Sex With Animals OK For British TV

[DudeAsInCool]

http://media.guardian.co.uk/site/story/0,1...1491990,00.html

[Shawn]

Hey man, sex with animals is good everywhere.

[slum_goddess]

Although Mr Hooper was at pains to point out that the new regulations will not give carte blanche to broadcasters, he said certain offensive material would be OK as long as it was shown at the right time and with suitable warnings.

"[What about] a programme about sex with animals? Yes, it's potentially possible. It all comes down to context," he said.

YAY! the voice of fucking reason (and fuck the FCC). i love TV here, ooopsy i said that like 600X already. :)

[Malicious Intent]

I was about to say "Science of sheep-shaggers in Mid-Wales begins Thursday at 9pm on Channel 4" when I read,

Mr Hooper's comments recalled Channel 4 bestiality documentary, Animal Passions, which featured a man who admitted have sex with his pony and a woman who had sex with her dog.

My tax money subsidises that shit

[Ken]

YAY! the voice of fucking reason

FCC and this issue aside, when "the voice of reason" is suddenly directly related to sex with animals, I think we have a problem.

[DudeAsInCool]

FCC and this issue aside, when "the voice of reason" is suddenly directly related to sex with animals, I think we have a problem.

On the surface, maybe. Controversial subject matter has a place, provided the context is right. On the other hand, smut is smut...but who are we to decide what people should see or not see...

[Excrement_Cranium]

Meh.

Open up sheep brothels. $10 a pop, and you might deter a lot of rapists.

BaAaAaAaA!

[Ken]

On the surface, maybe. Controversial subject matter has a place, provided the context is right. On the other hand, smut is smut...but who are we to decide what people should see or not see...

That's why I said issue aside.

It was mostly my personal reaction to the comment SG made.

I think subjectivity eventually collapses on itself.

Where do we stop with "controversial material"? How far does choice go and in what direction? Do we limit things to "legality" (which is different all across the world)?

I can think of some controversial material that I can't even print in words. Where does a person's "subjectively free-thinking mentality” stop and absolution begin?

Everyone has a boundary.

Personally, I don't care about "sex with animals".

[slum_goddess]

FCC and this issue aside, when "the voice of reason" is suddenly directly related to sex with animals, I think we have a problem.

listen to einstein-w/o-free-will-and-a-brain over there. no dude, i think /you/ have a problem

blah blah blah blahblahBLAAAAH! I can think of some controversial material that I can't even print in words.

just keep up w/your 'word-a-day' vocabulary builder calendar and maybe you'll get there (but it's a big maybe).

[Redneck4sure]

At least the rednecks have the decency to not do it on tv. :bigsmile:

[Wolfie]

At least the rednecks have the decency to not do it on tv. :bigsmile:

Sound like a Fox reality show idea.

[Redneck4sure]

If they do they could get Paris Hilton and Bill Clinton to star in it. Neither of them have any shame4sure.

[slum_goddess]

i want rednecks to do this shit on TV (so i can exercise my right to push the button to the next channel)

[Excrement_Cranium]

Actually, I think this just covered the Royal Wedding with Prince Charles kissing Camilla... what a goat.

[Redneck4sure]

i want rednecks to do this shit on TV (so i can exercise my right to push the button to the next channel)

Liar!! you know you want to watch. :bigsmile:

[slum_goddess]

oh darn, y'got me. you're right: i wanna watch. *sigh*