View Full Version : Extreme Pornography
Got permission to post this here. Today they come for our brand of pornography, tomorrow it could be yours. Posted from a BDSM forum.
"Hi,
I hope people on this group won’t mind my posting this – but I think it is a pretty important topic, and one that could affect some, maybe all of us, in the next few years.
A month or so back there was a lot of publicity about how the government was going to clamp down on ‘extreme pornographic images’ on the internet. What that actually meant was that they were asking for input and opinion from the public around a consultation paper that they had written.
It’s a bit much to go into detail now. However, what they seem to be saying is that there are some images on the internet that they can’t police (because they are outside their boundaries). They would not be publishable in this country, because they would be considered obscene (under the Obscene Publications Act). And they are so ‘abhorrent’ that all right-thinking people would like them banned.
So the government reckons it has to do something – and what it plans to do is to make it a criminal offence to POSSESS such images in future. From the net, certainly – but also in book or other form. If you possess any of the images that the government doesn’t like, you could end up in prison for three years and/or on the Sex Offenders’ Register.
Now I know that it is very tempting to say ‘jolly good’ – because I am sure that every one of us can think of images that they would find horrid to view and that maybe we would rather did not exist. But there are a number of problems with this proposal.
First, the government admits there is no evidence of harm at all from people watching these images – if anything, the evidence is the other way, with Japanese studies suggesting that people who look at a lot of porn often use it as a means to reduce their desires to DO things.
Second, it is about sex: the government is not proposing to ban ALL nasty images or nasty news images or whatever. Only images ‘in a sexual context’. Which is pretty dumb: because if they REALLY thought that these images led people to commit crimes, they would want them ALL banned anyway.
But they are saying there will be exemptions for images taken from films already passed by the censor and for artistic works – and that it won’t be a crime if you download stuff ‘accidentally’.
Which really sounds like spin and lies. Because once this proposal is law, I can’t see the police being impressed by someone saying: this image of a rape taken from a 18 film was only for personal interest or was downloaded accidentally or just didn’t turn me on.
Once this law is law, they are going to go after any images that anyone possesses that the local police chief doesn’t like – and if you remember James Anderton, the ultra-Christian police chief, what chiefs don’t like can be pretty innocuous indeed.
Anyway, all this worries me. There is a group set up to fight the proposal – details are at
www.backlash-uk.org.uk
You can also find links to the government consultation paper there. And if these proposals worry you, too, then please, please write in to the consultation. You don’t have to be wity, academic or anything. You don’t even have to answer THEIR rather biased questions. Just write in and make your point.
And you have until 2 December to do it!!!!
All the best, "
mOBSCENE
11-07-05, 01:26 PM
Thanks for reminding us of this, Rosie. It should concern us all. I have been working on my research and have loads of evidential articles and stuff to cite - just need to put it all together now, I think and get it sent in by the deadline.
What scares me is even stuff such as bondage and spanking will be banned. Anything that is even mildly "Kinky" will put you in prison for as long as owning kiddie porn.
mOBSCENE
11-07-05, 02:50 PM
Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights:
"1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. this right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.
2.The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or the rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary."
By the Consultation's own admission:
"As to evidence of harm, conducting research in this area is complex. We do not
yet have sufficient evidence from which to draw any definite conclusions as to the
likely long term impact of this kind of material on individuals generally, or on
those who may already be predisposed to violent or aberrant sexual behaviour."
(Indeed their problem is that there is much evidence to support the contrary view that adult material in general actually reduces the number of sex crimes, and that violent material has little effect on those genetically or societally predisposed to violent sex crimes)
Therefore they cannot prove that passing this ban will be "in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or the rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary."
I believe they will therefore find that they are in breach of Article 10...
Alf Garnet
11-07-05, 02:57 PM
What scares me is even stuff such as bondage and spanking will be banned. Anything that is even mildly "Kinky" will put you in prison for as long as owning kiddie porn.
Thats fucking stupid. Although Im sure everyone will agree with you Rosie unfortunatly no one will do anything about it. We dont seem to care about our rights in this country. As we can see from what our political leaders have done over the last 20 years.
Thats fucking stupid. Although Im sure everyone will agree with you Rosie unfortunatly no one will do anything about it. We dont seem to care about our rights in this country. As we can see from what our political leaders have done over the last 20 years.
You maybe right there Alf, although Backlash is being pretty vocal in it's condemnation of the thought police. Oh yeah, and they're banning owning fisting pics as well, and watersports.
I believe they will therefore find that they are in breach of Article 10...
Backlash are having a QC check this one out - although the government is currently considering giving itself the ability to opt out of the charter of human rights when it conflicts with it's own policies.
mOBSCENE
11-07-05, 05:36 PM
Where does watersports and fisting and spanking all fit into the "serious physical assault" the paper mentions? Can you be prosecuted for actual bodily harm for spanking someone with their consent? In this country, probably!
Where does watersports and fisting and spanking all fit into the "serious physical assault" the paper mentions? Can you be prosecuted for actual bodily harm for spanking someone with their consent? In this country, probably!
Watersports and fisting might actually arouse someone. And they're considered dirty by the powers that be.
Can you be prosecuted for ABH, yup you sure can. Check out the Spanner men case on google.
xcite-tv
11-07-05, 05:39 PM
OK firstly my opinion on this is wierd..but
I think we should all be allowed to view and do pretty much anyting we want as long as...
Everybody involved has given consent and are happy to be involved.
However those viewing such images of "extreme pornography" as you put it. may not know the limits and boundarys that you have filmed and the reasons for all to be there
he/she may then go out and practice what they see with competly different boundarys
and with disasterous results..
Your first problem are the words you use, "extreme pornography" the word pornography started as a legal term for something obscene and wrong. So to put the word extreme before it is asking for trouble from anyone trying to protect minors and others who find "obscene" material offensive.
Personally and please remember this is just my own view so no offence is meant.. I think and have said here before, that society all too often uses the words, Sex and Violence in the same sentence.
To me sex and extreme BDSM have nothing in common and the sooner the two are seperated the sooner we and the whole BDSM scene can get on with our seperate lives.. but i fear the two are forever inexorably linked...
one further point.. its amazing what some people find "Obscene"
Put two people together in the dock for "obscenities" Me, who prodces sexual images of two consenting people having fun. and someone say who works for say, BAE systems and a fine upstanding member of his/her community, but who works for a company that produces technology to make weapons that actually will kill someone..
Its me thats guilty every time
However those viewing such images of "extreme pornography" as you put it. may not know the limits and boundarys that you have filmed and the reasons for all to be there
Your point is well taken there, but we can't legislate for the lowest common denominator in society. Just because a few people maybe stupid, shouldn't mean that educated and intelligents adults can't watch consentual play between adults. Maybe I should put a "Don't try this at home kids" warning like they put in Braniac Science Abuse :lmao2:
Your first problem are the words you use, "extreme pornography" the word pornography started as a legal term for something obscene and wrong. So to put the word extreme before it is asking for trouble from anyone trying to protect minors and others who find "obscene" material offensive.
These are the words of the Home Office and not me. In fact if you read their consultation document the whole thing is worded with an enormous bias to imply that if you don't agree with them you're a pedophile and probably a terrorist too.
To me sex and extreme BDSM have nothing in common and the sooner the two are seperated the sooner we and the whole BDSM scene can get on with our seperate lives.. but i fear the two are forever inexorably linked....
Whilst I do agree that the word "violence" shouldn't ideally be linked with sexuality (and for that reason neither do we use the word torture on our BDSM site), you should undertand that for me (and many others) extreme BDSM is very much about sex. My husband and I play in what would be considered a very extreme manner and then have marvellous sex.
For me obscene is anything where someone gets hurt without their informed consent.
xcite-tv
11-07-05, 06:08 PM
Your point is well taken there, but we can't legislate for the lowest common denominator in society. Just because a few people maybe stupid, shouldn't mean that educated and intelligents adults can't watch consentual play between adults. Maybe I should put a "Don't try this at home kids" warning like they put in Braniac Science Abuse :lmao2:
You only have to look at the effect television has had on the western world to know thats wrong. Unfortunatly the world is not full of "educated and intelligent adults"
These are the words of the Home Office and not me. In fact if you read their consultation document the whole thing is worded with an enormous bias to imply that if you don't agree with them you're a pedophile and probably a terrorist too.
well I for one am glad the Home Office make the laws of this country and not you...no offence meant.. and i am sure you are right about the bias
Whilst I do agree that the word "violence" shouldn't ideally be linked with sexuality (and for that reason neither do we use the word torture on our BDSM site), you should undertand that for me (and many others) extreme BDSM is very much about sex. My husband and I play in what would be considered a very extreme manner and then have marvellous sex.
For me obscene is anything where someone gets hurt without their informed consent.....
But whats good for you and hubby is complety at odds with what is portayed on these sites. does your watcher want to know that the subservient one is willing or even enjoying what is happening to him/her.
how many BDSM sites show a nice cosy relationship between a consenting man and wife
I would always try and go further thanjust "consent" and before we film anything we actually find out what models enjoy and love doing..
dont get me wrong there is a place for everything but respectfull limits should be observed.. for example the girl in your nose hook pics did she really want that done to her...........i doubt it
mOBSCENE
11-07-05, 06:12 PM
I think the whole thing wrong with this proposal is that they are considering prosecuting consenting adults for watching other consenting adults in role play.
I'm sure if the proposal was targeted at people constantly downloading/searching for REAL rape and REAL torture, none of us would have a problem with that. Most rape sites will have a message on somewhere like "We do not condone non-Consensual sex.
This site is about ROLE PLAYING FANTASY only and performed by professional actors and models." I think the reason they are targeting fake stuff as well is that it would be too time consuming to prove whether the actors consented or not...
On the other hand, if you want to go on P2P and download videos of people being run over, shot, stabbed, beheaded, electrocuted, they don't have a problem with that because it it's primary purpose isn't sexual arousal.
Rosie, I can see how watersports and fisting might be considered dirty, but urolagnia is not in itself illegal, and they seem to be at pains to suggest that only depictions of things that would be considered crimes in themselves will be targeted. I don't think fisting is illegal in itself either - but I know your point is that they are being vague about what is covered - and it's pretty stupid that anyone can be prosecuted for doing something to someone with their consent.
Perhaps Amazon will join the fight if they ban fisting references - was astonished to find this title on Amazon.co.uk recently!
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/1890159026/qid=1131386752/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl/202-5918823-1783809
First yes our site very much trades on the fact that the girls are enjoying it, usually do it in their private lives and that are not in any way being forced. If a girl doesn't get across just how much she enjoys it then she's really not all that popular with our members. Any Dominant will tell you that seeing a submissive enjoying BDSM is the absolute overriding reason for their kink.
The girl in the picture is Koko Li, and the nose hook photo set was her idea. If you want to PM me I shall send you her e-mail address and you can mail her to ask if that's the case.
Perhaps Amazon will join the fight if they ban fisting references - was astonished to find this title on Amazon.co.uk recently!
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/1890159026/qid=1131386752/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl/202-5918823-1783809
That's a naff book, I've got it LOL
mOBSCENE
11-07-05, 06:17 PM
....
dont get me wrong there is a place for everything but respectfull limits should be observed.. for example the girl in your nose hook pics did she really want that done to her...........i doubt it
That's a bit of a slippery slope. Did that model really want to do dp, did she really want a facial cumshot - did she even want to do a porn scene in the first place or was it to get through Uni?! Besides as Rosie will tell you there are plenty of girls who enjoy the nose hooks and the ballgags and all the rest of it. It's a weird world. Consider dacryphilia - arousal by tears - there are some people who love to be made to cry - probably looks bad to the observer, but it's their thing...
It's a weird world. Consider dacryphilia - arousal by tears - there are some people who love to be made to cry - probably looks bad to the observer, but it's their thing...
This is probably more than anyone wants to know, but make me cry or bleed and I'm a happy bunny. Tickle me and I'll smash your face in :angel:
That's a bit of a slippery slope. Did that model really want to do dp, did she really want a facial cumshot - did she even want to do a porn scene in the first place or was it to get through Uni?!
Thats how I feel. If its between two consenting adults, then we dont need the government sticking there nose in. Where will it stop?
Thats how I feel. If its between two consenting adults, then we dont need the government sticking there nose in. Where will it stop? It'll stop with Mr Blair sitting on your headboard at night telling you what position you can shag your wife in.
It'll stop with Mr Blair sitting on your headboard at night telling you what position you can shag your wife in.
Yes thats a turn on for sure, but what about the down sides?
Yes thats a turn on for sure, but what about the down sides?
And they call ME a pervert.....
:lmao2: :lmao2: :lmao2:
mOBSCENE
11-07-05, 06:36 PM
Yes thats a turn on for sure, but what about the down sides?
No downside - get the pics of him perving and we can get him out of office!
:lmao2:
xcite-tv
11-07-05, 07:08 PM
That's a bit of a slippery slope. Did that model really want to do dp, did she really want a facial cumshot - did she even want to do a porn scene in the first place or was it to get through Uni?! Besides as Rosie will tell you there are plenty of girls who enjoy the nose hooks and the ballgags and all the rest of it. It's a weird world. Consider dacryphilia - arousal by tears - there are some people who love to be made to cry - probably looks bad to the observer, but it's their thing...
What is the world coming to.....
if the girl didn't want DP, a facial cumshot, or even a porn shoot
WE SHOULDN'T BE DOING IT.
If its somebodys thing to watch films where guys make girls cry during sex how do they carry that out to real life....just imagine thats your daughter
I am sure there are girls who want nosehooks, ballgags etc..
It takes a brave decision to do anything you dont want to for cash but thats then thats the decision made and they then consent..
as i say we prefer our models to enjoy and want to do what we film...
mOBSCENE
11-07-05, 07:51 PM
What is the world coming to.....
if the girl didn't want DP, a facial cumshot, or even a porn shoot
WE SHOULDN'T BE DOING IT.
If its somebodys thing to watch films where guys make girls cry during sex how do they carry that out to real life....just imagine thats your daughter
I am sure there are girls who want nosehooks, ballgags etc..
It takes a brave decision to do anything you dont want to for cash but thats then thats the decision made and they then consent..
as i say we prefer our models to enjoy and want to do what we film...
All I'm saying is - you can't imagine how a girl (or a guy) would love nosehooks; some people can't imagine how any girl would enjoy doing hardcore or even art nude... The classic criticism of porn in general is that all the models are coerced (one way or another), and we know that's not true. You find nosehooks offensive, some people find nudity itself offensive... They will say that the girl must have been forced to do the dp or the facial or whatever because it doesn't gel with their own moral universe. Of course you are right if the model doesn't want to do it, it shouldn't be done - and I would affirm she has the right to change her mind at any point in the scene, even if she's agreed beforehand.
I'm sure there are lots of people out there who will find what you do offensive, no matter how consensual, enjoyable or mainstream it is. "All porn degrades women" they will say.
We might disagree on the appeal of some forms of porn, and that's fine - but once anyone starts agreeing the government has a point in proposing to jail people for merely looking at pictures of consenting girls with nosehooks (or whatever), I think we're back to the slippery slope...
The dacryphilia thing was an extreme example - the number of people who do however enjoy bondage or rough sex or fetish x or fetish y to one degree or another is huge - it doesn't make the dom a bad person, and it doesn't make the sub a victim, and it doesn't make anyone watching their games a criminal either (imho)
Shandy McAndy
11-07-05, 10:53 PM
if the girl didn't want DP, a facial cumshot, or even a porn shoot
WE SHOULDN'T BE DOING IT.
but some do and some dont, some girls like to be spanked, some dont, some like to be hit with canes and belts, some dont, some like to be tied up, some dont, some men like to have women stamp on their bollocks, some dont, some men like women to use their mouths as ashtrays, some dont.
Who the fuck are the government to tell two consenting adults what they are alowed to enjoy?
Lets hope that what the government thinks isnt exceptable tommorow isnt what you are shooting today
First is was Extreme. Then it borderline kinky and then it was anything Vanilla.
Seems to be the current doward trend on pollies going down this route. In their eyes porn in porn is porn is porn.
-N
vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.