World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
- Blogsites are treated in the same manner as social media sites. Medium, Blogger, Substack, etc. are not valid news links regardless of who is posting them. Yes, legitimate news sites use Blogging platforms, they also use Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube and we don't allow those links either.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
Oh okay, I get that. I would agree with you, but the problem here is the coercive nature of paid acting. We have to have safeguards in place to protect actors.
Choking, as I mentioned, causes permanent brain cell death every single time it is done. Not to mention issues like PTSD as well. In this scenario the government has the overwhelming burden to protect actors from being paid to harm themselves.
I think there is another argument about protecting the welfare of the public as well. This is where you could argue it becomes about a questionable moral decision. I tend to agree with people who have concerns about the state exceeding it's authority and the possible slippery slop of censorship.
This is why it is important to weigh these things carefully. You may disagree, but I fall back to the the concept of specific and narrowly defined speech that poses the direct risk of harm. I think filming actual or even simulated choking can meet this definition.
The burden of proof must be on the government and it must prove its case empirically . With the large amount of non-consensual choking, along with the reality that a lot of men abuse women it can be seen as an extremely negative societal trend. Statistics point to the reality that only a small fraction of these instances could be considered truly consensual.
Monkey see and monkey do is a very real phenomenon. Our brains literally work by mirroring actions. I know this harkens back to a lot of truly negative censorship though. We can see all kinds of censorship that could be justified with this logic.
I suppose depicting sexual violence in normal sexual encounters is where I draw the line. When it is no longer fantasy and people see what they think is normal behavior without any pushback.
This is why so many young men that watch pornography with male dominated choking go on to repeat these actions as if they are normal, safe, or acceptable.
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.
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.
https://laist.com/news/holly-deen-accusations
To the last part. It should be illegal to actually harm people on camera which is what is happening. If you think this is a over reaction you are wrong. We should not be allowing this to happen.
There is direct correlation between people watching people get choked out in porn and doing it in real life. This is not violent video games.
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/article/2024/sep/02/i-think-its-natural-why-has-sexual-choking-become-so-prevalent-among-young-people
Please save your moral panic nonsense for cases were it is applicable. It is not here. This is simply a public health issue and the UK is doing the right thing.
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.
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.
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.
Your are welcome to ignore reality and play devil's advocate. I won't be joining you in your trip to fantasy land. Thank goodness cooler heads prevail and the UK is doing the right thing. I will lobby my own government for a similar outcome.
There is no good outcome with arbitrary censorship. You're only giving the rope to hang yourself. Congratulation.
You have not proven your point at all. In fact, you just exposed yourself as a poor devil's advocate who doesn't understand the situation. Congratulations!
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.
Trying to have a discussion with someone who doesn't care about logic or evidence is pointless, but...
Cley_faye clutching their pearls priceless
Edit: First they came for people strangulating each other causing permanent brain damage on camera and encouraging others to do so, then they came for Cley_faye's foot fetish videos. Oh God, this is how dumb this is.
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.
Clowns deserve a clown show.
And you're getting it.
Glad you can admit you are a clown. After reading that last reply where you ignored everything I had said and doubled down on accusatory nonsense I realized it. Thank you.