MarkVarley's profile . MarkVarley's homepage
 |
| MarkVarley |
on Tue 10 Oct 06, 11:55 AM to MarkVarley's blog.
Everyone is blogging for backlash, thought I may as well have a go.
The government wants us to stop viewing violent pornography, that's the basics, as I understand it. They also don't like us hurting each other if we enjoy it (or indeed, don't enjoy it).
A little history lesson, the history of Mark, when I was 17 I killed someone, I was in the army you see and circumstances came about that put me in that position. A man was violently ripped apart by bullets I fired, I was 17. I cannot imagine a more upsetting and grotesque image, yet I was fully allowed to do it and even congratulated for it, yet at 17 I was legally a child. At 17 I cannot by a porno mag because the images might upset/damage/corrupt me. At 17 I cannot drink alcohol because I am still a child. At 17 (at that time) I was not allowed to fuck a man, but I could kill him. Who the fuck is making these laws?
I am now exploring BDSM, boy meets girl, boy and girl get along in a fully consensual intelligent way and explore some stuff, boy hurts/cuts/bruises girl and takes a pic on his camera phone, both look at pics in the following weeks and feel warm and close and smile at what they share. No-one is corrupted, no one is damaged in any negative way both are freely exploring an area of mutual interest in a safe, sane, consensual, intelligent, caring way. Yet the government says it is bad and both could be prosecuted for the injuries sustained and, with the new laws, the images of such could lead to prosecution in themselves.
We like to think that we live in a free country, we do not, and that is a good thing. In a free country anyone could do anything. We need laws to prevent people doing things which are harmful to others, we need and we are grateful for these laws. What we DO NOT need are laws that are not protecting us from anything, we do not need laws to prevent us from doing things that do not adversely affect other people, we do need laws to prevent us hurting ourselves but there are mental health laws that cover this.
As a photographer, if I want to photograph someone being caned then provided the person being caned fully and sanely wants this to happen then my taking a photo harms no-one, if that image is then seen by a vanilla person then they can say 'nope, not for me' and ignore it having been no more adversely affected han the last '18' movie they saw, if it is seen by a kinky person then they will likely enjoy it. At no stage is anyone harmed by the creation or viewing of this image.
But what about the children? Well photos of fucking or open pussies may well upset children but we have laws covering that, these laws allow the images to be taken and to be distributed on the condition that reasonable care is taken to prevent children viewing them, this 'reasonable care' amounts to putting magazines on a high shelf in the shop. Similar control is placd on films with potentially upsetting content, why is this not enough?
I want to be free to do what I want, to create what I want, to view what I want, as long as it causes no nonconsensual harm to anyone. Why is this a bad thing?
PS, If you outlaw BDSM, if you outlaw what we do and photos of what we do, you won't stop us, you will merely make us outlaws.
Mark - Twisted Photography.co.uk - Twisted Photography IC Profile
"You have the right to remain Violent"
Edited Fri 13 Oct 06, 12:01 AM by MarkVarley
