And, let me repeat, a DVD, photo, magazine or clip off the net never killed anyone.
Ahem. Yes, I’ve been here. I’ve done this. I made the fuckin’ t-shirt.
But, highlights for rebuttals sake…
UK. Porn Bill. Extreme Content: Pornographic material which depicts necrophilia, bestiality or violence that is life threatening or likely to result in serious injury to the anus, breasts or genitals/ "an act which threatens or appears to threaten a person's life"…
So, I repeat: “I’m with you on the necrophilia (provided it’s a real corpse) and bestiality…because hey, dead people and animals cannot consent. But after that, you lose me. Violence? Very subjective, and sounds like a war on BDSM/rough sex to me. Life threatening? So, does that include…say, sex at all? Sex without condoms? Sex itself is life threatening. Serious injury to the breasts, anus or genitals? What, like it leaves ugly bruises? Makes someone gape? How about piercing? Fisting? Insertion of large objects? Cock & ball torture? Suturing? Trampling? I mean…all that is also pretty subjective. (Ah yes, the NSFW section) To some folk, oh, having this stuck in their ass during sex might look like it would cause serious injury, and it probably would to some people. To other folks, hey, another day in their sex life and a good time. To some folk, this might look like it would cause serious harm to the breasts…other people love it. Genitals? I’m sure to some; these devices look torturous and would cause serious injury…other people? Nope. So yeah, who gets to decide that? Who gets to make the rules and have the say for every soul in the UK?”
And gee, no, I’m not a man!
But now I do want a shirt that would say “I’d get banned in the UK!”
(because, what, with my like of rough, violent sex, with the choking and multiple penetration and stuff…in or out of porn…it’s probably true…)
And I have to ask…who gets to decide what kind of sex, on or off camera, other people can have again? Nah…see, I don’t think y’all are anti-sex…you’re just anti people having any kind of sex you don’t agree with…and putting it out there for other people to see, for free or for pay.
And yes, I know, when the revolution comes, I will be up against the wall. Thanks for the liberation and rights, sisters!
Edit- An interesting piece from BBCNewsbeat. H/T to SnowdropExplodes
Thursday, May 08, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I left a comment there, but I don't know if it'll get out of moderation:
I would say the government is actually, for once, attempting to take seriously the death of a woman at the hands of a man, and the concerns of her grieving mother, and to do something to prevent similar deaths.
The police have already indicated that this is unlikely; instead, they’re talking about Operation Spanner again, and sending off every signal that they’re going to go after gay men rather than take away porn from heterosexuals.
It received Royal Assent today, and is officially a law of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern ireland (but not, absurdly enough, a law of Scotland).
There's more from the BBC here (including an unsubstantiated claim that the law will come into force in January):
BBc- Newsbeat
Just in the past few days, it looks as if the media are starting to wake up, and more people in and out of the BDSM community here are waking up to what a horrendous law this is going to be.
Thanks again for the publicity, Ren!
You know what's really terrific?
"This piece of media represents barbaric sadism! Sexualized punishment and power and captivity are not things a civilized society should ever support! So...off to jail with ye!"
and yes, of fucking course they're gonna go after the queer folks first, they always do. Thanks, nice married lady, for your -radical- work against the Patriarchy! -salutes-
Left on their blog, reposted here so someone might actually read it:
I have very little hope that this comment will make it through moderation-- being that you and your readers are so judgmental and holier-than-thou as to think your sense of propriety should hold sway over the lives of others.
You have very little understanding of sex and the sex-positive subculture. It's not surprising-- if you were to mingle among such people your look of shock and disgust, your obvious contempt for your fellow humans would humiliate them vastly more than any 'kinky' acts they might engage in. The intolerance and hatred shown here really astounds me, the sheer vitriol, it's physically disturbing. Sex-positive people are fundamentally in support of informed consent, regardless of your uninformed prejudice. Who are you to say who is and isn't a feminist? To judge a woman for her sexuality, to rob her of her right to consent by reducing her to a porn-influenced automaton incapable of making a decision for herself, this is somehow the act of someone who seeks equality for women?
People are not the simple monkeys you make them out to be-- they have free will, and they have consciences. What's more, they hold a huge range of sexual preferences and desires, so widespread and diverse as to make any one personal or cultural view of proper sexual function inadequate to fully express the reality of human experience. Acting out roles that you would personally not choose for yourself or your partners does not make someone mentally ill, and neither does it remove one's ability to distinguish between appropriate consensual activity and inappropriate non-consensual activity.
Newsflash: human beings sometimes kill other human beings. Men kill other men, men kill women, women kill women, women kill men. People commit murder. Oftentimes they do it with the consent of their nation's government and they're given awards and are called heroes. Violence happens. People have violent thoughts, both towards themselves and others. Oppressing those with violent urges does nothing to reduce either those urges or the actual violence that occasionally develops from them. The BDSM scene is a perfectly healthy and consensual outlet for those urges, as is its pornography. The actual evidence supports this view. Your faith, your opinion, your simplistic naivety is all that supports your view that pornography spawns violence towards women, or that by oppressing those who view sex differently than you do you can somehow change human nature.
Not to say extreme porn as outlined in this law is necessarily okay-- in the area of actual non-consensual acts such as necrophilia and bestiality it is quite clearly not. But jail time for possession serves only those who profit by the incremental growth of the police state. And those fuckers are a hell of a lot more dangerous than a bunch of perverts, and they are far more misogynistic than the BDSM crowd-- something you would know if you actually bothered to try to understand the people you vilify.
Left on her blog, reposted here so someone might actually read it:
I have very little hope that this comment will make it through moderation-- being that you and your readers are so judgmental and holier-than-thou as to think your sense of propriety should hold sway over the lives of others.
You have very little understanding of sex and the sex-positive subculture. It's not surprising-- if you were to mingle among such people your look of shock and disgust, your obvious contempt for your fellow humans would humiliate them vastly more than any 'kinky' acts they might engage in. The intolerance and hatred shown here really astounds me, the sheer vitriol, it's physically disturbing. Sex-positive people are fundamentally in support of informed consent, regardless of your uninformed prejudice. Who are you to say who is and isn't a feminist? To judge a woman for her sexuality, to rob her of her right to consent by reducing her to a porn-influenced automaton incapable of making a decision for herself, this is somehow the act of someone who seeks equality for women?
People are not the simple monkeys you make them out to be-- they have free will, and they have consciences. What's more, they hold a huge range of sexual preferences and desires, so widespread and diverse as to make any one personal or cultural view of proper sexual function inadequate to fully express the reality of human experience. Acting out roles that you would personally not choose for yourself or your partners does not make someone mentally ill, and neither does it remove one's ability to distinguish between appropriate consensual activity and inappropriate non-consensual activity.
Newsflash: human beings sometimes kill other human beings. Men kill other men, men kill women, women kill women, women kill men. People commit murder. Oftentimes they do it with the consent of their nation's government and they're given awards and are called heroes. Violence happens. People have violent thoughts, both towards themselves and others. Oppressing those with violent urges does nothing to reduce either those urges or the actual violence that occasionally develops from them. The BDSM scene is a perfectly healthy and consensual outlet for those urges, as is its pornography. The actual evidence supports this view. Your faith, your opinion, your simplistic naivety is all that supports your view that pornography spawns violence towards women, or that by oppressing those who view sex differently than you do you can somehow change human nature.
Not to say extreme porn as outlined in this law is necessarily okay-- in the area of actual non-consensual acts such as necrophilia and bestiality it is quite clearly not. But jail time for possession serves only those who profit by the incremental growth of the police state. And those fuckers are a hell of a lot more dangerous than a bunch of perverts, and they are far more misogynistic than the BDSM crowd-- something you would know if you actually bothered to try to understand the people you vilify.
Post a Comment