egafd.com

Being a pedant is about the minor details......or errors that are irrelevant to someone the discussion.

Pointing out Liberalism isn't the same as Conservatism is not an insignificant detail.

P.s. The 'as' in your comment is bad grammar. You just needed a 'the'. You also didn't finish off your post with a full-stop. That's pedantry.

It was discussed a bit on this forum back in the early 00's (the days of 'officerdibble' & co) and very few people felt it would really come to pass, despite the 2003 laws determining U18 page 3 etc as 'child pornography'

Thing is, through the 'extreme porn' law, the knives seem to be out - anyone targeted by the powers that be in possession of legal porn is inferred to be a pervert. They now seek to classify 'rape porn' made by consenting adult actors (why not 'murder porn' then with any movie that depicts illegal killing?), so I am presuming the 'green light' may be then to call the likes of 'Class Action' and any schoolgirl fantasy porn as child abuse, and so on.

When I was 12 in the mid-80s, a load of lads at school found a Mayfair, and said in unison 'it's for perverts' chucking it aside - bollocks to that, I thought, and retrieved it a bit later. Thing is the media (having it's cake and eating it, as per - we still have the likes of Celebrity Juice sharing the ITV schedule with lots of puritan nonsense, and the Daily Heil publishing photographs of 14 yr olds in bikinis) is reacting now like my 12 year old classmates - like silly stupid idiots. We are at the point were the police seem keen to classify possession of or interest in adult pornography as some indication they are heinous sex offenders

When the totally unnecessary 'extreme' porn legislation was bull-dozing its way through our supine parliament during the rancid last days of the Broon's tenure, we were assured that it would only be used in the most extreme of circumstances. The powers that be even speculated that there would probably be fewer than 6 cases a year, presumably people with commercial quantities of stuff the moralists dont approve of. Which raises the question why the law was required in the first place. Prosecutions for this victimless crime are now running at over 1000 a year, almost all for possession on ones phone of one or two images that may not even have been solicited by the owner, and usually discovered by the filth during a search in an unrelated matter, another anti-privacy power handed to the police by NL. I dont suppose it will be any different when the new 'criminalising of adult sexuality' bill concerning 'rape' porn is passed soon.