This post is on the BDSM Activism web board.
| Tue 30 Aug 05, 6:33 AM Mona_Demarkov HR, 7 yrs  |
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4195332.stm ...I know that non-consensual violence in sex is horrible, agreed. But I have a feeling a lot of BDSM sites will be on trial with the proposal of this ban...and for my generation and surely the generations to follow, the internet is one of the main helpers in understanding and "coming out"...aarrrgggghhh! | ||||
| 30 Aug 05, 7:20 AM relaxed1 UK(BR), 6 yrs  |
It's a difficult situation, but there's no reason to suppose that it will stop responsible sites. They're pointing out, for example, that it's specifically aimed at foreign-based sites because the material they're aiming to stop is already illegal in the UK in any case - on that basis it's reasonable to infer that it wouldn't affect sites like IC. Also, there's no reason to suppose that it would extend beyond distribution of violent internet porn - and although we all have different definitions of what is unacceptable, we have to acknowledge that there are dangerous people around who may be influenced by this. Perhaps the way to look at it is that the best porn occurs in your own head, in the fantasies and ideas that you have; they haven't yet come up with plans to control your thoughts! We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking up at the stars | ||||
| 30 Aug 05, 7:23 AM demolitionred 7 yrs |
we're having a real nightmare getting hold of the Home Office on this...but are still persisting. Feminists against Censorship and the Sexual Freedom Coalition have already agreed to help on some collaborative action...if any is needed. If you're interested in doing some investigation, attending a meeting, write to me at demolitionred@unfettered.co.uk or contact one of the above organisations. --------------------------------------------------- -- Edited 30 Aug 05, 7:25 AM by demolitionred | ||||
| 30 Aug 05, 7:38 AM MisterBear UK(WA), 8 yrs   |
Here's the previous discussion on this. http://www.informedconsent.co.uk/boards/activism... bear (o:3 My speling is purfekt, its my tiping thst sicks | ||||
| 30 Aug 05, 9:08 AM demolitionred 7 yrs |
M, you have mail --------------------------------------------------- -- | ||||
| 30 Aug 05, 9:50 AM relaxed1 UK(BR), 6 yrs |
Sorry Manniq, I was reading the whole BBC article, not just the headline, and my comments were only with regard to that article, not the wider issues. "Distribution of extreme pornography is illegal in the UK but this does not affect foreign websites, so new laws could ban possession of it in Britain."
I'm not sure what principle I was welcoming with regard to child porn, but I'm happy to make a clear statement here, that is relevant to this issue in any case. I support the prohibition of any porn that features persons engaged in non-consensual acts; since the law determines that a person under 16 cannot consent to a sexual act, child pornography clearly falls into this category. Although classification of a sexual image versus a non-sexual one - art, or a photo of your kids in the bath etc - can be highly subjective, difficulty in classification should not detract from the responsibility that we all have to prevent exploitation and abuse. The purpose of the law should be to protect people - in this case children. In so doing, it will inevitably (and intentionally) impinge on some freedoms; it's a matter of opinion whether that balance is correctly struck, but most parents (and many others) would wish the law to err on the side of caution where children are concerned, even if it restricts their own freedoms.
The whole point about the IMAGES is that it can be near impossible to establish that the activity in them is consensual and staged rather than real - and I'm sure that none of us would endorse non-consensual activity. Indeed, part of the "value" of such porn to some people is the appearance that the acts depicted are non-consensual. If we are talking about creating home-made images (of your own, consensual, activities), then current advice seems to be not to do it - not because of any pornography laws, but simply because it provides evidence of activity that may be illegal. This is nothing to do with sticking my head in the sand. I am as keen as the next person to protect my rights and freedom to do as I wish, with whomever wishes to do that with me. It's all to do with trying to strike a balance between wanting to be accepted as taking part in consensual activity (even though that activity may not be accepted or understood by the some sections of the general populace) whilst being perceived as defending the distribution of images depicting non-consensual activity. There is a danger that appearing to defend images of non-consensual activity (because that is already the focus of attention) in the earlier stages of the debate could devalue legitimate protest when legislation is drafted. When you are part of a marginalised group of which "society" generally disapproves, it's difficult to be taken seriously in debating potential negative aspects in the drafting of legislation without appearing to defend the action that prompted it. It would be a mistake to underestimate the emotive nature of the debate that will ensue, or the banner headlines in the red tops ("Perverts defend murderer's porn stash"). Finally, it may be worth stating, for the record, that I don't disagree with you; I just favour a more cautious approach. We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking up at the stars | ||||
| 30 Aug 05, 9:53 AM demolitionred 7 yrs |
lets wait till we have an official line from the Home office and then I think we need to sort out a eeting with any interested parties -- maybe on-line, maybe regionally , to discuss possible ways forward... Like I said we already have a core group of people who are interested in doing something...we need to agree what, in consultation with lawyers, experienced lobbyists --------------------------------------------------- -- | ||||
| 30 Aug 05, 10:18 AM The_Playhouse UK, 7 yrs £ |
If a law is created it is likely to be as grey as the one existing regarding licenses for sex shops. This already is so grey that is includes "anything for the purposes of restraint". This led to Sheffield city council talking about imprisonment if I started up a small fetish market without paying for a license and abiding by strict rules imposed by them on what was not allowed. Therefore if a law is passed it is likely to be able to be applied to all BDSM if the Police want it to. Which could seriously harm the acceptance of BDSM online but also in public. But this is the worst case scenario and hopefully it would not come to this. Especially with the increasing acceptance on the High Street of BDSM, with vanilla chain stores starting to sell floggers and restaints. Mistress Kitana The Playhouse The home of three lifestyle Mistresses where the possibilities are endless... www.the-playhouse.co.uk | ||||
| 30 Aug 05, 10:24 AM demolitionred 7 yrs |
the current intent does seem to be -- following our conversation (thanks Manniq) with the Home office -- to implement more far-reaching terms than the current Obscene Publications laws...
--------------------------------------------------- -- | ||||
| 30 Aug 05, 10:48 AM nightowl91 7 yrs |
it wouldn't surprise me at all if this ends up some ill-thought-out, headline-grabbing load of bollox that steps on the toes of plenty of law-abiding people who just want to enjoy consentual fun in private and watch what they want to in the privacy of their own homes. of course there are some things that are pretty beyond out there but i'll be surprised in they're the only things that get sucked into this. at the end of the day will the government give a toss about the voice of a relative minority such as the fetish community and who will actually make the decisions? i doubt if they've got any real experts on the subject and also whether they'll consult too widely with people really in the know. the scumbag blair may be slaughtering women and children in iraq but, hey, as long as he gets the right headlines back home for dealing with all those nasty perves everything's ok isn't it. | ||||
| 30 Aug 05, 12:42 PM bellahindia UK, 6 yrs |
Radio 2 are discussing the issue today. And intermittantly there's call ins from the public. From the few I've heard, there seems to be quite an even split between those who think such images should be allowed [perhaps policed, but not banned] and those who think it's 'depraved and deviant' and therefore should be banned post haste [and anyone who's into it should be ritually burned].
|
