Cameron has introduced strict regulations on porn films for adults:
Spanking BANNED from porn under new government law – what else isn’t allowed?
– but refuses to introduce regulations for bankers:
Channel 4 News’ reporter gets angry over current state of UK banking regulation
(satire?)
Regulator demands tighter oversight of management and conduct of Britain’s wanks
Britain’s wankers are facing tighter regulation after government regulators announced a surprise clampdown on more extreme wanking practices, in a clear sign the authorities have adopted a more hands-on approach to wanking.
Andrew Bailey, the executive in charge of supervising UK wanks, told the Financial Times that the new stricter regulations would allow regulators to experiment with specific incentives to encourage safer, risk-free wanking required by the Basel global wank safety rules and that after two decades of working with failed and failing wanking institutions, he was openly sceptical of wankers’ ability to police themselves.
In an unconnected development, government ministers have announced a dramatic slackening of existing regulations in the UK banking sector, in which Britain’s bankers will now be given free-range to indulge in extreme perverted acts at will, ranging from aggressive whipping of their hard-pressed bank customers to hard-core strangulation of the means to live for the majority of their struggling borrowers.
.
Please feel free to share. And comment.
.
The Coalition Government Colouring and Activity Book is now available for download as a PDF and in print:
Pride's Purge 
Reblogged this on gingerblokeblog.
LikeLike
Pingback: Cameron’s government regulates wanking, but refuses to regulate banking | Alternative News Network
This is a shocking attack on the human rights of fine up-standing ‘wankers’. Will I no longer be allowed to watch videos of Mother Superiors spanking a young ‘novice’? Not that I’ve ever seen such filth of course.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Reblogged this on sdbast.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on Beastrabban’s Weblog and commented:
It’s satire, but it does show the priorities of the Tory government. Sex and porn are to be policed as a threat to public morals, but greater freedom given to the wealthy financiers, who have done immense damage by pillaging and wrecking their economy through their sheer, naked greed. It’s a measure designed to satisfy readers of the Daily Mail. Way back in the 1980s, one of the magazines I used to read (not, I hasten to add, of the type that was put on the top shelves of newsagents and read by people with dodgy eyesight and hairy palms) termed such people ‘wobblers’. ‘Wobblers’ were those, who were dedicated to stamping out immoral filth, but actually couldn’t get enough of reading about it first. The magazine cited Mary Whitehouse and her Viewers’ and Listeners’ Association as examples of wobblers, but it also accurately describes the mindset of the middle market tabloids.
The film director, John Landis, in one interview talked about the way one of his movies had been edited by the censors because of its sexual content. American cinema is self-regulated when it comes to censorship, and the censorship board sees itself as reflecting contemporary values and morality. When he made An American Werewolf in London, he took a sex scene he’d made for a previous movie, and re-used it as a piece from a fictional porn film in one scene. The film from which the clip was taken was given a less restrictive rating than ‘American Werewolf’. And the problem was the clip, not the violence or horrific content of the rest of the movie. The explanation given by the censors was that they had to give a higher age rating than a few years previously, because this was now Reagan’s America, and they had to reflect the new morality.
So there you go: certain types of sex – bad. Violence and rampant, destructive capitalism with no thought for anyone else, v. v. good, in the language of Bridget Jones.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Reblogged this on nearlydead.
LikeLike
@Beastrabben
…………the crackdown on porn etc. by the Tory Party? The same party allegedly harbouring kiddy-diddlers?
You couldn’t make it up 😦
LikeLiked by 1 person
Why can’t the two be combined..?
Perhaps bank executives could be compelled to cut and paste the heads of their wives /husbands/significant other onto random pictures of members of the public before shafting them.
Perhaps it could be mandatory that bank traders be required to lie on their writing arm until all feeling is lost before falsifying LIBOR rates etc (I really didn’t FEEL like I was doing anything wrong!).
Under existing trading standards legislation it is even possible that bank customers could be obliged to don a pvc bodysuit and gimp mask before entering their bank in order to make clear the nature of the relationship.
Bankers could even be required to swear an oath of allegiance to the Queen along the lines of ‘I vow to serve my country and your tax cheque’s in the post Your Majesty’ before adding ‘and I promise not to come in your mouth ‘.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on Britain Isn't Eating.
LikeLike