Well, at least from the ‘naughty screen’.
Why?
Apparently, the wise tyrants in Australia have ruled that women with a mere cup A breasts are not feminine enough.
Therefore, any naughty scenes in shows or movies which include women who are either not naturally ‘well endowed’ or who don’t get breast implants are ‘promoting pedophilia’.
Images of even women in their late twenties are being banned… It seems that, in these censor’s eyes, a woman’s femininity is defined by her bra size!
Shame on them!
Oh, and watching cartoon characters ‘do-it’ – well, in Ipswitch, that is ‘kiddie-porn’, too! It will earn you a place on the ‘sex-offenders list’ for life.
Don’t these people understand how this frivolence diminishes the horrible crime of pedophilia?
Of course, it is a useful pretext for increased censorship, more surveillance, less privacy…. It will not save any children, but it will certainly help crooked politicians control the citizens!
All this makes me so sick…
Xanthippa's Chamberpot 
January 30, 2010 at 00:10
[Small-brested women are banned in Australia]
We need laws like that here. 🙂
January 30, 2010 at 19:06
thats awful. i never knew that austrailia was that authoritarian.
Xanthippa says:
Their internet censorship laws are past bizzarre. They are now censoring even materials which are permitted for adults, but which ‘children might come across’…
But, that is not the worst of it. They have a ‘black listed sites list’, which is secret. As in, nobody is permitted to know which sites are permanently blocked. BUT – when it was leaked last year, it was revealed that less than a third of the blacklisted sites had anything to do with porn….most were political sites, mostly critical of the Auzzie government.
Oh – and there is no ‘regulated process’ through which you can get off the list if you are wrongfully put on it….
January 30, 2010 at 21:09
convinceme is back up
Xanthippa says:
I got 2 emails from them: one to tell me they are back up, and if I want to re-join, to confirm by clicking it. Time-stamped 4 minutes later, I got a ‘confirmation that I had re-joined’. Of course, I found both emails at once…
So, I wonder if they are still having ‘technical difficulties’.
Did you check it out?
January 30, 2010 at 22:50
i did. i PMed you on convinceme.
Xanthippa says;
In that case – methinks I replied! Thanks!
January 31, 2010 at 01:33
Xanthippa:
The whole concept of a “sex offence” is as shady as the idea of a “hate crime.” If someone is harmed, does it really matter if sex or hate are involved? No, it does not. And does it really matter if sex or hate are involved, as long as no one is harmed? No, it does not.
The crime, if there is one, is exclusively defined by the harm done, if any.
What we have here is another attempt to redefine non-crimes as crimes, so as to rationalize the real crimes and shield the real villains: the scheming, controlling, organizational psychopaths who dominate the bureaucracy.
We already have on the books more than enough laws to deal with any real crime. Writing new laws and defining new crimes is nothing but pure lawfare, practiced by the state against its own people at the instigation of these psychopaths.
This is evil. But, fortunately, it is eventually self-limiting. When everything is a crime, nothing is a crime. When everyone is listed as a sex-offender, being a sex-offender ceases to be a stigma.
The whole thing will eventually blow over, like the medieval witch trials and the more recent witch hunts over “satanic ritual abuse” and “recovered memories.” And, again fortunately, the life cycles of these aberrations are getting shorter. The Inquisition lasted for centuries, but the ritual abuse mania lasted only about a decade.
Not that this alleviates the real tragedies visited on the people who are wrongly stigmatized while the whole sorry business is still gathering steam, and before it gets so exaggerated that no one takes it seriously any longer. The real victims are the falsely convicted, who “died in jail” while imprisoned for crimes that never happened.
But the lingering damage is that these hysterias result in the passage of draconian laws and corrupt methods of law enforcement. These laws stay on the books, and these methods become standard practice, and thus our once free and just society is corroded and subverted from within.
In the current “internet kiddie porn” craze, the real targets are freedom and privacy. First of all, the term “kiddie” is deliberately misleading and inflammatory. One is invited to picture an infant or toddler, when in fact these cases typically involve physically mature and sexually knowing teenagers, who are very often instigators and not at all the passive victims we are lead to imagine.
And our emotional reactions to these false images are used to justify much greater evils, committed by the state. Consider, for example, the recent case of a 44-year-old man, accused of having sexual conversations and performing sexual acts on a web camera in front of a police officer posing as a 15-year-old girl.
Whatever you may think of the man’s sexual habits, it is very clear that he is not the worst offender in this twisted scenario. Under no circumstances is it ever legitimate for an on-duty police officer to express interest in having sex with a 44-year-old man while posing as a 15-year-old girl!
Do not let your opinion of the man blind you to the fact that this is the vilest form of entrapment! Let’s be very clear what happened here: when the cop told the man her pretended age, he turned off the video camera and he tried to break off the conversation, but she kept wheedling until he gave in and turned it back on!
How sick is that? How wrong is it? How illegal is it?
This cop should be thrown off the force in disgrace! But the sad fact of the matter is, the man will probably get convicted of a crime he would not have committed, had he not been led astray, tempted and goaded into it by a police officer, and the said police officer will probably get a commendation… from the morally degenerate organizational psychopaths who created the whole sordid situation in the first place!
By far the worst criminals in this situation are the conniving, bureaucratic psychopaths who pervert the machinery of state, and corrupt the law courts and turn the police force into a gang of con men and whores, just to satisfy their own sick and twisted lust for power.
I’ve argued elsewhere that the bureaucracy must be dismantled, whatever it may cost and however difficult it may be. And nothing could better demonstrate why this is so important, than the issues raised by this post.
Xanthippa says:
Agreed.
What I’m wondering is if the architects of this law can be charged with hate crimes, for demeaning small-breasted women everywhere….or for misogyny of equating femininity with breast size. Sort-of turn their own weapons against them.
January 31, 2010 at 17:35
Xanthippa:
Well, it’s either that, or we watch as they make it illegal for small-breasted women to be in the presence of teddy bears…
Xanthippa says:
CodeSlinger, I wonder if they will make it illegal for small-breasted women to nurse their infants!
I mean – they could get a whole new branch of police – measuring the breasts of women who are breast-feeding! If the cup does not measure up – they are ‘doing kiddie porn’!!! Throw them in jail, those perverts! Letting underage children suck on their child-like, unfeminine breasts…that is sexual abuse of those children! And – by their own mothers!!!
Perhaps they could get the Somali police to train this squad: you know, the ones who force women to remove their bra and shake their breasts, to see if they are using the bra to ‘disguise their feminine body-shape’!
February 2, 2010 at 15:10
Xanthippa:
Hmmm… presumably the reason the shake them is to fluff them up, like pillows that have been in storage for a while… Is that actually a law over there or is it just something they made up on the spot because they’re fun guys who really know how to show a girl a good time?
Xanthippa says:
CodeSlinger, read it and weep!
Sharia forbids the wearing of ‘deceptive clothing’ – such as women dressing as men, and so on (there is a loophole: if a man it trying to deceive his enemies (like, say, kufurs), he may wear a burka or otherwise disguise himself as a woman…but ONLY while fighting-type-thingie).
These hard line Islamists deduced that push-up bras are a form of a deception, because it makes even women with floppy breast look as if they had firm breasts. Since Sharia forbids the wearing of deceptive clothing, it was their duty to make sure that no woman was transgressing against Sharia!
So, they would demand that women remove their bra and shake their breasts. If they did not look firm without the bra, then the woman was guilty of wearing deceptive clothing and was whipped! If it weren’t so serious, I’d make jokes, like asking if these guys wore ‘official bra inspector’ t-shirts, but, it’s just too close to the truth to be funny.
By the way – breasts are not ‘like pillows’. They do not ‘fluff-up’ when shaken!
February 2, 2010 at 21:04
[…] BOOB-WATCH: Small-breasted women are banned in Australia.. because of the paedos, dontch know …. […]
February 2, 2010 at 23:47
Xanthippa:
Bizarre! That article reads like something out of a poorly written kink magazine… Those Al Shabaab guys (peace be upon them and their families) are crazier than the Australian government! Their received wisdom makes even less sense than my wise crack. There really isn’t a sane place left on the planet, is there?
All the more reason to stay here and get serious about fixing this place.
February 23, 2010 at 21:40
Hey great entry. Did you manage to watch last nights hanity and colmes? That’s some great blogging material lol. Peace
Xanthippa says: Thanks!
I’m afraid life is too short to watch Hanity…and, I don’t know who Colmes is…again, life is too short to waste!
March 9, 2010 at 20:57
All in all I do not make comments on blogs, but I have to mention that this post really forced me to do so. Really marvelous post
April 21, 2010 at 19:02
The government seems to be flailing with this issue. I find it perplexing that anyone could believe exposure to small breasts will encourage child molestation. Should men without man boobs be forced to wear bikini tops at swimming pools?