I’m pretty sure most countries have an idea of peace that does not openly include “start frivolous wars”. We’ll be ok without that.

For starter, the fact that I can’t find anything related to that in any local (France), German, European, or international news outlet. The closest thing there is is a change in unemployement benefits, replaced by a stricter (but with similar monthly amount) model (https://www.iamexpat.de/career/employment-news/german-cabinet-agrees-replace-burgergeld-neue-grundsicherung). Added with the absolute lack of any external source from this post’s link, a bit of caution sounds reasonable.

Just wish for consequences of his actions.

He’s too old for that. A country who’s president is, say, around his 50s, should fear for potential consequences. Trump? He’ll be dead long before a single actual trial is even started at this point. Better stop the murder and destruction sooner than let it go in the prospect of posthumous condemnation.

There’s two things people in position of power are good at: talking about child safety, and not giving a single crap about actual kids.

busy during the day, emptier overnight

Ah, so THAT is the problem they’re looking to solve here.

We’re collectively picking all the worst solutions, aren’t we?

“Oh no, a number, that’s threatening the greatness of the US and we must act immediately!”

• Some couch fucker, probably

What, you think parents should watch over their kid and provide them interaction? What is this, year 1200?

Yes, but under the promise that you won’t be under any kind of protection if it happens again in a few years.

Nah. The only place where trump would be acceptable is as a footnote in a history book. Get that filth out of the way.

No need. As I said, it’s still here, in plain view, for people to see. When you see someone harming someone else, your blame goes to some movie instead of to the people involved. You’ve been very adamant about that.

Lol. You’re aware that the whole discussion remain available for all to see? Ignoring things won’t change anything.

And you’re getting it.

Wow, not addressing any single issue raised and citing people in derogatory ways. You sure made your point clear. I’m sure you’re the man in every party you would go.

Murder is illegal. Would you advocate against murder in movie? Guess not, uh?

Let’s make choking people illegal… wait, that’s already the case. At least I hope it is. Would you advocate against choking in movies? Yes?

Nice double standards you got. YOU outed yourself as someone that’s ok with censoring things that don’t relate to them, on the flimsiest of pretense, without actually caring about actual people involved. You just want something you dislike to disappear, and use imaginary justification.

If you were advocating to protect victims? Sure. If I was saying “nah, choke women away!” then sure, I’d be wrong. I’m saying banning something will not change anything. And you’re hell-bent on banning things.

Unless you’re born yesterday, it is transparent that such laws are rarely, if ever, about protecting anyone. It’s about setting up a mechanism to arbitrarily forbid contents and idea. But, I guess you’re a-ok with that, and don’t care either about actual people that gets rolled over by this. At no point you took the side of the supposed “victims” during filming, nor the “victims” of people supposedly “inspired” by porn, that are actually not the victim of porn, but the victim of lunatics that wants to physically dominate other, did it before porn, and will continue after porn. If at a single point in time you considered these people instead of crusading for “no, choking bad, ban imagery of choking!” you’d have gotten it.

There is no good outcome with arbitrary censorship. You’re only giving the rope to hang yourself. Congratulation.

Anyone with two brain cells would have understood long ago that “the mass” are more numerous than “the limited top moneybags”, and that authority and power built on the mass bending over (including police and military) are a liability.

Unfortunately for us, some of the richest people think they can buy everything. Unfortunately for them, they can’t bribe people that can’t eat anymore with their shining prestige.

Actors do actually get choked so that takes care of the first part of your premise. Here is a story of it happening. There is no safe way to restrict breathing period.

Then, campaign and propose laws to prevent actors from getting choked or mistreated for real. Not a free ban on content. Put in place a framework for safe recourse for these actors, especially in an industry that’s usually shut off, instead of turning them down for being in the “adult movie business”. Provide protection for people coming out denouncing unlawful activites instead of putting them on the spot. Have strong incentive for directors to not do it that way, where even a single report gets seriously looked at and would cost them more money than it brings back.

In summary, actually protect people instead of just setting up yet another strawman.

It should be illegal to actually harm people on camera which is what is happening

Fiction is fiction. If your call is protecting actor, then I wholeheartedly agree. But your position in this discussion is not that; it’s ban this or that content from existing. That’s a very different, very slippery slopey topic.

This is simply a public health issue and the UK is doing the right thing.

Censoring media is never the right thing. You’ll never make me change my mind on that. I’m dead set on not having censorship while protecting people; you’re dead set on encouraging censorship blindly.

You talk like actors are actually choked. I’m pretty sure there are already regulations against that.

You talk about protecting actors; sure. That’s not what’s discussed though.

You think people that are actually willing to choke someone, sometimes even against their will, need a porn flick to think about it? Or that they would not do it without someone having filmed it somewhere? Some people are lower than beasts, and they’ll do what they want. Trying to chase after every possible outside justification will not change them, and will not protect anyone. If a couple is getting it on and the man won’t listen to a “no, don’t do that”, there’s no amount of censorship, regulation, and ban, that will make them abide. The only thing it will do is increase censorship, regulation, and bans.

The sane approach for that is, surprise surprise, education, and maybe properly labeling stuff. It’s not putting in place another framework to ban things on a whim, which will subsequently be abused for much more than the arguably “fair” initial point.

This discussion is repeated ad nauseam everytime there’s plan for banning something. The argument that choking is bad is true, there’s no point repeating it. The argument that “monkey do what monkey see”? Sure, go for that. Let’s ban every media then, because boy oh boy I have a bad news about the movie industry of the past 50 years.

and it should absolutely be called out

That is THE WHOLE FUCKING POINT of this article. CALLING IT OUT instead of going all “oh, they diddly daddlied the dudely prisoner into giddily happily compliance”.