Prowler has just launched
Mates, a new style of safer sex video,
produced in co-operation with GMFA. Sadly the BBFC demanded 10 cuts despite its health
promotion content.Essentially it was censored just like any 18 rated porn video. The BBFC felt that
whilst it had a strong safer sex message, it was an invitation to watch graphic sex
rather than educational. Some cuts were of condoms being put on fully erect
penises, making it unclear in many scenes that condoms are used. Scenes where the condom
was put on a penis not fully erect were allowed, although this is a less safe practice.
Some cuts would probably still have been made under the R18 certificate. R18 videos can
only be bought in licensed sex shops, making them harder to get than illegal hardcore
videos.
The BBFC have never allowed explicit buggery in gay videos, even at R18. This even
applied to Pride's educational R18 Extreme Pleasure Zone. They have
allowed explicit vaginal and anal penetration in straight R18s.
They demanded the removal of explicit fellatio and mutual masturbation from a Load R18
despite a prior agreement with Ferman, the previous director, to allow fellatio in
exchange for not submitting buggery.
In distinguishing between an 18 and an R18, the BBFC seem mainly concerned with the
issue of offensiveness to straights or someone who does not realise a video will be
explicit. The BBFC's new director, Robin Duval, has already said many people find it
much
more difficult to confront the portrayal of gay sex than heterosexual sex [Gay Times,
Jan 99]
Issues of safer sex appear to have a low priority. A straight video passed in 1997,
See
Real People Performing Better Sex shows highly explicit vaginal penetration, but
no condoms are used. By contrast Load's 1996 gay video Angels with Broken Noses 2
shows condoms clearly used in each scene. It was only passed after 2 years and suffered
some 15 to 20 cuts.
Many blame Jack Straw or Customs. However, a Customs spokesman said there is now no
real difference between straight and gay sex so far as legal obscenity is concerned. He
thought there was nothing obscene in the cuts from Mates, except possibly
a glimpse of apparent penetration. He felt even that might be defended on 'public good'
grounds. Customs allow mutual masturbation provided no ejaculation is shown. And they have
no trouble with condoms on full erections.
The Home Office spokesman stressed that they are not responsible for any differences
between straight and gay material. There were also no plans to have a higher age at which
gay videos can be bought. This was proposed by none other than Robin Duval.
He said that they rarely intervene in BBFC affairs. They did so in 1997 because both
Customs and Police complained that some straight R18s passed by the BBFC were legally
obscene. Ferman had unilaterally relaxed restrictions after a 'lunch time chat' with a
junior minister. He had failed to consult the Crown Prosecution Service or anybody else.
The new BBFC restrictions on gay sex are bizarre when you consider what is freely
available in the West End, Richard of Load told me that we effectively have the least
regulated porn market in Europe. Stuff that is completely banned and unobtainable on the
continent can be bought easily 'under the counter'.
One of GMFA's objectives with this video was to counteract the harmful effects of
hardcore material. Much of it contains explicit unsafe sex, or where condoms are not
visible. Even when condoms are seen you rarely see anyone putting one on. They just appear
like magic.
The BBFC were totally indifferent to the objectives of
Mates. They
appear to have discriminated against gay sex and done little to promote safer sex. Many
talk as if Jack Straw was the Wicked Witch of the West and James Ferman was Dorothy. The
truth is more complex.
