Universal Porn Filter Coming to the U.K.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT
 

So are they going to ban the internet then? because they can't block every website that has a pornographic image. hell Youtube has birthing videos and you know people will turn to that to sate their thirst.

SonOfVoorhees:

Not angry. Just find it funny people moaning so much about the lack of porn. Its hilarious. What the real issue is is "free porn" just go buy it. People are just complaining cos porn is free online. Its nothing to do with art or blocking. Just buy it. But its the pirating excuse....why buy when we get it free. Thats the reason people are moaning. End of the day, if people search for child porn, then we can then catch them when they are flagged up. For the record, i only watch porn with my wife. Watching porn alone is like starving and looking through a restaurants window at all the people eating.

This is a censorship issue not a pornography issue. The government is using this to set up their own Great Firewall of China. How long before searches for info on subjects like Blair Peach, Jean Charles de Menezes, the Birmingham Six, or the Bogside Massacre (Bloody Sunday) get blocked?

ninjaRiv:

SonOfVoorhees:
Subjective doesnt matter. That statue wasn't built cos the artist liked cock. Porn is made for the sake of porn. Big difference. I agree though, this is about deleting illegal porn, rape and child porn. An i think a few people being pissed is fine if that crap is blocked. Also stopping underage kids looking up that crap. Would you want your 12 year old watching porn? An thats the problem also. You can see anything online. The internet has grown faster than the security behind. If your an adult, nothing is stopping you watching porn online....you may have to pay for it....but nothing is stopping you.

Not all things with nudity is porn, though, as you know. Suicide Girls? Classic paintings and statues? Nudity in comic books? I can easily see these as being classed as porn.

You have to opt out of this porn censorship, though; a thing plenty of people with families will not do. Wouldn't an opt in option be better? Except that already exists, in the form of software and parental control. This is censorship-lite. !It's censored but not quite. We're just testing everything for when we do ban everything."

So blocking child porn and rape porn is now compared to the Suicide Girls and classic Statues. HUGE DIFFERENCE PEOPLE. People can get horny about anything, a statue, a movie, a picture or even a plate of food (weird people out there.) Just that porn is made to be porn. Its people paid for fucking to sell a movie of people fucking. Im not against porn at all.....sorry if thats what you think. Though i am against 12 yr olds looking up "arse fucking" online and watching things that will corrupt them. Can we atleast agree with that? Most we need is a solution where adults can watch what they want and kids are blocked from porn online. An every freak is banned from watching child/rape porn online. Censorship is fine, but censor kids, not adults.

I really don't know why they didn't just make the filter opt IN instead of opt OUT.

Andrew_C:

SonOfVoorhees:

Not angry. Just find it funny people moaning so much about the lack of porn. Its hilarious. What the real issue is is "free porn" just go buy it. People are just complaining cos porn is free online. Its nothing to do with art or blocking. Just buy it. But its the pirating excuse....why buy when we get it free. Thats the reason people are moaning. End of the day, if people search for child porn, then we can then catch them when they are flagged up. For the record, i only watch porn with my wife. Watching porn alone is like starving and looking through a restaurants window at all the people eating.

This is a censorship issue not a pornography issue. The government is using this to set up their own Great Firewall of China. How long before searches for info on subjects like Blair Peach, Jean Charles de Menezes, the Birmingham Six, or the Bogside Massacre (Bloody Sunday) get blocked?

No arguing. :-) I realise the issue is censoring kids from this. Not adults, they just need better ways to allow adults the freedom and kids have more protection. An no one wants 12 yr olds watching arse fucking vids. We can agree with that. But rape and child porn should be banned. Porn is between concentual adults, not victims of abuse....an anyone that watches that stuff needs to be beaten to death.

I think its a waste of time, cant stop pirating online so they have no chance with blocking porn. Especially as the UK has no impact on the porn industry outside the UK. I dont think we even have a porn industry in the UK so nothing to worry about. lol

SonOfVoorhees:

So blocking child porn and rape porn is now compared to the Suicide Girls and classic Statues. HUGE DIFFERENCE PEOPLE. People can get horny about anything, a statue, a movie, a picture or even a plate of food (weird people out there.) Just that porn is made to be porn. Its people paid for fucking to sell a movie of people fucking. Im not against porn at all.....sorry if thats what you think. Though i am against 12 yr olds looking up "arse fucking" online and watching things that will corrupt them. Can we atleast agree with that? Most we need is a solution where adults can watch what they want and kids are blocked from porn online. An every freak is banned from watching child/rape porn online. Censorship is fine, but censor kids, not adults.

They intend to block everything they define as pornography. Read the article. Child porn is already blocked as well as possible by the Internet Watch Foundation and violent pornography is already illegal under the extremely ill-defined "Extreme Pornography" laws.

SonOfVoorhees:

More aimless and disingenuous ramblings snipped

See above

SonOfVoorhees:

ninjaRiv:

SonOfVoorhees:
Subjective doesnt matter. That statue wasn't built cos the artist liked cock. Porn is made for the sake of porn. Big difference. I agree though, this is about deleting illegal porn, rape and child porn. An i think a few people being pissed is fine if that crap is blocked. Also stopping underage kids looking up that crap. Would you want your 12 year old watching porn? An thats the problem also. You can see anything online. The internet has grown faster than the security behind. If your an adult, nothing is stopping you watching porn online....you may have to pay for it....but nothing is stopping you.

Not all things with nudity is porn, though, as you know. Suicide Girls? Classic paintings and statues? Nudity in comic books? I can easily see these as being classed as porn.

You have to opt out of this porn censorship, though; a thing plenty of people with families will not do. Wouldn't an opt in option be better? Except that already exists, in the form of software and parental control. This is censorship-lite. !It's censored but not quite. We're just testing everything for when we do ban everything."

So blocking child porn and rape porn is now compared to the Suicide Girls and classic Statues. HUGE DIFFERENCE PEOPLE. People can get horny about anything, a statue, a movie, a picture or even a plate of food (weird people out there.) Just that porn is made to be porn. Its people paid for fucking to sell a movie of people fucking. Im not against porn at all.....sorry if thats what you think. Though i am against 12 yr olds looking up "arse fucking" online and watching things that will corrupt them. Can we atleast agree with that? Most we need is a solution where adults can watch what they want and kids are blocked from porn online. An every freak is banned from watching child/rape porn online. Censorship is fine, but censor kids, not adults.

I feel like you didn't read everything I wrote... yes, ban the real nasty stuff, Ban the crap out of it. My problem was never with that, it's with what's defined as porn/ ALL porn is getting censored but what are government officials, people not known for being a fun, relaxed type, going to class as porn? But I've tried divert away from porn vs art because it's not even the real issue. Censorship is. And the last line of your post sums up everything I have to say on the matter, so that's good.

God damn it. Now we'll have to phone up our ISP's and say "My name is X and I'd like you to unblock porn sites please".

I won't pretend that there are some fucked up websites out there not suitable for children. I agree that "rape porn" and child porn and crap like that needs to be taken the fuck down. But this is not the way to go about it.

A very simple change of opt in rather than opt out would have made everyone happy. Help the parents parent their children, don't fucking do it for them. Otherwise parents will never learn anything. The mentality has become 'The government needs to step in an do this and do that for us' rather than doing things themselves.

Also, I blame TV. I know it's cliche but with shows like Eastenders and Big Brother and all that crap being shown to kids they grow up thinking the stuff that those characters do is acceptable. Like sleeping around, and fighting over a non issue.

AC10:
I really don't know why they didn't just make the filter opt IN instead of opt OUT.

Less people are likely to opt out, due to shame and pressure from family, etc.

Andrew_C:

SonOfVoorhees:

So blocking child porn and rape porn is now compared to the Suicide Girls and classic Statues. HUGE DIFFERENCE PEOPLE. People can get horny about anything, a statue, a movie, a picture or even a plate of food (weird people out there.) Just that porn is made to be porn. Its people paid for fucking to sell a movie of people fucking. Im not against porn at all.....sorry if thats what you think. Though i am against 12 yr olds looking up "arse fucking" online and watching things that will corrupt them. Can we atleast agree with that? Most we need is a solution where adults can watch what they want and kids are blocked from porn online. An every freak is banned from watching child/rape porn online. Censorship is fine, but censor kids, not adults.

They intend to block everything they define as pornography. Read the article. Child porn is already blocked as well as possible by the Internet Watch Foundation and violent pornography is already illegal under the extremely ill-defined "Extreme Pornography" laws.

Come on, if you live in the UK you know are government are pathetic. They have no ability to block stuff outside the UK, as we see from pirate sites. They would have to make pacts with other countries for this to work. I do agree though, kids should be blocked more and adults should have freedom to watch what they want. Just need more work on the best way to do that.

ninjaRiv:

SonOfVoorhees:

ninjaRiv:

Not all things with nudity is porn, though, as you know. Suicide Girls? Classic paintings and statues? Nudity in comic books? I can easily see these as being classed as porn.

You have to opt out of this porn censorship, though; a thing plenty of people with families will not do. Wouldn't an opt in option be better? Except that already exists, in the form of software and parental control. This is censorship-lite. !It's censored but not quite. We're just testing everything for when we do ban everything."

So blocking child porn and rape porn is now compared to the Suicide Girls and classic Statues. HUGE DIFFERENCE PEOPLE. People can get horny about anything, a statue, a movie, a picture or even a plate of food (weird people out there.) Just that porn is made to be porn. Its people paid for fucking to sell a movie of people fucking. Im not against porn at all.....sorry if thats what you think. Though i am against 12 yr olds looking up "arse fucking" online and watching things that will corrupt them. Can we atleast agree with that? Most we need is a solution where adults can watch what they want and kids are blocked from porn online. An every freak is banned from watching child/rape porn online. Censorship is fine, but censor kids, not adults.

I feel like you didn't read everything I wrote... yes, ban the real nasty stuff, Ban the crap out of it. My problem was never with that, it's with what's defined as porn/ ALL porn is getting censored but what are government officials, people not known for being a fun, relaxed type, going to class as porn? But I've tried divert away from porn vs art because it's not even the real issue. Censorship is. And the last line of your post sums up everything I have to say on the matter, so that's good.

I did. You said subjective. Whats hardcore for one person is softcore for others. I agree with you, i do, sick stuff should be blocked. But who makes that choice? Thats the problem with subjective, can many anything to anyone. Just need better control of what a kid and an adult can view. Am off now, loved your comments. :-) Sometimes i find people argue more though they agree and see things differently. Have a good night. :-)

I wonder how many people just read the title and nothing else...

Judging by the responses, I'd say quite a few. For those of you who don't like reading whole posts, he says that you can turn it off if you want and that before it's put in place, your internet provider will ask you if you actually want it. In other words, if you want to look at porn, you can still look at porn. I don't really see what the uproar is... Are people mad that they can't watch it at McDonalds now or something (public wifi is the only place where it's mandatory and that's really not unreasonable)? Seriously, who looks at porn in public anyway?

Edit: And if you're so ashamed that you can't bare to tell your internet provider that you want access to adult content, maybe you're better off without it.

SonOfVoorhees:

Da Orky Man:

SonOfVoorhees:
You all stupid? Its not blocked. It blocks rape or child porn. Why do people claim it blocks everything? I hate the condems but this is a good thing. End of the day, if you are a normal porn loving guy, you have nothing to fear.....only if it involves kids or its rape porn. In that case, your not normal and should be beating in prison.

You didn't read it, did you?

The law would immediately ban possession of rape pornography full stop, as well as bringing in new measures to detect and block child pornography. However, it would also automatically block all porn sites to everyone in the UK unless they specifically ask their ISP remove the block,

You didnt read my comment did you. I said it blocks rape porn. Why would anyone want to see rape porn? If you do, i hope some female person in your life is raped so you know its not something for entertainment. Now blocking child porn im all for.

WTF dude!? He has an opinion that you find abhorrent so you're wishing violence on his loved ones to teach him a lesson!? What the hell is wrong with you?

If you truly find the idea of rape as bad as I think you do, you shouldn't be wishing that on anyone.

SonOfVoorhees:

ninjaRiv:

SonOfVoorhees:

So blocking child porn and rape porn is now compared to the Suicide Girls and classic Statues. HUGE DIFFERENCE PEOPLE. People can get horny about anything, a statue, a movie, a picture or even a plate of food (weird people out there.) Just that porn is made to be porn. Its people paid for fucking to sell a movie of people fucking. Im not against porn at all.....sorry if thats what you think. Though i am against 12 yr olds looking up "arse fucking" online and watching things that will corrupt them. Can we atleast agree with that? Most we need is a solution where adults can watch what they want and kids are blocked from porn online. An every freak is banned from watching child/rape porn online. Censorship is fine, but censor kids, not adults.

I feel like you didn't read everything I wrote... yes, ban the real nasty stuff, Ban the crap out of it. My problem was never with that, it's with what's defined as porn/ ALL porn is getting censored but what are government officials, people not known for being a fun, relaxed type, going to class as porn? But I've tried divert away from porn vs art because it's not even the real issue. Censorship is. And the last line of your post sums up everything I have to say on the matter, so that's good.

I did. You said subjective. Whats hardcore for one person is softcore for others. I agree with you, i do, sick stuff should be blocked. But who makes that choice? Thats the problem with subjective, can many anything to anyone. Just need better control of what a kid and an adult can view. Am off now, loved your comments. :-) Sometimes i find people argue more though they agree and see things differently. Have a good night. :-)

What? But... You... You were disagreeing with me on the subjective points. That's all what I just said! I don't...

I...

Was this a huge miscommunication on both our parts or are you fucking with me (pun intended)?

Seriously? I'm of the personal belief that pornography helped me out as a kid, ya know, stress relief and what have you. But I guess that blaming porn for ruining our kids is a lot easier than taking responsibility ourselves.

maybe its just cuase I live int he US but I dont see thsi happening here.

and even though im not that old... does this mean the Uk will just go back t the days the US was in where sons were stealing their dad's playboys?

... though I agree with the radio personalities this morning I was listening too. now its just a matter of time till cameron's porn habits go public for all to see.

National Order for Toddler & Small Ones Protection Act?

Or maybe

Net Obstruction Technology & Parental Intervention Pornography Act?

Captcha: yeah right

Now all the child molesters and psycho rapists will finally go outside and get some fresh air... at your local playground. I really hope Australia doesn't follow suit, just keep getting distracted buy the boat people.

We are tor-rified!

ITT: Fetish shaming, porn-shaming and a whole lot of slow-witted agreement with politicians' painfully transparent using children as a shield to create an even bigger surveillance state than already exists. Because child molesters are the modern bogeyman for which we have no answer but hysteria.

oph by the way, anyone who thinks this is the only way to protect children from seeing porn, by blocking it on the web, you're naive

id seen porno mags before i was 10, and anal porn before i was 15. dont think wifi even exsisted then n dial up was myustery

curiousity will find a way

let the childrens parents deal with this, not the government

Oh the irony of a Conservative government pushing nanny state measures, pointless policy which I doubt will become a thing, much like minimum spend and plain packaging.

I wonder where else this explicit request that you allow porn will turn up? Will there be a field when you are screened that will be marked in a certain way?

These thoughts march in totalitarian direction.

Dominic Crossman:

You know there are problems that actually relevant, like having terrorist and hate preachers in the UK who we won't deport because of their "human rights".
My question is where are their victims' human rights?
With issues like this, how the hell can censoring porn be protecting us when our soilders are stabbed to death and ran down in the middle of London or the attacks of 7/7 kill dozens of people.
I'm not polictal but I've had it with the coalition.
Sorry for going off topic, the blindness the goverment has to bigger issues just comes to mind when they start doing trivial, unimportant stuff like this.

While I do agree that this block is ridiculous, saying that there are "bigger issues" isn't a good argument. The government can focus on more than one problem at a time. Also, didn't 7/7 happen almost a decade ago?

Anyway, the "think of the children" shtick is such a dirty argument that I'm a bit shocked the leader of any country would use it with a straight face. All it does is automatically portray the opposition as people who don't care about, or even want to harm children. That alone is pretty bad.

But really, a block on porn? What will this accomplish? Even assuming that this will keep young teenagers from getting access to pornography (which it won't), all that means is that they will be hopelessly uneducated about the very concept of sex.

Not to insinuate that porn teaches sex in any positive way, what I'm saying is that keeping teens sheltered from sex and saying "just don't do it" in response to inquiries about it will make teen pregnancy and STD statistics skyrocket. Let's just put this out there:

TEENAGERS, BY THEIR VERY INSTINCT, WILL TRY TO FUCK EACH OTHER AND THEMSELVES TO NO END. NO SOCIAL BARRIER CREATED BY MAN WILL EVER STOP THAT FROM HAPPENING.

So how about instead of this shit, we get parents and teachers to show the consequences of unprotected sex, and try to give a picture of the huge responsibility that sex takes in terms of a relationship.

Why not? Because the Bible says things against premarital sex? Well, we might as well stop all production and public services on Sundays as the Bible explicitly warns against working on the Sabbath. Oh, but that doesn't sound very convenient to your infrastructure, does it?

The temptation to leave this country gets stronger every time that posh prick opens his mouth. The worrying thing is, this decision creates public debate. It's a smoke screen. It stops people worrying for five minutes about why Cameron and his mates are flushing 50 notes down the toilet.

SonOfVoorhees:

Michelangelos David wasnt made for people to go "wow, what a huge cock". I dont think you know what art is, think your confusing nudity and porn. Being nude doesnt mean its porn.

By today's standards? Yes it does.

Your continued ignorance on this topic that you don't care about makes me angry. Please censor yourself so I don't have to deal with it.

-Dragmire-:

SonOfVoorhees:

Da Orky Man:

You didn't read it, did you?

The law would immediately ban possession of rape pornography full stop, as well as bringing in new measures to detect and block child pornography. However, it would also automatically block all porn sites to everyone in the UK unless they specifically ask their ISP remove the block,

You didnt read my comment did you. I said it blocks rape porn. Why would anyone want to see rape porn? If you do, i hope some female person in your life is raped so you know its not something for entertainment. Now blocking child porn im all for.

WTF dude!? He has an opinion that you find abhorrent so you're wishing violence on his loved ones to teach him a lesson!? What the hell is wrong with you?

If you truly find the idea of rape as bad as I think you do, you shouldn't be wishing that on anyone.

Voorhees is the type that thinks whatever he doesn't like should automatically be banned, or at least that's what I've gathered from all his comments which show a total lack of empathy towards other people while still keeping a "holier-than-thou-art" attitude. I just think he'd have massive troubles walking outside, because he'd want people to die or their family to be raped because they chose the McChicken over a McDouble.

Wait a sec...

I just realised that this is the UK and we broadcast "Embarrassing Bodies Live" before watershed. All folks gotta do is tune in and they'll see random strangers posting their webcam feeds of minor STDs or skin irritations you can barely see because the pictures are so grainy and most of them will go up on screen.

And Cameron thinks tackling the internet porn industry (worth over a billion pounds in tax revenue per year even with current restrictions) is going to stop kids from talking about "Vajazzling" and primary school-aged girls wanting careers as glamour models in the future?

Serious waste of money better spent getting rid of the legal slavery known as Workfare!

Capitano Segnaposto:
I remember seeing my first porn mag at the age of 7.

Reminds me a bit of the Story my mum would tell me.

Apparently at one point se was traveling on buisness and took me with her (as I was a todler) and I turned on the TV in the hotel. Apparently it went to a pornographic film...

Anyway I was apparently telling my mother what was happening whilst she was in the other room... Asking her if we should pay to watch the full film....

I don't remember this but I can't see something like that being made up.

Point is there is nothing wrong with me and I would have been what? 2-3

Adult things damage children... Yeah I call bullshit.

klaynexas3:

-Dragmire-:

SonOfVoorhees:

You didnt read my comment did you. I said it blocks rape porn. Why would anyone want to see rape porn? If you do, i hope some female person in your life is raped so you know its not something for entertainment. Now blocking child porn im all for.

WTF dude!? He has an opinion that you find abhorrent so you're wishing violence on his loved ones to teach him a lesson!? What the hell is wrong with you?

If you truly find the idea of rape as bad as I think you do, you shouldn't be wishing that on anyone.

Voorhees is the type that thinks whatever he doesn't like should automatically be banned, or at least that's what I've gathered from all his comments which show a total lack of empathy towards other people while still keeping a "holier-than-thou-art" attitude. I just think he'd have massive troubles walking outside, because he'd want people to die or their family to be raped because they chose the McChicken over a McDouble.

I can see what you mean. I kind of regretted posting that as I may have stepped into an argument with no value, even to outside people who can make informed decisions based on the opposing opinions. An argument with no value to anyone is usually something I try to avoid. I was just kind of irked by his lack of empathy on the subject.

Live and learn I guess...

The effect on the innocence of children? Child porn is already blocked. I also highly doubt what a child needs is more sexual repression than is already present in the world.

We have had pious paranoid purity shoved on us for far too long now. I think it's time that we realize that a child's head will not explode if you tell it where babies come from before the age of 25.

Meh. People are getting a bit riled up over this. All they are really saying is the default position will change from completely open to blocking pornographic content. Unless people are afraid to just allow it to be unblocked, it doesn't hurt anyone. The concept is called a "nudge". This means the default state is censoring pornographic material rather than the reverse. The default state has quite a large impact on decision making. For instance, in the US the default position on a driver's license is that of not being an organ donor. So consequently, the percentage of people who are organ donors are really small. In places where the default position is being an organ donor, the percentage of people who are organ donors is really high. It doesn't make anyone do anything and people are free to participate in this block or to not participate. If they were saying no one can look at it ever, then people should show up at their local parliament representatives house with torches and pitch forks. But that is clearly not the case. I don't ever look at porn on internet, but I would choose for it to not be blocked just because you can't possibly trust an automated filter to not block things that are not actually porn.

Baresark:
Meh. People are getting a bit riled up over this. All they are really saying is the default position will change from completely open to blocking pornographic content. Unless people are afraid to just allow it to be unblocked, it doesn't hurt anyone. The concept is called a "nudge". This means the default state is censoring pornographic material rather than the reverse. The default state has quite a large impact on decision making. For instance, in the US the default position on a driver's license is that of not being an organ donor. So consequently, the percentage of people who are organ donors are really small. In places where the default position is being an organ donor, the percentage of people who are organ donors is really high. It doesn't make anyone do anything and people are free to participate in this block or to not participate. If they were saying no one can look at it ever, then people should show up at their local parliament representatives house with torches and pitch forks. But that is clearly not the case. I don't ever look at porn on internet, but I would choose for it to not be blocked just because you can't possibly trust an automated filter to not block things that are not actually porn.

The question is why must the default position be the one blocking pornography? It's not like this is something that'll happen at the innocent flip of a switch, millions of government dollars are going to be thrown at this.

Why not instead have the default position be unblocked with the option of parents blocking it as a government convenience? That would be wasteful, but it would at least make sense. What good reason does the government have for automatically blocking porn?

Dangit2019:

Baresark:
Meh. People are getting a bit riled up over this. All they are really saying is the default position will change from completely open to blocking pornographic content. Unless people are afraid to just allow it to be unblocked, it doesn't hurt anyone. The concept is called a "nudge". This means the default state is censoring pornographic material rather than the reverse. The default state has quite a large impact on decision making. For instance, in the US the default position on a driver's license is that of not being an organ donor. So consequently, the percentage of people who are organ donors are really small. In places where the default position is being an organ donor, the percentage of people who are organ donors is really high. It doesn't make anyone do anything and people are free to participate in this block or to not participate. If they were saying no one can look at it ever, then people should show up at their local parliament representatives house with torches and pitch forks. But that is clearly not the case. I don't ever look at porn on internet, but I would choose for it to not be blocked just because you can't possibly trust an automated filter to not block things that are not actually porn.

The question is why must the default position be the one blocking pornography? It's not like this is something that'll happen at the innocent flip of a switch, millions of government dollars are going to be thrown at this.

Why not instead have the default position be unblocked with the option of parents blocking it as a government convenience? That would be wasteful, but it would at least make sense. What good reason does the government have for automatically blocking porn?

First: I don't disagree with you. The default position should always be open, in my opinion.

Second: All governments are wasteful. The representatives do not always represent the position of their constituents, contrary to popular belief. This is because people have the role, not robots. They are throwing money at this because the people involved are largely inept and do not understand their purpose. They seek out positions to fulfill their own wishes, not the wishes of people who elect them. This is just the logical extension of the aforementioned point. They don't like it, so they will use money that is not their to try and stamp it out.

Third: The government doesn't have any reason at all, only the individuals responsible have reasons. Obviously reasons founded in ignorance and stupidity, reasons founded in their own ability to cope with the existence of these things.

Ultimately though, provided they are not attempting to eliminate it, just changing the default position is not a bad thing. The decision still falls to individuals.

-Dragmire-:

klaynexas3:

-Dragmire-:

WTF dude!? He has an opinion that you find abhorrent so you're wishing violence on his loved ones to teach him a lesson!? What the hell is wrong with you?

If you truly find the idea of rape as bad as I think you do, you shouldn't be wishing that on anyone.

Voorhees is the type that thinks whatever he doesn't like should automatically be banned, or at least that's what I've gathered from all his comments which show a total lack of empathy towards other people while still keeping a "holier-than-thou-art" attitude. I just think he'd have massive troubles walking outside, because he'd want people to die or their family to be raped because they chose the McChicken over a McDouble.

I can see what you mean. I kind of regretted posting that as I may have stepped into an argument with no value, even to outside people who can make informed decisions based on the opposing opinions. An argument with no value to anyone is usually something I try to avoid. I was just kind of irked by his lack of empathy on the subject.

Live and learn I guess...

I struggle with it myself, so I know how you feel, but my main guess is he won't reply to yours at this point because I think he either lost interest or got sick of his inbox piling up. And if he does reply, chances are it will be something about how apathetic he is towards the subject and how because he's apathetic toward it it automatically is a bad thing and he can strawman the hell out of it because he is Voorhees. I've seen trolls on memebase, nay, 4chan, with better arguments than Voorhees apathetic and also somehow antagonistic responses.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here