March 29, 2001
10:11 PM   Subscribe

This is the Land of the Beaver? The Canadian government, determined to spare its citizens the horror of having to think for themselves, decides hard-core porn channels are no-nos for their satellite systems.
posted by aaron (12 comments total)

Did you read the article in question? They aren't pulling all hard core porn off the air waves, they are pulling *2* hard core porn channels off, because their content hasn't been reviewed yet. Content is reviewed for things like illegal acts such as rape, not for general hard core action.

There are a number of other porn channels left for your wanking needs. Don't panic just yet.
posted by kristin at 12:16 AM on March 30, 2001

Well, Aaron, I hope you still have time to return your satellite dish.
posted by pracowity at 12:17 AM on March 30, 2001

kristin, I didn't see anything in the article to contradict aaron's post. Also, the article notes that the censor board's head "said he would never have approved" the channels, so saying they were pulled "because their content hasn't been reviewed yet" is true, but it's practically a certainty they won't be back. As a Canadian, I'm used to this kind of paternalism, but I'm glad to say I'm still not blasé about it. The content is irrelevant. The bottom line is that the government thinks it can do my thinking for me. It can't and they're infringing my rights by trying to.
posted by mw at 5:41 AM on March 30, 2001

I saw the 5th Esate show on this last night, they we're the ones who called the review board to complain about the "hardcore" porn. Of course they showed as much nudity and hardcore sex as humanly possible in a 30 min segment. I guess its ok for journalist to profit of porn; but not respectable telecom companies.
posted by cburton at 8:41 AM on March 30, 2001

Did you read the article in question?

*laugh* As mw asked, did YOU?

Nice to know you're pro-censorship, pracowity.
posted by aaron at 8:53 AM on March 30, 2001

There is no hard-core porn on US satellite systems, either, as far as I know. Basic problem: any content which is broadcast by satellite must not violate the "community standards" of ANY place where (a) that signal lands and (b) the company is subject to jurisdiction.

IIRC, back in the 1980's some rural Georgia county successfully prosecuted a satellite broadcast company for obscenity for the content of the movies it sent out. Now, this was back when most satellite broadcasts were sent in the clear, not in the digital-encrypted way they are now, so maybe a new take on the obscenity standards might help.

But, for now, cable and satellite are just like the hotel naughty movie services: no penetration depicted, no full-frontal-male, no "money shot" of course. Not that I've ever seen a money shot myself ....
posted by MattD at 9:15 AM on March 30, 2001

I remember seeing my first porn on tv when I visited Canada as a little kid for a family vacation (i think i was 9 or 10 / '89-'90). I only saw about 10 minutes before someone came into the house and i had to quickly switch to another channel.

There is no hard-core porn on US satellite systems, either, as far as I know.

Yeah there is- at least on dss service. hotnetwork, playboy, and a few others. On most of the networks, they show everything that you would see in your normal XXX hardcore video - full male fontal nudity, plently of penetration, and the always funny money shot- 'Look- he put it in her ear!'. A few networks show the softcore stuff. yuck. why would anyone pay to see that, is beyond me.
posted by ewwgene at 5:00 PM on March 30, 2001

Wow, penetration is hardcore? I've got to get off the Internet.

We've had porn in Canada for years, on regular broadcast television. It was a rare weekend during my teen years that I couldn't, if I so desired, find suitably erotic material.

It wasn't always porn porn, but when I'm looking for breasts, I don't care if there's actual "meaning" to their presentation. Sorry.
posted by cCranium at 6:45 PM on March 30, 2001

I am not necisarily anti-porn. I think it to be degrading to women, and icky, but it has it's place.

I think of it as insurance. An insurance that if some pervert wants to fuck some beautiful woman that he can never have, he can do it in his head, while watching a porn, and jerking off, and not by going out and prowling the streets and raping some innocent person.

I think that to remove porn, you are taking a risk of not giving these people an outlet. So they find their own....with our sisters, out mothers, our girlfriends..
posted by listless at 7:08 PM on March 30, 2001

I wrote: "Well, Aaron, I hope you still have time to return your satellite dish."

Aaron wrote: "Nice to know you're pro-censorship, pracowity."

It looks like poor Aaron must have had trouble with logic at school. That's what makes him such an excellent freeper.
posted by pracowity at 2:28 AM on March 31, 2001

You're right, pracow. My mistake. I inadvertantly was looking for an actual point, when all you were doing was spewing insults. I'm embarassed to admit I thought you could have possibly been doing otherwise. Mea culpa. Mea maxima culpa. (Insulting en masse generalization duly noted for the records. But hey, it's just FreeRepublic, not MeFi, right?)
posted by aaron at 10:18 AM on March 31, 2001

I'm amused when people answer supposed insults with, of course, insults while whining about insults. More of your failed logic, Aaron.

Have fun with your satellite channels.
posted by pracowity at 1:55 AM on April 1, 2001

« Older Only one navel left to gaze at?   |   F u cn rd ths, u rnt vry kreatv. Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments