Documentry - Animal Farm

[BEARBOT]

regarding germaine geer posing naked in an explict way way back then....IMHO she was making a statement by doing it.."hey im sexually free and i can fuck men outside marriage and dont call me a slut for having my fun etc"

from what i understand some lefties, hippies and "fun feminists" like germaine
were supportive of the emerging porn industry cos they felt lots of sexual abuses such as rape/myssogny
were down to sexual repression....porn was seen as liberating back then,
i can see that view UP TO A POINT...cant see how besitaility was seen as ok
..i guess it was a different time and it wasnt known then just how many children were being raped and otherwise abused and how it could damage their sexuality
...i feel yes the danish girl was exploited for sure, someone made a fortune off those creepy films
i was suprised that "animal farm" was voted best film at that "arty"porn fest
and that CHILD PORN used to be LEGAL in denmark

i have to say im AGAINST censorship but i think there is an argument for banning violent and bestial porn..scarey to think what effect this could have as its becoming normalised

re tuppy owens hat...its simple she is a fashion victim
that hat reminded me of one worn by a character in nathan barley
didnt think hats like those existed in real life

 

[chico enrico]

i have to say im AGAINST censorship but i think there is an argument for banning violent and bestial porn..scarey to think what effect this could have as its becoming normalised

what a load of fanny batter. What, you think our green and pleasant land will be at risk from an outbreak of chubby danish farm girls sucking pigs' peckers wherever you look if the floodgates of filth are opened? get a grip...

 

[Sweaty Betty]

I didnt see that,,,

I must have missed it too - Thank god

you were lucky, it was a right hairy growler

 

[ATOMIC SUPLEX]

Censorship wise, I say if consenting adults are alowed to do it in the eyes of the law then it should be alowed to be put on film.

 

[chico enrico]

Censorship wise, I say if consenting adults are alowed to do it in the eyes of the law then it should be alowed to be put on film.

Fair enough, but why 'IN THE EYES OF THE LAW' ???

And who gives someone the right to legislate against what , as you say, 'consenting adults get up to ??

see the 'spanner case' where a bunch of middle aged men got banged up for rubbing each other's gerries' helmets with cheese-graters and suchlike, even though they were all pefectly consenting adults, albeit gentlemen of 'refined taste' the courts decreed this was 'assault'.

I'd say it should be -

if consenting adults do it it should be allowed to be put on film. And if other folk wanna watch that, either for titillation or a laugh that's their business. End of...

 

[KeyboardJockey]

Censorship wise, I say if consenting adults are alowed to do it in the eyes of the law then it should be alowed to be put on film.

Fair enough, but why 'IN THE EYES OF THE LAW' ???

And who gives someone the right to legislate against what , as you say, 'consenting adults get up to ??

see the 'spanner case' where a bunch of middle aged men got banged up for rubbing each other's gerries' helmets with cheese-graters and suchlike, even though they were all pefectly consenting adults, albeit gentlemen of 'refined taste' the courts decreed this was 'assault'.

I'd say it should be -

if consenting adults do it it should be allowed to be put on film. And if other folk wanna watch that, either for titillation or a laugh that's their business. End of...

Thats my point of view as well. If something is consensual and adult then people should have the right to film and distribute it provided all involved consent.

 

[ATOMIC SUPLEX]

Censorship wise, I say if consenting adults are alowed to do it in the eyes of the law then it should be alowed to be put on film.

Fair enough, but why 'IN THE EYES OF THE LAW' ???

Because it's the law.

Now if something sexual should be leagal or not is another matter altogether. I'm talking about film sensorship. Back in the day when you couldn't see cocks in fannies was just daft, when I could get my cock out wank all over a lady and let her do a poo on me.

 

[ATOMIC SUPLEX]

Thats my point of view as well. If something is consensual and adult then people should have the right to film and distribute it provided all involved consent.

What if someone consents to having their arm cut off and another consents to shoving the soggy end up her fanny for huge amounts of cash?

 

[KeyboardJockey]

What if someone consents to having their arm cut off and another consents to shoving the soggy end up her fanny for huge amounts of cash?

The issue of voluntary mutilation is a tricky one. It really depends on the context and the mental state and point of view of the participants. What happened in the Spanner case may seem terrible and abusive to some non SM'ers but perfectly acceptable and safe, sane and consensual to others.

I've got freinds who have had their bodies modified (breast removal / genital re moddelling / hormonal treatment) so that are of Neuter gender to make themselves as androgynous as possible. Some may say that is a form of self mutilation which is unacceptable, me I just say it is there right to change their bodies as they see fit.

The issue of financial inducements is a separate matter and may be sometimes that financial inducements play a part in matters of consent.

I can imagine that there are things I would do for a large wedge that I probably woudn't do otherwise. Blood play for example.

 

[May Kasahara]

i have to say im AGAINST censorship but i think there is an argument for banning violent and bestial porn..scarey to think what effect this could have as its becoming normalised

what a load of fanny batter. What, you think our green and pleasant land will be at risk from an outbreak of chubby danish farm girls sucking pigs' peckers wherever you look if the floodgates of filth are opened? get a grip...

I thought what you've quoted was referring more to the effects on people of watching violent or bestial porn and thinking it's the norm, something which also really concerns me. There was a piece in the Guardian (which obviously I read, being the handwringing MC wet liberal that I am) about how sexuality is now, in which the author interviewed several young men for whom extreme and/or violent porn and the shaved fannies therein were what you started off watching in your teens and were therefore what they expected, to some extent, from their own real life sexual relationships.

Call me old-fashioned, I probably am; I have no problem watching people fucking and enjoying it, quite enjoy it myself in fact, but I do object to porn whose main angle on sexual titillation involves the forced humiliation and hurting of people. Consensual BDSM - yes, no problem. Guys forcing girls to eat their own sick, or rape porn - really not cool.

Obviously the problem is, where do you draw the line? How do you know when those involved are consenting or not?

Bestiality porn should be outlawed anyway IMO, as animals aren't able to give consent.

I thought this documentary was extremely sad and depressing. It also made me very glad that I've never seen Animal Farm, although TBH probably neither have most of the kids at my school who claimed they had.

 

[Sweaty Betty]

Bestiality porn should be outlawed anyway IMO, as animals aren't able to give consent.

Thats what draws the precise line that says this shit should be outlawed....imo

 

[KeyboardJockey]

Thats what draws the precise line that says this shit should be outlawed....imo

Good point an animal is not able to give informed consent.

 

[Flashman]

Horses can nay.

 

[xes]

Good point an animal is not able to give informed consent.

if someone was to bend over,and said animal mounted them,would that be ok? It's not forcing an animal to be fucked,the animal is fucking of it's own free will. IYSWIM

Plus an animal is more likely to turn around and attack a person if it's having something done to it that it's unhappy with.

I'm not advocating beastiality,just trying to throw in a non biased opinion. (I think/hope)

 

[KeyboardJockey]

if someone was to bend over,and said animal mounted them,would that be ok? It's not forcing an animal to be fucked,the animal is fucking of it's own free will. IYSWIM

Plus an animal is more likely to turn around and attack a person if it's having something done to it that it's unhappy with.

I'm not advocating beastiality,just trying to throw in a non biased opinion. (I think/hope)

Interesting point there. Very tricky dividing line. Personally I'm more comfortable with saying that animals can't consent - full stop. After all this argument could be extended to other groups who cannot consent because they were the active party. Opens up a very dodgy can of worms.

 

[May Kasahara]

Is this a Raddish thing?

 

[chico enrico]

Guys forcing girls to eat their own sick, or rape porn - really not cool.

this illustrates the crucial point: it is 'force' that is wrong - not the act.

I have a very good friend in tokyo, who is very beautiful , intelligent, works as a designer for one of Japan's top fashion houses , but is genuinely 9and without the slightest element of coercion) 'into' bukkake and very hardcore, degrading sex which she goes to a certain shibuya club to indulge in.

I know other girls who have been in some pretty heavy SM films.

IMO that is their informed decision and i would oppose any legislation that would prevent them from expressing themselves thus or participating in the making of such films.

I've no great desire to warch 'rape porn' or women eating vomit etc so i simply haven't watched it.

In much the same way if i go into a record shop i have no great desire to listen to death metal so i won't but the new bathory album.

oh, and I saw 'animal farm' over 20 years ago and it certainly didn't make me wanna go and suck my dog's furry lipstick, or cause me any great psycho-sexual trauma so I don't hold with any of that argument either.

 

[KeyboardJockey]

Guys forcing girls to eat their own sick, or rape porn - really not cool.

this illustrates the crucial point: it is 'force' that is wrong - not the act.

I have a very good friend in tokyo, who is very beautiful , intelligent, works as a designer for one of Japan's top fashion houses , but is genuinely 9and without the slightest element of coercion) 'into' bukkake and very hardcore, degrading sex which she goes to a certain shibuya club to indulge in.

I know other girls who have been in some pretty heavy SM films.

IMO that is their informed decision and i would oppose any legislation that would prevent them from expressing themselves thus or participating in the making of such films.

I've no great desire to warch 'rape porn' or women eating vomit etc so i simply haven't watched it.

In much the same way if i go into a record shop i have no great desire to listen to death metal so i won't but the new bathory album.

oh, and I saw 'animal farm' over 20 years ago and it certainly didn't make me wanna go and suck my dog's furry lipstick, or cause me any great psycho-sexual trauma so I don't hold with any of that argument either.

Top post.

 

[ATOMIC SUPLEX]

I have a very good friend in tokyo, who is very beautiful , intelligent, works as a designer for one of Japan's top fashion houses , but is genuinely 9and without the slightest element of coercion) 'into' bukkake and very hardcore, degrading sex which she goes to a certain shibuya club to indulge in.
.

Oh no, I'm finding that sexy.

 

[Fruitloop]

Better that than porky the pig any day.

 

[KeyboardJockey]

Better that than porky the pig any day.

Is it time for a Rebecca Loos joke ?

 

[Fruitloop]

She is even more emotionally emotionally needy than the horse-shagging lady, without the endearing if slightly proleptic liking for animals.

 

[May Kasahara]

Guys forcing girls to eat their own sick, or rape porn - really not cool.

this illustrates the crucial point: it is 'force' that is wrong - not the act.

Which is also the point I was making, if you look - the problem lies in how to ensure that all participants are doing so of their own free will, just one of the many issues that make the whole debate so much less black and white.

I have a very good friend in tokyo, who is very beautiful , intelligent, works as a designer for one of Japan's top fashion houses , but is genuinely 9and without the slightest element of coercion) 'into' bukkake and very hardcore, degrading sex which she goes to a certain shibuya club to indulge in.

I know other girls who have been in some pretty heavy SM films.

IMO that is their informed decision and i would oppose any legislation that would prevent them from expressing themselves thus or participating in the making of such films.

Indeed, and I agree wholeheartedly. My issue is not with whether people want to make films, but whether such films are widely distributed and made easily available (sorry if I didn't make that clear earlier). IIRC the Spanner stuff was all for private consumption, rather than bandied about in the public domain. It is a fact that the loserweb offers unprecedented access to porn of all kinds, from good old fashioned tits and bums to extreme out-there shit. Human curiosity being what it is, and the pathways of the internet being so easily clickable, people will almost inevitably visit things that they might not have gone into a shop and asked for.

I've no great desire to warch 'rape porn' or women eating vomit etc so i simply haven't watched it.

In much the same way if i go into a record shop i have no great desire to listen to death metal so i won't but the new bathory album.

And I salute you for it. You are only one individual though, so your own personal experience can't possibly cover the multitude of different reactions that people have.

oh, and I saw 'animal farm' over 20 years ago and it certainly didn't make me wanna go and suck my dog's furry lipstick, or cause me any great psycho-sexual trauma so I don't hold with any of that argument either.

Well done. I'm not sure that anyone is arguing that watching one particular film, once, will lead to the breakdown of civilisation as we all rush out to fuck our pets. What concerns me, as I stated previously, is that as porn in general is becoming more and more extreme, more extreme porn is becoming the general norm, therefore more and greater extremes may need to be reached in order to keep pushing the porn envelope. So where does that take us?

I have no desire to legislate against people's sexuality but I am frankly pretty disturbed by the level of violence that is displayed, overtly or not, in a lot of modern porn. Certainly I'm not pretending to have the answers, though, as previously expressed - I just think there's more of a debate to be had than simply 'ban it' or 'don't ban it'.

 

[madamv]

What concerns me, as I stated previously, is that as porn in general is becoming more and more extreme, more extreme porn is becoming the general norm, therefore more and greater extremes may need to be reached in order to keep pushing the porn envelope. So where does that take us?

I have no desire to legislate against people's sexuality but I am frankly pretty disturbed by the level of violence that is displayed, overtly or not, in a lot of modern porn. Certainly I'm not pretending to have the answers, though, as previously expressed - I just think there's more of a debate to be had than simply 'ban it' or 'don't ban it'.

Hmm I agree... Although saying that, I have several 'art' books and Taschen books/cards made depicting various stages of BDSM, heels, leather, torture etc. The only difference, as I see it, is there are no dicks or fannies flaying about. I am sure various hard porn images have been around for ever....

The distinction is a hard line to find.

 

[tim]

The consent argument is a bit weak unless you happen to be a vegan. Cows don't consent to having their tits mechanically squeezed, or to having metal bolts shot therough their brains. Horsies don't consent to being whipped around Aintree.

 

[TeeJay]

...What concerns me, as I stated previously, is that as porn in general is becoming more and more extreme, more extreme porn is becoming the general norm, therefore more and greater extremes may need to be reached in order to keep pushing the porn envelope. So where does that take us?...

Is this really true tho'?

I bet the Romans had some fairly sick stuff going on with animals and slaves and gladiators etc. - probably happen in the medieval London bearpits and taverns etc as well. Watching people killing other people and animals - plus sex - is about as extreme as it gets and this has probably been around for thousands of years...

...or are you you making a point about UK censorship laws, the availablity of stuff of the internet and British attitudes to sex and porn? I'm not sure this is exactly the same thing as saying that porn is getting more and more extreme, is it?

 

[May Kasahara]

I was thinking a lot about this last night rolleyes: ) and I think that my problem is more to do with availability than nature. As you say, if it can be thought of and physically done, chances are someone's done it already; I just don't think it's particularly great that people who aren't even into extreme porn have video clips of women fucking horses on their mobile phones 'because it's funny'.

 

[TeeJay]

The consent argument is a bit weak unless you happen to be a vegan. Cows don't consent to having their tits mechanically squeezed, or to having metal bolts shot therough their brains. Horsies don't consent to being whipped around Aintree.

You can support animal welfare - against cruelty, abuse and in favour of treating them with respect - and also agree with quick and painless killing of animals (ie minimal suffering) for food. I don't think that horses suffer that much from racing or cows from being milked - but then again I suppose animals don't suffer that much if they get randy and start to shag a human...

A lot of things are hard to distill into a theoretical moral principle, but this doesn't automatically mean they are without foundation ... I suppose that people's dislike of humans having sex with animals is one of these. Generally most people hold to the idea that you should only have sex with someone or some (living) thing if they consent, whereas herding them round a field (the living things) is less problematic...

... I can't really explain what the moral principles are behind this: maybe something to do with me thinking that herding cows round a field is somehow "in the natural order of things" - in that it approximates how they would live in the wild? I admit this isn't really a "moral principle" as such, more an "aesthetic".

 

[Louloubelle]

On reflection, perhaps the most disturbing thing about this film wondering what it must have been like for this woman's daugher.

Growing up on a filthy farm with a depressed mother with an alcohol problem who earned her money by having sex with a dog in nightclubs and then as a prostitute , well it's not a great start in life is it?

It must have been a difficult home life and her relationships and friendships with other children can't have been easy.

 

[chico enrico]

Growing up on a filthy farm with a depressed mother with an alcohol problem who earned her money by having sex with a dog in nightclubs and then as a prostitute , well it's not a great start in life is it?

BLOODY TOWNIES... THEY JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND OUR COUNTRY WAYS