http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7364475.stm BIIIIIIIIIGGGGGGGGGGGG can of worms here in the UK today. I listened to someone who was utterly clueless (think he was an MP) on the radio today saying that he supposed it was "alright for people to wander round the bedroom in an eyemask with handcuffs" WTF! and didn't have a clue what kinky porn was. I absolutely agree that rape, mutilation, etc should NEVER be shown in porn videos or photography, but in the interview I heard it was stated that "anything which could cause bruises or draw blood" would be seen as illegal. As someone in the comments on the site above said, what about mainstream movies? Basic Instinct? Goldeneye? And how about 2 grown men going into a ring and hitting each other repeatedly to bruise, draw blood and render each other unconscious.... or does that not count because its "sport" :crossedlips:
MW do you want me to get the formal answer from work (obscene publications guidelines) or answer this less formally? Bit of guidance needed on this one.
The whole thing is a mess. It's utterly unclear. I for one will be amazed if the BDSM community don't go up in arms. There is a line, but where are they trying to draw it?
Ok Read this very clear. Charging practice Specimen indictment (Indictment Precedent Manual). The particulars should clearly identify the obscene article e.g. "an Internet website entitled "Welcome" (exhibit reference KDW/6)." It is impossible to define all types of activity which are suitable for prosecution; however, the following categories are those most commonly used: sexual acts with children sexual assaults upon children portrayal of incest buggery with an animal rape drug taking flagellation torture with instruments bondage (especially where gags are used) dismemberment or graphic mutilation cannibalism activities involving perversion or degradation (such as drinking urine or smearing excreta on a person's body) The principal factors influencing whether a prosecution under section 2 is required are: the degree and type of obscenity together with the form in which it is presented: for example the impact of the printed word will be less than the same activity shown in film or photograph; the type and scale of any commercial venture should be taken into account; whether publication was made to a child or vulnerable adult, or the possibility that such would be likely to take place; where publication took place, especially if material can be readily seen by the general public, for example in a newsagents or market; the defendant's antecedents, especially where there has been a previous conviction, or caution, for a similar matter; The degree of participation of the proposed defendant(s). This becomes relevant where the defendant can employ the statutory defence that he had no knowledge of the contents of the material under section 2(5) of the 1959 Act. Where proceedings under section 2 are instituted, the number of articles to be placed before the Court should be manageable. The use of too many articles, or charges, could be counter-productive and have a negative effect upon the jury. The Crown Prosecution normally advises on no more than six articles as being sufficient to highlight the different types of activities portrayed or described, unless there are particular factors in a case, such as multiple defendants, seizure of material from more than one location etc. In cases where a large amount of material suitable for prosecution under section 2 has been seized, the use of specimen charges should be considered.
yes agreed, i think it has to be in combination with the more serious acts (not BDSM related i think unless as you said above unless blood is drawn). But then this is related to UK sites only and ones that are commercially operated.
May main issues with the above are: flagellation Most BDSM films have this torture with instruments Surely this depends on your take on tourture you could argue chastity is tourture (and im sure most of the men would) bondage (especially where gags are used) agree with MV activities involving perversion or degradation (such as drinking urine or smearing excreta on a person's body) although i may not be a fan of this if its the persons choice to drink someone elses waste or be "smeared" in it then i fail to see the issue It just appears to me that it is the easy options for the authorities and yet another case of complete lack of common sense which increasingly seems to be the way the world is going.
Agreed. But i do have a very very quick guideline when assessing sites. Basically next time your in a sex shop go to the DVD section (with BBFC or simular rating) and find the most hardcore video you can find (not an under the counter job). Watch it and the sexual acts within and as a rule of thumb thats what the most extreme content permissable is allowed.
http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/section12/chapter_e.html Pet theres the source link some right old bollox on there.
[quote name='Ms Watchful's pet']My favourite part was this....[/QUOTE] Just goes to prove that the law really is an ARSE!!! :tongue:
MW, you’re a radio 2 listener as well then? The interview didn’t make it clear what exactly could be seen as offensive. Should I be worried about the pic of me on here wearing nipple clamps and a gag!? Hell why don’t they just ban sex and issue sex licenses to people only deemed suitable. I love the way it’s always portrayed as a few people that do ‘these unusual acts’. When everyone knows every chairman and politician up and down the country has kissed some dominatrix’s feet at some point.
Oh yes, I'm always shouting down the radio at Jeremy Vine! Who on earth WAS that bloke?! Clueless doesn't even begin to describe him. But the woman... she rocked! She knew all her stats and everything. I'm not worried about anything because we are non-commercial. It's so unclear though. Murky waters! There's much worse on the internet, I don't think we have anything to worry about.
As a society, we have already been there & done that! In Medeval times, if you wanted a baby you had to get permission from the king. You would be sent this permission & people then hung a sign on the door when they went to bed saying 'Fornication Under Consent of the King' This later became abbreviated to its initials...F.U.C.K!! :anal::sex005:
LIES! I'm sorry. The information age being about information, the least we could do is have information that is correct. The fuck thing is one of my pet peeves. http://www.snopes.com/language/acronyms/fuck.asp Well, you have enough camera's for "anti-social" behaviour on the streets, what's pointing them into your homes gonna cost? Privacy? Pish posh, you don't need that unless you have something to hide. And obviously some of you do! You people in the UK have such a nanny state it's scary.
I love snopes... I use it every time someone sends me a chain-email. I completely disagree. Taking this to the extreme, I wouldn't necessarily want people tracking my everyday life. Especially not my bedroom habits... even at their most vanilla! And I'm an exhibitionist at heart! I'm pretty sure I don't have anything to hide. But... on that note, when hubby was home this past week, I asked him to check out some cracks in the walls, because I was worried about subsidence. This meant he had to go up into my bedroom. At one point I noticed him stand there, staring at my dressing table. I figured he was just in awe at the mess... lol! Then I realised he was probably looking at the umbrella stand full of riding crops and canes. I had one crop when we were together, but not the 7 or 8 I have now. Ah well....
It has nothing to do with having anything to hide, its more to do with what would now be considered illegal. As you are a member of this site Im guessing you already take part in activities that if used in porn under this new law could be deemed illegal. As fair as i can see the main point being made is that it is another case of a government (and lets remember its not just the UK mp's that are guilty of this) implementing laws that do not take into account common sense and deciding that anything that is not seem as the "norm" must therefore be wrong in someway, when in actual fact the majority of these things are more normal and commonly indulged by a large number of people just not in the public eye
There are lot more killings ( including ritualistic) comitted after reading the Bible, Koran and other religious works then those "motivated" by violent porn. Unfortunately it is easier to get "brownie points" for the later then the former. The witch hunt is on and it will take a generation before it stops. What these zealots do not get is the difference between reality and fantasy and the fact that a sexual killer does not need porn to commit the crime he would do it anyway.
And so it goes on.... The UK, to the best of my knowledge, is the only country where you are obliged to buy a license to watch the government television station, AND all the others, none of which are worth diddly-squat.... sorry UK but most countries have much better television!!! Talk about over-control, sure children.. no problem, but consenting adults... PLEASE!!!!! Admittedly I do have "pay" television to allow me to watch some interesting channels, Discovery, History, NatGeo, movies, but even the free to air programming in Australia and the USA is much better. As for porn....... Well...ask 100 people what they think porn is and you'll get 100 different answers. Next, we'll all have brain implants and if we have a "pornographic" thought we'll be imprisoned or terminated. This, of course, is coming from a country run by lords and sirs who all leave the houses of parliament and go to their favourite prostitute/brothel/lover without fear of reprimand or investigation, unless of course the Daily Telegraph gets hold of the story and wants you out of office!!!!! And so it goes on You vote them into office and they screw you to the wall while screwing their mistress and dressed as a woman....go figure!!! Cynical... maybe hypocrite... maybe but hey we all believe everything we read in the papers...right????? Sex in the bedroom/dungeon between consenting adults is just that .... sex It's only porn when it comes into the public uninvited view or is non-consensual. Unless, of course, it crosses the accepted moral boundaries of non consent or age. cheers all michelleCD Please don't take offence at my comments, they are just MY opinions.