Sex #6' (Diabolic). The cuts are apparently all to one scene, the main reason given being that the girl is clearly suffering 'mental and physical trauma'. Previous installments of this all-anal series have been approved for R18 with little or no cuts.

Now, I've seen the uncut US version of this vid, and I didn't notice anything out of the ordinary compared with previous installments, EXCEPT that in one scene the girl (Chandler) spends most of the time making a high-pitched squealing noise, like Minnie Mouse caught in a trap. If you were new to porn you might be worried that she was really in agony, but on a closer look it is clearly just part of her 'act'. According to IAFD, she has made 240 vids, many of them anal, so she is hardly a newbie!

So all you porn producers had better give your girls instructions not to scream too high!

Maybe this is just a 'one-off' misjudgement by the BBFC. Or could it be a sign of a general hardening up of their interpretations?

why not email the bbfc querying their actions and post their reply here? be interesting to know what the latest thinking is on these matters, among our moral superiors.

To correspond with the BBFC I would need to disclose my name and address, etc, and for personal reasons I prefer not to!

Maybe someone less 'chicken' would like to take it on?

This is why you have to suffer cuts and censorship of your TV, videos, movies etc, because as a nation we are still 'chicken' in confronting the establishment and saying "Fuck you, fuck that, I'll watch what I dam well please thank you very much!" Yes, although we have come a long way in the past 40 years we are still cap doffing surfs at heart. The French and the Eyeties wouldn't stand for it they'd take to the streets if some poncy politician or public sector prat tried to tell them what they could or couldn?t watch.

Maybe the cuts in the movie alluded to have got something to do with that new geezer who's taken over the top job at the BBFC. He sounds a particularly poncy middleclass prat that claims never to have seen a "blue movie" doesn?t like swearing in films and doesn?t appear to have the slightest thing in common with the vast majority of the British public. So how can he possible make any objective decisions on behalf of the British public?

The movie David J alluded to sounds like a load of unerotic, distasteful tripe. However, if all involved are consenting adults I would still defend their right to view it - though I might question their taste!

Officer Dibble.

What an interesting concept! I wonder if the scene or film was
re-dubbed, if it would pass muster then, or maybe the new porn censor has decided enough is enough, and has used this particular film as a scapegoat. I mean if she was "laughing all the way through (unlikely when you have someones knob up your arse), would they have taken the same view. My view is the horse has bolted. Like technology, you cant really go back, you just drive it underground, result: films still get made, but you have to distribute them illegally. All you can do is challenge the bbfc,s ruling but I guess that,s up to the producer/makers. As punters there,s not a lot we can do.

Just watch it sonny !

The BBFC can fuck off.

You mail them Dibble. Your no chicken! And you could put across a good argument which hopefully might prompt a reply from those bbfc muppets.

I just knew this Quentin geezer would be a pain in the arse to the porn fans of the nation. However Dibble I disagree that he is a "middle class prat". I suspect he is an upper class prat from the landed gentry who goes fox hunting on a sunday after church (C of E of course). Apart from his toffish name he is also a Knight of the Realm. The only non toffs who get a knighthood are celebs, sportsmen, politicians and Jimmy Saville. He was probably born with a title as well as a silver spoon in his gob.

However if the bbfc ever do get off thier high horses and give us a reply we should be polite to them as persuasion may educate them into accepting that porns not that bad. Whereas if we just slag them off like I just did they will dismiss us all and think we are not worth listening to.

I must admit I dont know if Quentin was born a toff. He might have got a knighthood for his work in Ireland for John Major. I just let my reverse snobbism take over due to the bloke being caled Quentin and being a tosser.

in a nutshell - you're wrong.

you don't need to disclose any details about yourself and here's the proof:



as it happens, i did use my real name but they had no way of knowing the truth or otherwise of my given identity and what's more they expressed not the slightest interest in the matter. i also communicated via a webmail address which offered no clues as to my identity.

webmaster@bbfc.co.uk - go on, give it a shot and tell officer dibble where he can stick his mighty truncheon (subject to bbfc approval, of course).