Are we the new Victorians*?

Are current politicians turning into the new Victorians? I ask as in recent days there has been an increasing case of prudishness in a number of things that have been done.

Of course firstly the UK has decided to bring in line what is allowed in online pay on demand pronography with what is produced in DVD in this country. The new law bans scenes of caning, aggressive whipping, penetration with an object "associated with violence", physical or verbal abuse (regardless if it is consensual), urolagnia (ingesting during "water sports"), female ejaculation, strangulation and face sitting. This list seems more an arbitrary list of things the panel dislike rather than based on any reasoning as to dangers etc.

Over in Northern Ireland this week we have the latest stage of the Human Trafficking and Exploitation Bill, which somehow is actually the introduction of the Nordic model on all sex workers including those that aren't trafficked or exploited. One of the amendments on Monday even raised the question, which the DUP refrained from answering were they now looking to ban lap dancing, strippergrams or kissograms with the clause of B touching themselves for the sexual gratification of A, whilst B is in physical proximity to A.

Of course with also all the moves as well to bring in a minimum price for a unit of alcohol it seems that those in power are trying to restrict people's morality to suit their perceptions.

So are our politicians becoming modern day Victorians with their attacks on the modern day equivalents of whore houses and gin joints? Are we entering the early stage of prohibition on a number of activities that the free market always seems to have provided through time immemorial.

Somehow, somewhere people will still access the sex workers that they want to, although by pushing it underground you are making it less likely that victims will come forward for support when they need to. People will still find ways to consume cheap alcohol, though if they are forced to set up illicit stills will what they produce be safe. As for porn, well as Avenue Q famously tell us, "The Internet is for...PORN!" somewhere out there in the unmanageable back streets of the interwebs there will still be British productions of all the porn that has just been made illegal. How you find it? How you determine it was made in a room in the UK (when all rooms can look alike)? How you can persecute the content creator who may well use a foreign domain? These are the questions that politicians have not and will not answer through their prudishness.

* Apologies to the all the debauched, drunkard and promiscuous Victorians that lived. Some of your generation gave your entire era a bad name as goody two shoeses. Though if you are viewing this in the UK terms and conditions now apply so maybe the Internet isn't quite so great...

Talk Talk filter is not politically neutral

I was doing some late night checking of Twitter in relation to the fact that the LGBT+ Lib Dems Website was blocked under Talk Talk's porn filter and came across this converstation.

Fortunately for Talk Talk we are outside an election period at the moment or else there could be implications from the fact that they are blocking both the Lib Dems and UKIP's LGBT websites but not that of Labour or the Conservatives. It means that they are able to differentiate sites and someone should have spotted this for the other political parties assuming that the Conservative and Labour sites had to be exceptions for the use of the language especially in relation to same-sex marriage, transgender issues and the like which are the key words that would automatically have been flagged up.



Of course the issue is far wider than this, these filters by the ISP providers are not good enough to differentiate what is health, education and public awareness sites and what is pornography etc. This was the crus of the debate at Lib Dem conference in Glasgow this September when we referenced back the motion on internet safety as it failed to address these issues in a way that the majority of the internet literate members of our party were already aware. The fact that our LGBT+ website is now parked behind such a porn filter is a case in point.

Earlier today someone else Tweeted this showing the BT definitions of what is blocked:

Some of the implications of this especially in relation to sex education have implications that some of our young people may be kept in ignorance as a result of parents not lifting the filter. This is especially true of LGBT youth whose parents are opposed to their child being LGBT and don't want them to find out about help that can be provided for them.


As a Liberal Democrat I don't believe that anyone should be enslaved by ignorance. But when the filters by two of the largest internet providers in this country can block access to some of the LGBT groups of our political parties, or information on sex education, including respect for a partner, STDs and LGBT lifestyle then there clearly is an issue. Thankfully the mainstream media are catching up with something that I know many Lib Dems have been shouting about for years. Some of our LGBT bloggers have found our own websites blocked on certain connections in internet cafes or wifi hotspots.All we are doing is talking about the issues, using language that can be used in good as well as for porn.



On an issue of porn, even notice that the emails selling you sex good get around your spam filter in your email by not using the actual words in full, but use punctuation and spaces to get around this. Guess what some porn does exactly the same.

Read also Alistair MacGregor's piece on Lib Dem Voice about this.

F17 Alternative Motion: Protecting Children from High Street Coffee #talknottech #ldconf

Lib Dem conference is going to be debating Protecting Children from internet pornography. However, over a coffee decided to slightly reword the motion based on something close to hand.

 

Conference welcomes the fact that:

A.Caffeine has the power to transform our society by empowering citizens, improving and extending

services, and enabling innovation.

 

B. It is vital both for our economy and our society that we teach children how to use caffeine from an

early age.

 

C. Liberal Democrats have a long tradition of protecting free speech and the right for adults to make

informed choices about their own caffeine habits.

 

However, conference believes that:

 

i) It is the role of government to protect those too young to make an informed choice from potentially

damaging experiences wherever possible.
ii) The long term effects on young minds of early exposure to often strong and highly-caffeinated blends is

highly damaging to impressionable young people and may significantly alter their attitudes to sleep and drink.

iii) The growing danger of children accessing high street caffeine is of increasing concern to parents,

teachers and children’s organisations.

iv) In addition to the problems posed by high street coffee shops, there are also significant concerns about other caffeine access points such as supermarkets and canned drinks that often actively target young people.

 

Conference notes:

a) That the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children has recently found an increase in the number of cases of children sleep deprived from over consumption.

b)The increasing number of cases of children being bullied or coerced into sampling caffeine drinks by their peers.

c) That the National Association of Herbal Tea Manufacturers has found that nine out of ten parents want a default setting on coffee machines to be a single shot.

 

Conference therefore calls on the Government to:

1. Work with the coffee retails industry to introduce coffee filters to explicit excessive caffeine on all new caffeine-enabled coffee devices.

2.Ensure that those adults wishing to drink extra-strong caffeine material should be required to opt in to machines containing such extra strength by providing verifiable proof of age.

3. Work with Caffeine Service Providers (CSPs)  to police actively their platforms and filter out

explicit caffeine which is currently easily accessible to children.

4.Support parents to take a more active role in how their children use caffeine and to understand the

risks involved.

5.Ensure that teaching about the dangers of coffee and the distorted view of caffeine provided by

coffee shops forms part of drink education teaching.