Female ejaculation

[Arnold Layne]

To obtain this category cuts of 6m 27s were required. The cuts were Compulsory.
Cuts required to remove images of women expelling liquid during sexual activity

I mean how fucking backward are the film censors? they may as well not even bothered to pass it what total cunts!

[Mr Mark]

So how come watersports pass and male ejaculation?!?! - fucked up world we live in...

[Ron T. Storm]

I think it is sexual discrimination. For men to be allowed to ejaculate on film and women not is wrong. Women are effectively prosecuted because of their sex.

Treating women different to men in life and on film is totally immoral and should have been stamped out in the last century.

What a damn awful society we live in with this unbalanced biased treatment. Give ladies the chance to choose whether they want to ejaculate, or not, on camera the same as men.

Well I've said my piece,

Matt

[planeterotica]

These cuts were made using the Obscene Publications Act 1959, well if they are going to use that act every time a porn film is rated how do any R18s ever get a rating !confused!

[Arnold Layne]

They are total hypocrites, I mean what kind of stupid mother fuckers do we have "protecting" us from what we see? You can walk into any HMV, Virgin megastore, etc and buy uncut versions of nasty pointless rape films like I spit on your grave & The Last house on the left, yet you can't watch a film with a woman ejaculating as they still believe it's piss, even though it's been scientifically proven otherwise

"Cuts required to remove images of women expelling liquid during sexual activity"

Liquid? like what? it isn't battery acid is it for fucks sake! surely as adults we are entitled to know what kind of liquid it is then? it just shows how ignorant they really are as just saying "Expelling liquid" means they really don't even know or want to.

B - Bigoted

B - Bullshit

F - Film

C - Crappers

[Jacques]

The BBFC take (inverted commas intentional) "guidance" from the CPS. The CPS use the OPA. If there is a probable (not possible) prosecution for an activity that a jury would find obscene then the "guidance" is to not allow it.

Now the beauty of OPA can be seen with the recent Perrin case - pissing and shitting found not obscene by a jury as it was behind a payment gateway and therefore viewers had chosen to see the content and therefor not obscene. Does that mean that any pissing and shitting behind a payment gateway is ok then? No, precedent is not set with the OPA, it is taken on a case by case status.

What should happen is that the BBFC should be 'classifiers' and not 'censors'. The classification should have been given with the advice that there was potential content for an OPA prosecution. The producer would then decide if it should be cut or not.

The whole system including TV needs a Judicial Review.

[one eyed panda]

Yet as I read this thread the latest BBFC R18 ratings window is showing a film 'The G-spot and female ejaculation - a guide for lovers - has passed R18. If they cut it the film would be pointless.

[one eyed panda]

Shi* I'm a ******** idiot

[bill goss]

You do know that it's very often faked in pr0n anyway though, don't you?