73
Pornography showing strangulation and incest to be banned in UK from early November
(www.theguardian.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 16 Oct 2026
73 points (96.2% liked)
United Kingdom
6972 readers
1110 users here now
General community for news/discussion in the UK.
Less serious posts should go in !casualuk@feddit.uk or !andfinally@feddit.uk
More serious politics should go in !uk_politics@feddit.uk.
Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.
Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.
Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.
If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.
Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.
Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Ban under 18s from using the Internet, only allow portalling through a Government filter / blocker. It allows certain sites deemed informative and educational but no ads for children. Complaints can be made by the public about certain sites and a board can decide if they should be limited from children's view.
If you wish access to the full internet, you get a government passcode when you turn 18 which can be used to allow you to leave the Government filter and back to normal internets. All of this is controlled by the Government, no 3rd party companies allowed access to your data.
Boom! Internets now back to normal. It solves your problem of Paedo's, kids looking at porn, suicide, annorexia etc etc...
Just watch as Google, Facebook, X all would be absolutely up in arms claiming it's banning 'free speech' when in fact they're just watching their ad revenue tank thanks to nearly all of it being about suckering in children.
I grew up in a conservative community and only got a broader world view from unmonitored internet access. I probably would have been more suicidal without it.
Major child traffickers are adults AND the elites who were doing before the internet.
Porn will always exist and pubescent kids will always seek it out.
Annorexia is more the direct result of Hollywood beauty standards and predatory marketers targeting insecure girls, also existed before the internet.
Making the Government the gatekeepers of the internet will allow them to censor whatever anti Government speech they want the same way public schools everywhere gloss over the crimes of their state.
And I don't think that would change if a system was implemented. That's not to say the future and future governments might not change things for the worst.
While all true, the Internet as it stands puts this directly and en masse into childrens hands without a fuss and worse, grooms children via algorithms down dark paths.
I think Th4tGuyII's comment in here is the most pragmatic response and something the government should have started out doing.
If there weren't so many puritanical zealouts out there, especially in positions of power, I think we'd probably be in a better position now.
You don't need to speculate about future governments. The current governments are already bad enough for their adult citizens not to trust them with their Internet activities.
I cannot disagree with that.
This one of the the dumbest fucking ideas I've ever heard.
What next, ban children from reading books and magazines, in case they get a porno one ?
Whilst your opinion is subjectively valid, following it up with such extreme's doesn't help make the case.
Very few books have been banned out of existence, for starters and secondly, aren't under 18's typically ID'd if they pick up an adult magazine, or even a packet of ciggies. Even in a pub now they have that 'Challenge 25' - which is ridiculously outlandish. This wouldn't be much different.
I do believe the damage that social media and algorithms have done to society is astounding. I would effectively call what they do, including advertising, 'Grooming'.
Read @Th4tGuyII@fedia.io's comment - that would be the most sensible solution for everyone involved but noone wishes to take accountability.
The solution to problems with the internet is not a fucking surveillance state.
Set aside the complete obliteration of any online privacy, and the fact that these bans are completely ineffective (piracy streaming websites are already illegal in basically every western country. Still watched a movie on one yesterday), the internet is also a valuable and important resource for many things, including studying and finding support encouragement, nformation and safe spaces on issues particularly for children and teens growing up queer.
You're throwing out the ~~baby~~ entire god damn family with the bathwater.
All these bans do is push teens and children into LESS safe spaces on the deep web that don't care about enforcing UK regulations, and banning those sites is literally just playing an infinite game of whack a mole.
Banning children and teens from everyday life activities has never worked and never been a solution, just how "abstinence only" doesn't work to prevent teen pregnancy. The solution is to teach children early and comprehensively how to engage with these systems safely and responsibly, how to recognise warning signs of unsafe situations or fake information, and how to react appropriately to those.
That ship, has sailed.
Nothing I disagree with there but I never said it would take it away from children. I suggest it would ringfence to acceptable sites so children can now find out about Homosexuality and Gender fluidity without being linked to a video on how to shoot up fentanyl with a knitting needle and a Maccie D's straw (other straws are available and other restaurants).
I feel that ship has sailed. The government hasn't listened yet, only to extremely old and sanctimonious other politicians.
That's why it would be ringfenced.
100% completely agree with not banning teens and working with them, but the Internet is an actively and pervasively hostile place towards children. They are being groomed (not always sexually), and most social media is just predatory grooming. If they're not being told what to think, they're being told what to buy. It's pretty disgusting.
Parents have their place in all of this too. Perhaps if more of them actually engaged with their children we wouldn't be in this sorry state of affairs, but then the way things are now, Parents don't even have the time because they're working just to pay bills.
The big Kaiju of the internet likes it this way (FAANG), they have the control. How do you stop that? It doesn't seem legislation against them is working.
We are currently now at the state where ID is required for certain access. It's absolutely shitty, it's terrible and shameful, but it seems the government and the zealots have built a brick wall around this issue about as much as talking honestly about the Israel / Palestine situation. They have shut down almost all dialogue with ordinary citizens - most likely because it serves more of a purpose of shutting out foreign actors and helps to combat terrorism.
It's not an excuse, it's just the way it is...and it's all one big mess where you're damned no matter what you do.
"Sign in with your government ID to prove you are an adult, and enable your camera to prove that you are using the correct ID"
Literally just enforce default-on parental controls and self-updating adult-content filtering on every consumer router sold/ISP rented in the UK - and enforce the updating of all existing routers to support that.
Respects people's privacy, gives parents autonomy over their children's internet habits, and is easy to implement because the routers are already in everyone's houses and can be actively updated as they literally have to be connected to the internet to do their job. Let/make parents take control and whitelist specific users and/or devices to fit their situation...
... But no. Instead we give the Government loads of unnecessary surveillance powers so they can kneecap everybody's internet experience to nanny the kids of parents who couldn't be fucked to learn how to use the parental controls they already had access to on basically every device they own to protect their children.
This is exactly the right answer.
Some parents can't and won't be arsed to take any responsibility for their kids at all, whether that's parenting or teaching - it's always the fault of the state. When the state acts, it's an attack on the freedom of speech. It's a hell of a situation and I don't envy the governments choices in this matter.
Parental controls as standard on, on a router would absolutely be the easiest, cheapest and most effective way but puritans somehow managed to keep this alive.
Unfortunately, here is where we are and I wish that there was something we could do about it. Every single solution can and will be circumvented so it all seems like a colossal waste of money at this point.
At least if they implemented a child filter, I would hope they ban ads on a large scale and put social media behind the wall completely. It would do the world a massive favour.