Extreme Pornography News

The Scottish government has declared its intention to ban the possession of violent porn. It extends on the law already passed for the rest of the UK by including non-consensual sex and rape (both violent and non-violent). 

POSSESSION OF EXTREME PORNOGRAPHIC MATERIAL

The Scottish Executive issued a joint consultation in 2005 with the Home Office on issues relating to the possession of extreme pornography. This consultation ran until December 2005 and 93 Scottish responses were received.

We have decided to introduce a new offence for the possession of extreme pornographic material. We propose that this offence will criminalise the possession of pornographic images which realistically depict:

• Life-threatening acts and violence that would appear likely to cause severe injury
• Rape and other non- consensual penetrative sexual activity, whether violent or otherwise
• Bestiality or necrophilia.

The maximum penalty for the proposed new offence will be 3 years imprisonment.

We intend that the new offence will be similar to that at section 63 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008, which will apply in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. The Scottish offence will go further than that offence, however, in that it will cover all images of rape and non-consensual penetrative sexual activity, whereas the English offence only covers violent rape.

Under section 51 of the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982, it is already illegal to publish, sell or distribute or to possess with a view to selling or distributing the material that would be covered by this new offence. We propose to increase the maximum penalty under section 51 of the 1982 Act in respect of extreme pornographic material from 3 to 5 years.

BENEFIT OF MAKING THE PROPOSED CHANGE

Will help ensure society is protected from exposure to pornography that depicts horrific images of violence.

...Take the case of Jane Longhurst, Five years ago Ms Longhurst, a Brighton-based teacher, was brutally slain. At the trial it emerged that her killer was a fan of nasty, violent porn websites such as Rape Action.

Following the life imprisonment of the murderer, Jane's mother Liz began an understandable campaign: to ban the possession of violent sexual imagery. This campaign got support from then Home Secretary, David Blunkett. This summer a law was passed, containing a clause prohibiting such imagery. Under the law it is illegal to look at images of someone freely engaging in rough sex. That is to say: the act is legal, but looking at a photo of it is forbidden. George Orwell had a word for this: thought-crime. Another description might be misguided puritanism.

How can these two urges absolute disinhibition and illogical prudishness coexist in the same society? I think the problem is that we are very confused about sex. We pretend sex is just a game, but deep down we still fear its power. However, because we now mainly hide or deny our fears, or focus these fears on "deviant" sex, the rest of the time we are free to act in a dangerously amoral way, in a bedroom without basic rules.

...Read full article

There was a discussion about violent porn on Radio 2's Jeremy Vine show on Wednesday 17th September

See No Evil forum members commented:

Was actually pretty good, it was obvious that Jeremy Vine wasn't at all convinced and the Labour MP they had on kept banging on about irrelevancies such as prostitutes and trafficked women and protecting children and so on.

Huge confusion (some intentional?) by all the participants:

• Vine suggesting the law would prevent accessing images on line.
• Denis McShane talking about anuses being ripped apart.
• Lois Hillgrove, publicist for Ben Westwood, contending that a married couple would be put on the sexual offenders register for photographing their mild bondage session.
• Longhurst gave an account of the circumstances of her daughter's murder. Then started rambling about snuff movies being made in Milton Keynes.

Well, at least if this was intended as some kind of pro-legislation piece, it failed in those aims. Denis MacShane was almost laughable in his sycophancy, whilst Mrs Longhurst gave an uncharacteristically rambling interview.

I believe strongly that prostitution should be legalised. Why doesn't the Government do that, instead of introducing this ban on extreme porn? It seems to me that they just want to be seen as "tough". Yet, in my opinion, the present Government has been rather useless and feeble about the most important moral things. They have taken this country to war; they are not strong on green issues: are we, for instance, going to take up the offer by the President of Guyana to pay for them not to cut down their rainforest?

Why don't we put our minds to dealing with these really important issues before serious damage is done to the world, instead of persecuting people for their fantasies?

We already have laws to deal with real violence, and surely there are much more pressing matters to be debating than "Is porn good?"

My answer to that, meanwhile, is simple: of course it is.

...Read full article from independent.co.uk

As you might have gathered elsewhere, Consenting Adult Action Network (CAAN) opposes NuLabour idiocy when it comes to Sex and Sexuality.

Legislation on Extreme Porn is just bad law, badly written and, we believe, likely to fall into disrepute very quickly – but maybe not before ruining a couple of dozen lives along the way.

Another new law - on Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups - is also going to cause enormous harm, because it bars people from working on the basis of their private and perfectly legal sexual fantasies.

In the meantime, we are hearing more and more from people who are beginning to be very afraid, simply because of their own sexuality.

But what do we believe in? We think the following is about as straightforward as it gets – and if you agree with us, let us know. Signing up doesn't mean you buy into every last detail of CAAN's campaigning actions: it does mean you are joining together with a growing body of people who are sick and tired of the Nanny State bullying its way into their bedroom.

Sign if you're kinky. Sign, too, if you're not.

This is about basic human rights – not your personal sexuality.

If you'd like to support this simple notion, please e-mail us on info@caan.org.uk

Please provide your real name (and organisation if applicable) and we do need a valid e-mail address for confirmation purposes.

Oh – and if you can help us campaign, please let us know what you are willing to do. Blowing up the Houses of Parliament is not on the agenda.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

We believe in the right of consenting adults to make their own sexual choices, in respect of what they do, see and enjoy alone or with other consenting adults, unhindered and unfettered by government

We believe that it is not the business of government to intrude into the sex lives of consenting adults.

Update: New Address

13th September 2008

CAAN have now established an easier to remember internet address:

Website: www.caan.org.uk
Email:  info@caan.org.uk

Bad artists of Britain, beware. Jack Straw's Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 seems to be creating a lot of unintentional collateral damage out in the tackier fringes of the art world. The act outlaws "extreme pornography" in which a woman or man's life appears to be in danger, as presented for the titillation of the viewer. As such, it also unwittingly includes much art and fashion photography, music video imagery and any other image in which a person (usually, in reality, a woman) is made the object of mortal threat. So it seems that we will no longer get to see any marvellous hipster pics of objectified female meat in danger. What a loss for the world of culture.

See article from guardian.co.uk

Update: Good Riddance

Thanks to Alan who points out an excellent counter blog to Bidisha's vindictiveness:

See Good Riddance to Bad Pseudo-Feminism from rohrstockpalast.blogspot.com

Bidisha is a novelist and a frequent contributor to he Guardian and the Observer. I enjoy her angry, hyperbolic columns a lot. They are a flashback to dogmatic 1970's style feminism, but written with all the vitriol and the fanaticism of youth. I think society needs people like Bidisha. For entertainment value, and to kick dumb, disrespectful, chauvinistic males in the face until they squeal like the craven pigs they are. There are still way too many of those leering neanderthals around, and they annoy me almost as much as they do women.

Unfortunately, Bidisha on her part doesn't think that society needs people like me - kinky people, that is, who are into corporal punishment and BDSM. Never mind that it's between consenting adults, never mind that roles in BDSM aren't really fixed to gender, but to personal preference. I can claim all I want that I respect women. In her eyes, being a CP fetishist makes me a dumb, chauvinistic pig myself, someone who propagates exploitation and abuse. No different from a sexist creep who harasses female colleagues in the workplace, really. And what about the women in our community? Well, they are nutcases who have conveniently internalised male oppression and misogyny. See, I told you, Bidisha is a lot of fun. And the frightening thing is, she's dead serious.

...Read the full article Good Riddance to Bad Pseudo-Feminism