The General Conversation Area

not that i'm standing up for Harwood but i do feel sorry for the police. Having to deal with drunk/drugged up/idiots and even the slightest touch can cost you your job/send you to jail.

If your going to vandalise and cause trouble you deserve a beating to an extent imho.
 
I think the thing to always look at WRT the police is that they are there to protect people from those who would cause them harm - So yeah, the odd old-fashioned beating of violent criminals probably would help in some cases. What they aren't supposed to be there to do is brutalise, constrain or restrain people because of their political leanings. That's what is generally referred to as a Police State, and whenever there's any kind of protest these days that's not far off what you see. I don't blame the individual officers for that necessarily (though some clearly quite enjoy it) - it's the government who decides what and how the police can deal with things through legislation after all.
 
Just had the public launch of the department. I provided all the figures and stats presented and was talking to the chief executive of the trust for a while about how the service has been in the founding months and what the figures are for the current month (over the past 3 months since launch to the trusts services we have increased on an hourly, daily, weekly and finally total monthly incoming calls and referrals by hundreds)

As the staff who were also in the launch asked me about the actual figures i've run the report again and distributed to all, many are shocked at how things are growing.

May - 1,890 Answered calls (80% picked up within 30seconds)
June - 2,863 Answered calls (76% within 30seconds)
July 1st to today - 2,420 Calls (71%)

The best part was.... the chief executive said "nice suit, that looks great" then again when we returned to the department for the cutting of the ribbon he said "again, nice suit bet it was expensive"

It was £200 lol no doubt he liked it :)
 
but i do feel sorry for the police.

I find it hard to have sympathy for police when they lie, time and time again. Whenever they are guilty of misconduct, they seem to be unable to hold up their hands and admit the wrongdoing, so instead they tell us the most disgusting lies. They did it with Charles De Menezes, Mark Duggan, and Harwood has done the same.

Having to deal with drunk/drugged up/idiots and even the slightest touch can cost you your job/send you to jail.

Can you give one example of a police officer going to prison for a slight touch? In fact, no police officer has been successfully convicted of manslaughter while on duty since 1986, I believe.
 
Vash, we mustn't generalise about the police. I'm sure you do understand that the majority are fine people doing an important job. I think the result of the Tomlinson death case was fair; the police should not have to be afraid to deal with those who will not comply. After all, they are the police, they enforce the law, and we must obey the law.

I think the police officer who pushed Tomlinson went too far with the pushing, though Tomlinson's non-compliance may well have warranted something being done.
 
I was under the impression that he had ignored instructions by police to leave an area. I have briefly searched for further details following your above reply, and I now believe I was mistaken about the non-compliance.
 
Yesterday I went into Tesco and saw a big display at the front of the store for...Fifty Shades of Grey.

Now, I'm not a prude (considering how I've previously spoke about how I like To Love Ru, Strike Witches, High School DxD etc I'm anything but), but how the hell is it acceptable for erotica to put on open display where people of all ages can see it? Especially as there are no disclaimers on the front cover - even the Is This A Zombie? manga had an explicit content warning on the front and the 2 volumes I have read so far have been really tame in that respect.

I do think books need age ratings published on the front covers; especially given that Fifty Shades of **** has *somehow* become a best selling title and the title of the book is really well known at the moment.
 
Joshawott said:
Yesterday I went into Tesco and saw a big display at the front of the store for...Fifty Shades of Grey.

Now, I'm not a prude (considering how I've previously spoke about how I like To Love Ru, Strike Witches, High School DxD etc I'm anything but), but how the hell is it acceptable for erotica to put on open display where people of all ages can see it? Especially as there are no disclaimers on the front cover - even the Is This A Zombie? manga had an explicit content warning on the front and the 2 volumes I have read so far have been really tame in that respect.

I do think books need age ratings published on the front covers; especially given that Fifty Shades of **** has *somehow* become a best selling title and the title of the book is really well known at the moment.

Firstly, young children would not be able to read most of the contents in Fifty Shades of Grey - but a manga with the same content is more explicit for children as it is shown through pictures. As they say: 'A picture paints a thousand words'.

I have had the misfortune of reading some parts of the book, it is not *really* explicit. The discriptions are vague and poorly worded. I've read better fanfiction to be honest. The reason why it is so popular is that women who don't read much in the way of books has become enraptured with the simplistic storytelling and 'taboo' of the main subject area. It is basically Twilight with a few S&M scenes.

I don't think restricting this glorified fanfiction would do any good. Britain already has censorship. Age ratings are on manga because it contains pictures with words, whereas books with no pictures require more visualisation in that respect.
 
neptune2venus said:
Joshawott said:
Yesterday I went into Tesco and saw a big display at the front of the store for...Fifty Shades of Grey.

Now, I'm not a prude (considering how I've previously spoke about how I like To Love Ru, Strike Witches, High School DxD etc I'm anything but), but how the hell is it acceptable for erotica to put on open display where people of all ages can see it? Especially as there are no disclaimers on the front cover - even the Is This A Zombie? manga had an explicit content warning on the front and the 2 volumes I have read so far have been really tame in that respect.

I do think books need age ratings published on the front covers; especially given that Fifty Shades of **** has *somehow* become a best selling title and the title of the book is really well known at the moment.

Firstly, young children would not be able to read most of the contents in Fifty Shades of Grey - but a manga with the same content is more explicit for children as it is shown through pictures. As they say: 'A picture paints a thousand words'.
I don't think restricting this glorified fanfiction would do any good. Britain already has censorship. Age ratings are on manga because it contains pictures with words, whereas books with no pictures require more visualisation in that respect.
Sure those are good points with the difference between visual pictures and visualising words, but there should still be some kind of indication on the front cover as to whether a book contains themes or other content that may be inappropriate for certain age groups. Music has parental advisory labels on albums that contain inappropriate content, yet we aren't shown visually shown those things.

Also, I never said "censorship"; having an age guideline is not the same as censoring. I am not and I never will be for censorship in books. I have no problem with Fifty Shades of Grey being badly written, self-gratifying masturbation fodder (to misquote Kuroneko from Oreimo), but I do not agree with that stuff like that being displayed in the entrance of a supermarket.

I have had the misfortune of reading some parts of the book, it is not *really* explicit. The discriptions are vague and poorly worded. I've read better fanfiction to be honest.
The reason why it is so popular is that women who don't read much in the way of books has become enraptured with the simplistic storytelling and 'taboo' of the main subject area. It is basically Twilight with a few S&M scenes.
Well, it was a Twilight fanfiction at first. I myself have read a few extracts and urgh...to say it's poorly worded is an understatement.
 
Joshawott said:
Yesterday I went into Tesco and saw a big display at the front of the store for...Fifty Shades of Grey.

Now, I'm not a prude (considering how I've previously spoke about how I like To Love Ru, Strike Witches, High School DxD etc I'm anything but), but how the hell is it acceptable for erotica to put on open display where people of all ages can see it?
And why exactly is it unacceptable? I know that like, society says so and all that jazz, but I've never been able to get a satisfactory answer to why exactly taboos exist, other than inherited attitudes from people whose motives we neither know nor understand. Probably some bloody upper class Victorians or some such. Book displays? The Romans painted stuff like this on their walls:

http://i406.photobucket.com/albums/pp14 ... rtica5.jpg

Lets go back to those days, I say.
 
ayase said:
Joshawott said:
Yesterday I went into Tesco and saw a big display at the front of the store for...Fifty Shades of Grey.

Now, I'm not a prude (considering how I've previously spoke about how I like To Love Ru, Strike Witches, High School DxD etc I'm anything but), but how the hell is it acceptable for erotica to put on open display where people of all ages can see it?
And why exactly is it unacceptable? I know that like, society says so and all that jazz, but I've never been able to get a satisfactory answer to why exactly taboos exist, other than inherited attitudes from people whose motives we neither know nor understand. Probably some bloody upper class Victorians or some such. Book displays? The Romans painted stuff like this on their walls:

http://i406.photobucket.com/albums/pp14 ... rtica5.jpg

Lets go back to those days, I say.
People can paint enlarged penises on their walls if they want; heck, in Athenian Theatre, actors would wear giant fake penises to honour Dionysus. I do draw the line with a book that prominently features S&M (in a rather inaccurate and unsafe way) and is quite frankly, really degrading to women yet promoted as being romantic, in the entrance of a supermarket. Would you be okay with a young girl you knew going into a shop, seeing a copy of Fifty Shades of Grey and buying it because she'd heard a lot about it, with no real knowledge of what it actually contains, such as S&M? Seriously, just read the plot description on Wikipedia.

If it was in the regular book isle then I wouldn't have any complaints (aside from finding the book crap), but in regards to the subject matter of the book, it isn't about what's moral and what isn't, it's about the safety aspect. It's already been proven that this book has prompted an increase in sales of S&M stuff, so if you get young people inspired by the book trying it out, with little idea as to what they are actually doing...

Did my post just sound like a Daily Mail article? Probably...but is it as baseless and silly as the usual DM article? Probably not.
 
I haven't read the books (and wasn't planning on it), but unless I blinked and missed something in that Wikipedia the most kinky thing in the book is someone being hit with a belt, which is additionally presented in a negative way? As supermarkets also sell games and movies which glorify murder and all kinds of unpleasantries, some consensual (if presumably uncomfortable, from the article) mild SM play in a book aimed at grown ups doesn't sound too shocking to me.

There was some reasonably extreme content in the Millennium trilogy and that was similarly widely advertised back at the time. Could there be a double standard for terrible books aimed at women and better-written books aimed at both genders?

R
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joshawott said:
I do draw the line with a book that prominently features S&M (in a rather inaccurate and unsafe way) and is quite frankly, really degrading to women yet promoted as being romantic, in the entrance of a supermarket. Would you be okay with a young girl you knew going into a shop, seeing a copy of Fifty Shades of Grey and buying it because she'd heard a lot about it, with no real knowledge of what it actually contains, such as S&M?
Yup. I don't like the idea of hiding things away from people ostensibly to keep them "safe" nor do I accept that the inclusion of S&M makes it any more obscene than any other form of erotica - I imagine it does at least say on the jacket that it's erotica. Anyone buying any book without reading the blurb deserves whatever nasty surprise they get.

I don't understand what the big deal would be about a young person learning through an erotic novel (a very safe form of exploring their sexuality) that some people get off to S&M. It's the truth isn't it? Why hide it? I imagine there is material far more degrading to women on the top shelf in the magazine isle.

Joshawott said:
I did, and as Rui points out it actually sounds incredibly tame:

Wikipedia said:
Jenny Colgan of The Guardian wrote "It is jolly, eminently readable and as sweet and safe as BDSM (bondage, discipline, sadism and masochism) erotica can be without contravening the trade descriptions act"
 
This reminds me of a few summers ago when I bought The End of Mr Y for a light summer read (as was recommended to me by the girl in the book shop). It was actually a pretty enjoyable read (which also used homeopathy as a plot device in a rather interesting way, funnily enough), but boy, I was not counting on the disturbing sex scenes the book contained! There was one particularly violent and vividly described gay sex scene which I hated myself for reading afterwards. I also now get quesy at the sight of that cheap pink soap you get in some toilet soap dispensers, all thanks to that book.

*shudder*
 
Rui said:
There was some reasonably extreme content in the Millennium trilogy and that was similarly widely advertised back at the time. Could there be a double standard for terrible books aimed at women and better-written books aimed at both genders?

R
I can't really remember there much promotion for the Millennium Trilogy in supermarkets (although I do remember seeing posters in the London Underground for the movies). I remember seeing it in book isles (and I still do), but not in Tesco's main entrance (could have been that I just didn't pay attention to it though). One thing I will say about the Millennium Trilogy though, is that I found the author's intentions really interesting, in that he wrote them to try and repent for witnessing a gang rape when he was younger and doing nothing about it (and yeah, he also said that the violent scenes do help it sell too >>). 50 Shades' author has admitted that it's self-gratification (hell, it started off as Twilight fanfiction). Is that bias based on the author and the history? I'd say so. However, the inspirations behind a novel also help shape it.
Sure supermarkets sell games and films that are pretty graphic...but they have the certificate ratings slapped on the front covers. Sure, there will always be those few parents who will buy Call of Duty for their 8 year old (>>), but for the most part, the risk is low, unlike with say, Fifty Shades - whose front cover is rather plain (it seems like books in general lately are going for a rather symbolic, minimalistic theme in their covers. Not a choice I agree with, but whatever) - at least with Nuts, Zoo and similar magazines...you pretty much know what's in it based on the cover (not like that's a good thing in itself though >>).

I'd be a hypocrite if I slammed the book based on it being erotic, considering how I like a good harem or ecchi show. However, what I do own of those genres is limited to things that won't be on display - any remotely explicit series I own is kept amongst my larger collections and I wouldn't even want things like some figures on display on my shelf as my younger brother would no doubt come across them (is that me being paranoid? Probably, but I see it as being cautious). As I said earlier, I have no problem with the book existing (other than it being so poorly worded that I literally could write better - hey, the poor writing gives me hope that my novel will be published xD) or S&M in general (despite it not being my cup of tea) and I wouldn't be bothered if it was found in the regular book isle, but it's the prominent focus at the front of a family friendly store without any blatant reference to it being for adults that bugs me, which could easily be solved by something as little as an "Explicit Content" sticker on the front cover.

I don't get how films, games and even music has to have those kind of warnings on their front covers, but books can get off free - and I'm saying that as a guy who aspires to be an author.

@Ayase - Sure, finding out whether they're into S&M or not through a book as opposed to actually trying it out sure is better...but I'm not sure if the entrance to Tesco is the best place to explore what may be your sexual fetish or not (although saying that, the customer services desk is kind of sexy....xD).

Here's the blurb from Amazon though:
Romantic, liberating and totally addictive, Fifty Shades of Grey is a novel that will obsess you, possess you, and stay with you for ever.

When literature student Anastasia Steele interviews successful entrepreneur Christian Grey, she finds him very attractive and deeply intimidating. Convinced that their meeting went badly, she tries to put him out of her mind - until he turns up at the store where she works part-time, and invites her out.

Unworldly and innocent, Ana is shocked to find she wants this man. And, when he warns her to keep her distance, it only makes her want him more.

But Grey is tormented by inner demons, and consumed by the need to control. As they embark on a passionate love affair, Ana discovers more about her own desires, as well as the dark secrets Grey keeps hidden away from public view .
Romantic eh? But according to Wikipedia - the relationship between Grey and Ana is not romantic at all (Also, while finding that description I read the reviews on Amazon. Some of them are absolutely hilarious - worth a good read in itself xD).

Hopefully the word of mouth that helped the piece-of-crap-of-a-book sell in the first place extends to telling people what it's about...because I'm sure the Daily Mail and similar "news" places would jump on any S&M related deaths or serious injuries.
 
...it's the prominent focus at the front of a family friendly store without any blatant reference to it being for adults that bugs me, which could easily be solved by something as little as an "Explicit Content" sticker on the front cover.

I don't get how films, games and even music has to have those kind of warnings on their front covers, but books can get off free...
And this is where we disagree, because I don't agree with those "explicit content" stickers or BBFC ratings either - obscene and/or prohibited by whose standards exactly? People who consider themselves the moral guardians of society? People should be able to make an informed choice about what they're buying, but anyone who expects other people to live by their morality should be ball-gagged and have a stick roughly proportional to their vocalism of their imagined moral superiority rammed right up their a*seholes. Why don't we let people take individual responsibility, and tell them to simply not look at the things they don't like? Why can't people just accept that others might have different moral standards from them? Why can't parents just accept that their children might have different moral standards from them?
 
A friend recently shown me this list of things wrong with 50 Shades...interesting read

ayase said:
...it's the prominent focus at the front of a family friendly store without any blatant reference to it being for adults that bugs me, which could easily be solved by something as little as an "Explicit Content" sticker on the front cover.

I don't get how films, games and even music has to have those kind of warnings on their front covers, but books can get off free...
And this is where we disagree, because I don't agree with those "explicit content" stickers or BBFC ratings either - obscene and/or prohibited by whose standards exactly? People who consider themselves the moral guardians of society? Anyone who expects other people to live by their morality should be ball-gagged and have a stick roughly proportional to their vocalism of their imagined moral superiority rammed right up their a*seholes. Why don't we let people take individual responsibility, and tell them to simply not look at the things they don't like? Why can't people just accept that others might have different moral standards from them? Why can't parents just accept that their children might have different moral standards from them?
*sigh* and somehow it's got to some great ideal about who guides society...

It's not like we have absolutely no control. Once something is purchased from a store, anyone can watch it. I will let Luke, my 8 year old brother, watch a 12 if I deem it suitable (like Squid Girl) and my Mum was fine with letting me watch the first X-Men film when I was around his age, but I also find that some aren't suitable (like today when my 17 year old brother asked if it would be okay for Luke to watch The Inbetweeners movie and I also wouldn't want Luke watching The Dark Knight or Strike Witches and the certificate rating stops him going out and buying those of his own accord, which I wouldn't want him doing). If the intention of certificate ratings was complete blanket control, how come we have a 12A certificate for cinemas, but still the 12 for home media?

Also, the guidelines do change over time. For example, some films that were refused ratings in the past are now being released with certificates as low as PG. The views of society as a whole are constantly changing and this also applies to the way films and stuff are rated here. Ultimately, it's society as a whole who guides these things, even if it is a group of people making the decision at the end.
 
Back
Top