Australia Bans Small Breasts In Porn (52)

This is definitely a good thing

"I like to play with things a while. Before annihilation...."

http://www.informedconsent.co.uk/posts/262420/0#...

although the two issues are appearing together, they are actually very different. They have been cobbled together as much because running on this story has come from the Australian Sex Party and their convenor, Fiona Patten, whilst a lovely lady, is not above, um, spinning stuff for maximum effect.

That and the fact that the ACB (who do the classification) are not very nimble when it comes to handling the media.

The breast size thing is about an issue that crops up worldwide: its a disagreement between those who think the role of child protection is about identifying and stopping actual child abuse (therefore focus on actual pictures of real children); and those who think that there is some paedophile meme out there and that having pics that "look" paedophile can feed the hunger, create more demand, lead to more abuse.

This news from australia is new. But it has echoes in many US jurisdictions. It echoes German legislation a couple of years back that targeted images that "appeared" to be under age (and provoked a court battle with "Barely Legal".

It also echoes the thinking of many of our legislators: just read back through the debates on the cartoon porn law and the fact that we are now saddled with a law that can make you a criminal according to how old a cartoon "appears". And yes: various jurisdictions, including the australian, have been hot on prosecuting people for possessing childrens cartoons that have been adulterated into adult porn.

To be honest, i suspect there are also people on here who buy into that argument: if it appears under-age, it MAY fuel desire...so we're safer without.

The ejaculation thing is very different - and echoes a long-running dispute in the UK between the BBFC, Feminists against Censorship and, most recently, film director Anna Span.

I also tend to think that the pro-ejaculation lobby are arguing completely the wrong tack.

The BBFC (and the ACB) will go on at length about how there "is no evidence" that female ejaculation exists. In that, they are following a line established by those oh-so-liberal forefathers of psychiatry, Freud and Kraft-Ebling.

So the debate has pushed off into the very sterile arena of whether there IS any such thing...and since many film producers DO fake it, that hardly helps the cause.

Bollocks!

Since when has "reality" been a touchstone of what is or is not allowed? Look at any mainstream porn film, and you will see men carrying out feats of orgasm and erectile sturdiness that are very unlikely to be real.

One might as easily argue that since a man CAN'T be cumming as often as they are purported to be cumming in an hour, the substance being sprayed around the place MUST be wee.

I would have say - have said as much both to the ASP and Ms Span - that if they wish to push this into court, they should take a gender discrimination route. Men get to watch men doing impossible stuff and men like it because it panders to male fantasy. But women don't get to watch stuff that panders to female fantasy because a "reality" test is introduced.

Sorry...but that feels discriminatory...and it strikes me that a film defended in court with a strong of female witnesses coming (sic!) on to the stand and stating that they believe its ejaculate, irrespective of what the medical profession say, and they'd have a very good case.

I believe that is what is known as the "Kris Kringle" defence - though whether encouraging an eight-year-old to bribe the judge with a dollar bill just before the summing up would help matters, i cannot say.

j

I mean, who would want to see such a terrible sight as a shaven lady? I'll tell you who: a paedophile, that's who! It all makes sense in my tiny stupid mind.

Personally I would ban children altogether. They always seem to be involved in this messy business somehow.

Thanks to OP for the heads up.

I think I'm going down with Stokholm syndrome . . . . .handsome.

Do you think they're sponsored by the implant industry?

Ubi caritas et amor, Deus ibi est. http://www.informedconsent.co.uk/posts/226772/

Well the next step is they'll probably ban Willy Wonka, because it's got children in it and it's a film about Willy so it's paedogedon

It's about time for another Brass Eye special...

The first rule of Brat Club, we don't talk about Brat Club...

I believe that one net effect of all this hysteria is to make the potential kiddie-fiddler's task of gaining access to, and the confidence of, victims much easier: by preventing sensible discussion of the subject and keeping children ignorant of their methodology and the real risks.

Academy Incorporated: turning fantasy into reality, fast friendly, helpful, discreet service, with integrity www.academywear.com for retro adult school and maid uniform guy@tawse.com PO Box 135, Hereford, HR2 7WL, UK +44(0)1432 343100 [pi

If someone IS under age, prove it and prosecute. If they are not then what they may "appear to be" is irrelevant.

Toak

FEMALE, BONDAGE-FRIENDLY MODEL SOUGHT. I am seeking to update my "How To" shibari bondage pictures (see my profile pics, the clothed blonde tied in red and black) with a model more "enthusiastic" about BDSM, and who is happy to be photographed nude. MEMO ME if this is you.

No, not just the Australians; all of us. There is an utter obsession with paedophilia at the moment, which is, when all is done, a very rare crime outside the family. Things are so bad that we adults can't even talk to children now. We are in the grip of a religious revival - did you know, for example, that there is a creationist zoo in Devon, where they cater for school trips? It seems that whereas in the eighties society was promoting Victorian values, we have now slid back to the middle ages, and are debating about how many angels would fit on a pinhead.