2005-Aug-30, 2005-Nov-28 - Consultation (0)

emark's profile

Posted by emark on Sat 17 May 08, 6:01 PM

[Repost from 2005-Aug-30]

Please Won't Somebody Think Of The ... Consenting Adults?

Government plans to ban material depicting "sexual violence", even between consenting adults ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4195332.stm ).

The media seems to focus on the idea of banning material which is reasonable to consider illegal, and available on websites, and asking the usual questions about whether it's fair to go after downloaders, or whether looking at such content actually encourages violence.

What's more worrying is that consenting acts appear to be covered, and mere possession will be an offence (ie, not just hosting on a website).

The Consultation document ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/30_08... ) says there would be a "new offence of simple possession of extreme pornographic material which is graphic and sexually explicit and which contains actual scenes or realistic depictions of serious violence". "Serious violence" is defined as that which would result in a prosecution of grievous bodily harm - but rape scenes do not appear to be included as far as I can tell. It also says they have "a desire to protect those who participate ... who may be the victim of crime ... whether or not they notionally or genuinely consent to take part".

The problem of course is that BDSM acts which leave some kind of injury are still illegal ( http://www.spannertrust.org/ ) even with consent, so a law restricted to only "illegal acts" would nonetheless cover such things. Arguably, it is the fact such things are illegal which is the fundamental problem here rather than this new law, but even so: I'd rather see things move forward and that such things become more acceptable and legal, rather than adding yet more laws, making such acts more demonised, and grouped together with non-consensual acts. It's worrying that, whilst one can take steps to avoid being caught in the act, having a photo of such acts - even if you remove any identifying features so it can't be proven it was something you were involved in - would now be inherently illegal.

I'm not sure if limiting to GBH gives some hope. Operation Spanner ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Spanner ) resulted in charges of ABH, but I've seen several definitions of GBH which include cuts to the skin. Anyone know anymore?

Extending this to even depictions seems very odd to me. Even play acting violence is now illegal? How would it be different to mainstream TV which features realistic depctions of serious violence in a sexual context? Since actually carrying out such acts is (sadly) illegal even with consent, I do not see what they intend to cover by including "realistic depictions".

Is "fake child porn" currently illegal? And anyone know if or how literary porn is covered by such laws?

Such material is apparentely already illegal to distribute, but not to possess (so I fail to see how this is merely closing a "loophole" - hosting on a website, and possessing material either downloaded from a website, or made yourself with consenting adults, and not distributed outside a private group are fundamentally different).

Mr Goggins said such images were "extremely offensive to the vast majority" and had no place in society.

They may be extremely offensive to some people who choose to watch it. What would be offensive would be scanning someone's computer, finding images which no one wanted you to see, and then throwing the person in prison.

The Government is asking for people's views, before Friday 2 December, which can be sent to: CLPUconsultations@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk .

I'm not entirely sure how to respond, since the main issue is that I disagree with consenting "violence" being illegal, which isn't what this new law would be fundamentally changing. Any ideas?

I feel the main two points are that (a) Acts between consenting adults should not be covered by this new law, and (b) "realistic depictions" is very ill-defined; in summary, the law should cover specifically illegal acts between non-consenting adults. Furthermore, if this cannot be done, any laws should specifically cover distribution, and not merely possessing an image on one's computer.

---

[Repost from 2005-Nov-28]

Consultation on Possession of Extreme Pornographic Material - Deadline Friday 2nd December!

The official document is available online as a PDF ( http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/documents/cons-extr... ).

A handy FAQ is at: http://www.unfettered.co.uk/backlash/faqconsulta... [UPDATE - URL out of date]

Basically the consultation asks a list of questions. You can respond either in writing or email CLPUconsultations@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk . Anonymous responses are apparentely allowed (or you can simply supply a name and a disposable email address, without having to give your home address).

I haven't written my responses yet, but thought I would remind people! Has anyone responded? Anyone know of some example responses (of course they should be individually written, but it's useful to have a list of points to make)?

Edited Tue 20 May 08, 1:40 AM by emark


	©1997-2009 Informed Consent