Sarsen

@sarsen

Older (1969 vintage), not very experienced kinkster. Less pup these days. He/Him Yellow Pan Vers-top NSFW 18+ North West England 🇬🇧 THIS IS A NSFW ACCOUNT. NON-NSFW FOLLOWERS MAY BE BLOCKED

372 Folgt223 Follower681 Posts

YouTube Bluesky

bdsm

Ist das dein Profil?Übernimm es — dann gehört dir sarsen.dirty.social.Profil übernehmen

Sarsen@sarsen· 2h

I’ll be in London on the 23rd and plan on spending the afternoon at @clubsop.co.uk if and mutual piss lovers are around.

Sarsen@sarsen· 4d

Could be fun Live in 🇬🇧 Born in 🇬🇧 Parents 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 Grandparents 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 Been to: 🇪🇸 🇫🇷 🇦🇹 🇩🇪 🇧🇪 🇮🇹 🇨🇭 🇩🇰 🇳🇱 🇸🇪 🇦🇩 🇨🇾

Sarsen@sarsen· Jun 27

I did a thread about this at the time. The published amendment isn’t anywhere near as bad as the headlines. A baby faced 20 year old in school uniform may be in trouble but an adult in diapers is probably safe.

67H (4) (b) "a person is not to be taken as pretending to be under 16 if it is fanciful that they are actually under 16 in the way pretended."

Sarsen@sarsen· Jun 16

Fuck me! At that price I hope the piss is included. I love my gear from Invincible Rubber (and I can’t fault their after sales care). I’ve long wanted a full suit from them. Looks like I’ll have to sell my soul (or my ass) to afforded one.

Sarsen@sarsen· May 28

Which will be ready first, the new Recon or Trump’s health plan? “Two weeks”.

Screenshot of Recon post:

No censorship. No restrictions.
Just Recon. Switch to the web app.
The new Recon is almost here.
Just weeks away.
Until then, check out the pilot

Sarsen@sarsen· May 24

Labour keep moving right in a futile attempt to win votes from Reform. They’ve not learned that Reform will keep moving further right. Labour promise to limit net migration to 10,000. Reform will promise zero or to expel 10,000. Why bother with a Labour government if it’s a Reform tribute act?

Sarsen@sarsen· May 24

All of that would be compelling if his comments since becoming Labour candidate weren’t so ‘continuity Starmer’. www.thecanary.co/uk/analysis/...

Sarsen@sarsen· Apr 30

Is it too early for fat cock Friday?

Sarsen@sarsen· Apr 11

And there’s a defence to the offence of publication if you’re one of the people int he image and you only publish it to the other person in the image: 67I (4) (c)

(ii) the act did not involve the infliction of any
non-consensual harm on any person,
(iii)
(iv)
neither A nor B was under 16, and
the person only published the image to person B or A (a le case may be
(5) In this section "non-consensual harm" has the same meaning as in section 66.
67J Penalties for offences under section 67H
(1) A person who commits an offence under section 67H(1) is liable-
(a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding the general limit in a magistrates' court or a fine (or both);
(b)
on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years or a fine (or both).
(2) A person who commits an offence under section 67H(2) is liable-(a)
on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding the general limit in a magistrates' court or a fine (or both;
(b)
on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or a fine (or both)."

(2) In section 68 of that Act (special rules relating to providers of information society services), after "67E" insert "and 67H".
(3) In Schedule 14 to that Act (special rules relating to providers of information society services), in paragraphs 3(1), 4(2) and 5(1) after "67E" insert "or 67H".
(4) In Schedule 34A to the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (child sex offences for the purposes of section 327A), after paragraph 13ZB insert—
"13ZC An offence under section 67H of that Act (possession or publication of pornographic images of sexual activity with child under 16) in relation to an image showing a person under 18."
(5)
In Schedule 7 to the Online Safety Act 2023 (priority offences), in paragraph 29 after paragraph (c) insert—
'(d) section 67H (possession or publication of pornographic image:
of sexual activity with child under 16)."'
(b)
* Page 230, line 13, at end insert—
"(ja) section (Pornographic images of sexual activity with child under 16)(5);" (c)
* Page 230, line 30, after "(4)," insert "(Pornographic images of sexual activity with child under
16)(2) and (3),"

Sarsen@sarsen· Apr 11

67H (4) (b) “a person is not to be taken as pretending to be under 16 if it is fanciful that they are actually under 16 in the way pretended.” If you’re a 30 year old with a beard you’re probably okay!

associated with the image that the person in subsection
(2) publishes with the image, and
(b) a person is not to be taken as pretending to be under 16 if it is fanciful that they are actually under 16 in the way pretended.
(5) In this section "image" has the same meaning as in section 63.
(6) Subsections (1) and (2) do not apply to excluded images, within the meaning of section 64.
(7) Proceedings for an offence under this section may not be instituted except by or with the consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions.
67l Defences to offences under section 67H
(1) Where a person is charged with an offence under section 67H(1), it is a defence for the person to prove any of the matters mentioned in subsection (2).
(2) The matters are
(a) that the person had a legitimate reason for being in possession of the image concerned;
(b)
that the person had not seen the image concerned and did not know, nor had any cause to suspect, it to be an image of the kind mentioned in section 67H(1);
(c)
that the person
(i) was sent the image concerned without any prior request having been made by or on behalf of the person, and
(ii) did not keep it for an unreasonable time;
(d)
that— (i)
the person directly participated in the act portrayed as person A or person B mentioned in section 67H(1)(b),
(ii)
the act did not involve
the infliction of any
non-consensual harm on any person, and
(iii) neither A nor B was under 16.

(3) Where a person is charged with an offence under section 67H(2), it is a defence for the person to prove any of the matters mentioned in subsection (4).
(4) The matters are-
(a) that the person had a legitimate reason for publishing the image concerned to the persons to whom they published it;
(b) that the person had not seen the image concerned and did not know, nor had any cause to suspect, it to be an image of the kind mentioned in section 67H(1);
(c) that-
(i) the person directly participated in the act portrayed as person A or person B mentioned in section 67H(1)(b),

Sarsen@sarsen· Apr 11

So what does the amendment say? Initially this looks bad. It’s an offence if a reasonable person thinks a pornographic image, or image depicting realistic sexual activity, depicts someone pretending to be under 16.

Page 99, line 24, at end insert the following new Clause-
"Pornographic images of sexual activity with child under 16
(1) After section 67G of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 insert—
"67H Possession or publication of pornographic images of sexual activity with
child under 16
(1) It is an offence for a person (P) to be in possession of an image if—
(a) the image is pornographic, within the meaning of section 63,
(b) the image portrays, in an explicit and realistic way, a person (A) engaged in sexual activity with another person (B),
(c) a reasonable person looking at the image would think that A and B were real, and
(d) a reasonable person—
(i) looking at the image, and
(ii) taking into account any sound or information associated
with the image,
would think that at least one of A or B was, or was pretending to be, under 16.
(2) It is an offence for a person to publish an image of the kind mentioned in subsection (1).
(3)
Publishing an image includes giving or making it available to another person by any means.
(4) For the purposes of subsection (1)(d)-
(a) the reference to sound or information associated with the image is-
(i) when subsection (1)(d) applies for the purpose of an offence under subsection (1), to sound, or information, associated with the image that is in P's possession, and (ii) when subsection (1)(d) applies for the purpose of an offence under subsection (2), to sound, or information,

Sarsen@sarsen· Mar 30

A pub in Brighton whose name I can’t quite remember. Totally unintentional. I was with a group of straight friends. None of us knew it was a gay bar until we were inside. I recall copies of the Pink Paper piled on a piano and a Tom of Finland clone behind the bar.

Sarsen@sarsen· Jan 13

If you’re still on X, another reason to leave. From private eye.

ANTI-SOCIAL MEDIA
READERS still planning to use X in 2026 might want to take note of the platform's updated terms of service.
Coming into force on 16 January, these have been quietly amended to ensure Elon Musk's platform of hate can use anything posted to its platform as training data for its AI systems, terminate a user's account for any reason it chooses, and to effectively monetise anything a user puts on the platform.
Specifically, the wording grants X the right
"to use, copy, reproduce, process, adapt, modify, publish, transmit, display, upload, download, and distribute such Content... for any purpose.... these rights include, for example, curating, transforming, and translating".
Meanwhile X is also rolling out a feature allowing anyone to use its AI, Grok, to edit any image posted to the platform directly, devaluing the work of artists and adding another layer of uncertainty around what is and isn't real.

Sarsen@sarsen· Dec 13

Not orange enough

A pumpkin with a carved face and a blonde wig. Behind the pumpkin is a sign saying “Trumpkin. Make Halloween great again”

Sarsen@sarsen· Dec 12

🚨 QUESTION PROMT 🚨 What was your first automobile? 1981 British Leyland Mini. This one to be precise

Dark green Leyland Mini with white roof.

Sarsen@sarsen· Oct 31

Sarsen@sarsen· Oct 6

It’s not just the Tories. Reform are facing escalating “hestility” like being labelled “fat right”, prompting “invviduals” to commit acts of “ferrorism”

A spelling error laden Reform leaflet. Honestly, you’re better of not knowing what it says.

Sarsen@sarsen· Oct 6

FFS!

Tories are stupid. That’s all you need to know.

Sarsen@sarsen· Oct 5

I know I repeat this from time to time but the moral panic really is coming for us. If you think being white, male and cis is going to protect you, you’re mistaken.

Screenshot of Turning Point UK post from 4 October 2025. Showing middle aged men, wearing dark jackets with “Kings Army” printed across them in gold, standing in lines down the middle of a street apparently in Soho, London. It’s dark and shops and bars are lit up.

The caption says “Activists from the 'King's Army' block traffic in Soho in protest of the immoral culture in the 'sex district.”

Sarsen@sarsen· Oct 3

In memoriam

Four flower planter buckets on a shop shelf. A red bucket “Tulip planter”. Two yellow buckets “Narcissi bucket”. And a purple bucket “Hyacinth bucket”.

Sarsen@sarsen· Sep 18

As an over 50, where do I apply?

Sex parties and drugs at a council block meant to be for the over-50s has left residents in fear.

Sarsen@sarsen· Sep 13

Isn’t it time we declared Yaxley-Lennon, and his flag shagging mob, terrorists?

Terrorism: interpretation.
(1) In this Act "terrorism" means the use or threat of action where—
(a) the action falls within subsection (2),
(b) the use or threat is designed to influence the government [F1 or an international governmental organisation] or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and
(c) the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious [F2, racial] or ideological cause.
(2) Action falls within this subsection if it—
(a) involves serious violence against a person,
(b) involves serious damage to property,
(c) endangers a person's life, other than that of the person committing the action,
(d) creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public, or
(e) is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.

Sarsen@sarsen· Sep 10

Found this in today’s “Reform watch” email. I’ve clearly been letting the side down.

Monckton, who was once UKIP's deputy leader, had ludicrously claimed that some gay men have "as many as 20,000 partners" in their "short, miserable lives".

Sarsen@sarsen· Sep 9

Apple reveal new AirPods with live translation feature.

Cut away image of stylised fish in black on white background containing red, blue and purple circuitry.

Sarsen@sarsen· Aug 30

Nothing says patriotism like defacing the flag. Fucking morons.

Anti asylum seeker protesters waving St George’s Cross flags and a Union Flag. Two of the St George’s Cross flags have slogans written on them including “Keep our children safe” and “Protect our Country”

Sarsen@sarsen· Aug 30

Waitrose sell unscented talc but it’s currently out of stock

Screenshot of white container on white background of Waitrose unscented talc

Sarsen@sarsen· Aug 19

Plus, in this world of 24 hour news, 1001 TV channels, streaming and social media (and equality advances made in the late ‘90s and ‘00s), we are more visible. It’s like there seemed to be an epidemic of people rolling their cars a few years ago. There wasn’t, just people posting pictures online.

Sarsen@sarsen· Aug 16

Off to @clublocked.bsky.social

Man in black and yellow rubber suit with yellow cap with the caption “sex dog”

Sarsen@sarsen· Aug 11

Travelling home after an unexpectedly kinky few days in and around London. Two thoughts: 1) I need to make plans to come back and spend a few days just visiting kink events and cruise bars. 2) I want a regular play mate; sub or dom-switch, cis or trans. Apply within.

Partly drunk pint of beer in a straight glass on a marble table.

Sarsen@sarsen· Aug 11

The only part of the Terrorism Act’s definition that could apply to Palestine Action is “serious damage to property”. That’s an unqualified statement so it could include damage to works of art, spray painting Harrods, spray painting car showrooms etc. The point being, once the precedent is set, 1/