this post was submitted on 13 Apr 2026
468 points (98.3% liked)

Not The Onion

21204 readers
1911 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, ableist, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] kreskin@lemmy.world 1 points 38 minutes ago* (last edited 34 minutes ago)

abhorrent step incest porn, sure ban it, but what about good or hot step incest porn? We all know what that is when we see it, right?

And if they want to add a prison scene to the end of thos step incest porn films those pornos then fine. Sounds pervy to me, but I dont judge what other people do in their bedrooms alone that doesnt hurt anyone because thats none of my fucking business, or anyone elses. People (and governments) should just leave other people alone unless it directly affects others.

Starmer seems like a moron with this move.

[–] Jarix@lemmy.world 0 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

So many people in the comments are asleep at the wheel.

The Ministry of Justice said that possessing and publishing porn showing incest between family members and sex between step or foster relatives where one person pretends to be under-18 would be a crime.

Porn showing characters that are related having sex

Porn showing UNDERAGE characters having sex.

That's it. That's all this stops.

Which probably is already illegal in most places

This will stop very little to no additional porn according to what was said.

It's NOT a ban on showing step porn, only when one person is under the age of 18.

This solves maybe having. Some law to help prosecute things that are likely already being prosecuted but will do nothing to stop what has become popular.

[–] GreenBeanMachine@lemmy.world 21 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

The Ministry of Justice said that possessing and publishing porn showing incest between family members and sex between step or foster relatives where one person pretends to be under-18 would be a crime.

So it's only a crime if they pretend to be under-18, and I haven't seen any porno where anyone pretends to be under-18. There's literally a category called barely 18. No one ever pretends to be under, but they do pretend to be barely-18.

Jess Asato, the Labour MP for Lowestoft, said: ‘After many years of campaigning to ensure online pornographic content is subject to the same rules as offline content,

When the fuck was under-18 porn ever legal? WTF? Also, isn't the age of consent in the UK 16 years old?

What the fuck is the point of this? Why the fuck is it needed? Who is it helping? What is it fixing? NOTHING.

Fucking jokers... Go tax the billionaires and fix the NHS and the cost of the living crisis you cunts .

[–] Avicenna@programming.dev 3 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

I don't understand, do they mean they are ok if it is under 18 but not incest? Is that where they draw the line regarding underage porn?

[–] P1k1e@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

Age of consent is 16 in the UK

Edit: I actually just realized this isn't a coherent response to your question

[–] MithranArkanere@lemmy.world 28 points 10 hours ago

As always, the first computers you should check when anyone tries to ban consensual porn that harms no one, are the computers of the ones proposing the ban.

[–] AdolfSchmitler@lemmy.world 5 points 8 hours ago

Surprised they're outright banning it instead of requiring a license

[–] Regrettable_incident@lemmy.world 11 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

MPs, of all people, have no fuckin right to act all holy about porn. They are depraved weirdos, the whole scabby bunch.

Just reminded me of this incident - it's a Tory, not labour, and many will be too young to remember, but I recall it being funny as fuck. The article neglects to mention that he was hanging in a cupboard and also had an orange full of poppers in his gob.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/february/8/newsid_2538000/2538165.stm

There are many, many more recent stories of debauchery amongst the bunch of wankers who rule over us, but I felt this one exemplifies the lot

[–] MBech@feddit.dk 5 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Great, now everywhere else is going to be overrun by british porn-tourists, locking themselves in their hotel rooms for their entire stay, looking to masturbate to lame incest porn.

[–] kreskin@lemmy.world 1 points 33 minutes ago

this will just result in porn providers changing the title of their porn videos.

[–] eestileib@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 8 hours ago

Britisher is Squicked, Panics

Starmer is a fucking tosser surrounded by nonces.

[–] ICastFist@programming.dev 26 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

Step-incest pornography and that which depicts performers as children is abhorrent.
Alongside banning strangulation in pornography which the government previously announced, tackling this vile content will make our country a safer place for women and children and shows the UK can lead the world in tackling violence against women and girls

That's it folks, step incest is violence against women and girls. Next up, in order to further protect them, they'll be prohibited from going outside without a man by their side.

Whoever asked "What's next, BDSM?" - guess what

The government has already made porn that shows women being choked illegal, after a review found videos like these had helped normalise it in real life.

The only silver lining in this whole thing is still only in "planning"

Ministers are also planning to make tech bosses personally liable if their platforms do not remove intimate pictures of people that are posted without consent.

[–] FosterMolasses@leminal.space 8 points 10 hours ago

The government has already made porn that shows women being choked illegal

Haha, a lot of women I know are gonna be pissed about this...

[–] WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today 14 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Choking by unskilled people, does lead to permanent injury or death.

[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 8 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

Real choking in any capacity, skilled or otherwise is dangerous. Simulated/RP choking, especially in porn is fine. Which one of the two are they trying to ban?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 51 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (1 children)

Oi bruv where's yer wanking loicense?!

[–] medicsofanarchy@lemmy.world 11 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (1 children)

Not yer bruv, mate - I'm yer step-bruv! Fancy a shag?

[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 11 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

What are you doing, step-bruv?!

[–] ivanafterall@lemmy.world 6 points 10 hours ago

This is against the law, y'all. :(

[–] YesButActuallyMaybe@lemmy.ca 7 points 10 hours ago

Sex positions that are legal in the UK: missionary

No braces, no schoolgirl uniforms! Praise Allah

[–] Jollyllama@lemmy.world 25 points 14 hours ago

This is the hill they die on? This is the issue they threaten to revolt for? Not properly funding the NHS or something else that benefits people?

[–] brownsugga@lemmy.world 9 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

This is the dumbest thing I've heard today (I have not yet checked in on T---p and it's only 8:30)

Meanwhile the global elite are eating children... best ol Kier can do is ban incest porn?? what? Lol good luck buddy

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] tomiant@piefed.social 2 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

As long as they don't ban just vanilla incest porn we're good, fellas.

[–] kSPvhmTOlwvMd7Y7E@lemmy.world 27 points 16 hours ago (2 children)

Stay tuned for more porn advices from your government

[–] Regrettable_incident@lemmy.world 3 points 10 hours ago

And they should know.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] febra@lemmy.world 13 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Why is your political class in the UK even discussing such nonsense? If no harm is done, let people jack off to whatever they please.

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 8 points 10 hours ago

The Labour Party has some Methodist roots (possibly more than Socialist) and has long included a petty-authoritarian faction. Starmer and Shabana Mahmood are very much of that tendency. See also bans on anti-genocide protests, the failed-yet-again ID card scheme, cruel treatment towards asylum seekers and trans people, continuing opposition towards soft-drug decriminalisation, and upholding previous age-verification and porn bans.

It's idiotic because Labour's chances of seizing the curtain-twitcher vote from Labour and Reform are next to nil.

But I suppose Starmer's too afraid to stand up to Trump, so there needs to be some kind of "think of the children" displacement activity to stay in the press.

[–] FosterMolasses@leminal.space 3 points 10 hours ago

Inb4 the film Clueless is banned across the UK, lmfao

load more comments
view more: next ›