Personal Thoughts on Extreme Porn Law (0)

emark's profile

Posted by emark on Tue 20 May 08, 1:50 AM

[Originally written April 2007]

"We believe the material would be abhorrent to most people and has no place in our society."

This was the statement made by the Government in its consultation for criminalising possession of "extreme pornography".

The debate about whether media affects behaviour has existed for a long time. Literature, rock music, violent films, pornography, computer games and Marilyn Manson have all been blamed for society's problems.

However I took particular interest when I heard of the Government's plans. Criminalising possession seems something new when it comes to censorship, and I took interest as someone whose sexuality includes interest in material that could be seen as violent.

Certainly I do not support images of actual non-consensual violence. If the Government wishes to criminalise possession of these, that's fine. Just as with child pornography, they would be criminalised because of the harm done to victims in creating them. But the proposed law covers images with consenting adults, even if they are filming their private acts for their own enjoyment[1], and images that are simulated, be it a photoshopped image, or a photo of a simulated scene. Websites cited by the Government such as "Necrobabes" sound horrific, but are nonetheless simulated.

This isn't a question of victims being harmed against their will, it's not even a question of whether one can consent to injury - it's a question of banning material because of the effect it allegedly has on the viewer, or society.

For the record, I'm not a visitor of sites such as "Necrobabes" (or the site with male models, "Necrodudes"). Whilst actual acts of necrophilia may be "abhorrent", I wonder why we would criminalise people for looking at an image, which at the end of the day is someone play-acting.

Those of us into BDSM may have private photos of our sex life, and have to worry where these stand with the new law. Also, in the past I have been subscribed to various BDSM, fetish and Goth sites, where sometimes people post images. Mostly mild, but occasionally an image - simulated - which could fall under the law. Examples include erotic images of models with fake blood, fake injuries, and sometimes perhaps looking dead. Even if I have no interest in the image, I wonder where I would stand with the law.

The show America's Next Top Model caused controversy with images of models appearing to be dead[2]. Despite the outrage, I saw no one suggesting that the images should be illegal to possess. I pointed out that ironically people posting the images to express outrage could be breaking the new law. Some responded that the law wouldn't cover these; it was only for "extreme" material. But if actors playing dead isn't extreme, that means sites like Necrobabes would remain legal, so what is covered?

No one is sure what will be banned, and few have seen images from "extreme sites". With only the names of the sites like "Necrobabes" and "Hanging Bitches", obviously intended to shock, much is left to one's imagination.

I am a man, but suggesting that I support violence against women - as the Jane Longhurst petition suggested these images do - seems hard given that I am a sexual submissive, and enjoy these acts inflicted upon me. When viewing fictional images, I identify with the "victim" not the "aggressor".

We are told that BDSM would not be affected, but at the same time, that images of consensual and even simulated acts would come under the law. It seems meaningless to say that we would not be affected, when we are told we cannot express our sexuality privately like other consenting partners do, nor can we look at erotic images online like everyone else can.

As I am not part of "most people", the Government thinks I should face prison as a Sex Offender for looking at pictures of consensual or simulated scenes. It believes that "most people's" views on what should be in society extend to your private bedroom. Is appealing to personal taste a sound basis for making laws? There are images that I find abhorrent, many of which would not be covered by this law, but I would still not wish to send someone else to prison for possessing them.

[1] To which some will say, "Why would you do that?" But whatever one thinks of it, filming one's own sexual acts is something that a large number of people do - a Durex survey in 2004 revealed 29% of respondents in the UK film or photograph their partner [ http://www.durex.com/cm/gss2004result.pdf ]. Filming yourselves having sex is a cliché. The better question is, "Why would you want to lock people up for doing this?"

[2] http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/showbiz/article-23...


	©1997-2010 Informed Consent