Olives @olives@qoto.org

They should probably be abolished.

Honestly, the whole idea of OBEs is archaic, and a lot of the time, they're just given to someone who someone in the British Government likes, not so much for merit.

I've spent enough time writing about this particular actor though, and there doesn't appear to be anything new going on (although, this doesn't mean that you shouldn't push back against any nonsense), so I might not comment on them a lot.

Derek appeared to be promoting censorship a couple of weeks ago.

He was a bit on the vaguer side by shifting the responsibility onto others (largely the predecessor and far right extremists and other bad actors).

However, I wouldn't count on him being good.

Susie didn't even operate legally. She was a vigilante who broke the law but which the British Government never bothered to pursue.

Susie Hargreaves.

Her successor "Derek" should also be scrutinized. He appears to be promoting censorship while pretending that he is saving the children.

At the end of the day, if someone is grifting off saving the children, while opportunistically censoring a large amount of legitimate content, such as online porn, then maybe there should be consequences for that abuse.

It's worth remembering that her org was known to mislead people, so as to push particular opinionated and human rights violating pieces of policy.

Next, Prime Minister Keir Starmer should revoke her OBE which was granted by the previous far right extremist government.

Looks like Censor Susie has stepped down but her vigilante outfit is probably still problematic.

Sometimes, the home feed just stops loading new posts and it might take hours to resume. Opening a new tab seems to fix it.

Making a post sort of works with occasional 500s.

I don't follow these that closely, it's something which appeared on my radar.

Well, people have a right to protest, so if someone is saying that a protest shouldn't be held because one particular person in the crowd might have done something, then that is concerning.

Seeing the government described as the "good guys" when talking about surveillance. What if the government are the bad guys though?

More 500s appearing again.

Also:
https://reason.com/2023/06/08/maines-legislature-passes-bill-to-partially-decriminalize-prostitution/
"But keeping sex work customers criminalized keeps in place many of the harms of total criminalization. The sex industry must still operate underground, which makes it more difficult for sex workers to work safely and independently."

"A recent study of prostitution laws in European countries found full decriminalization or legalization of prostitution linked to lower rape rates, while countries that instituted the Nordic model during the study period saw their rates of sexual violence go up."
#japan

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2024/10/06/japan/society/japan-sex-tourism/
I would not take advice from someone who runs an org called "People Against Pornography" and basically sounds like a prohibitionist.

Something which has been seen in some countries is that when they had prohibitions, people couldn't report it to the police, and the police might even be part of the problem, they might abuse someone in exchange for "overlooking" it.

See https://reason.com/2024/05/24/what-does-decriminalized-sex-work-actually-look-like/
#japan

Remember that it has nothing to do with whether the themes of something are "offensive" or "taboo". It's whether the person depicted (if anyone is depicted, think fictional characters) consented to that*.

* When talking about someone consenting, I obviously mean adults here.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-10-04/prison-journalism-jail-newspapers-giving-voice-to-prisoners/104399728
"Prison newspapers have overcome bans to give incarcerated Australians a voice and connection to outside"
#auspol #FreeSpeech

People in Australia really should be disturbed that the leader of one of the major parties basically wants to curtail the ability to protest because someone might say something supportive of Hamas.