Extreme pornography law: they tried to sound sane but the law is mad

[ciphergoth]

emarkienna has published an analysis of the new extreme pornography law. They tried to sound sane and reasonable during the consultation process, but the law they've come up with is censorious madness. You can explicitly get three years inside for copying a segment from a legally-bought Hollywood movie into your porn folder.

Backlash are campaigning against the new law.

Aaaarghg.

Comments

Re: Because of the Internet

[lovelybug.livejournal.com]

Of course, everyone should get a voice in the debate.

My feeling is that if there is a problem with *non-consensual* videos being made and distributed (again, I'd like to read more about the evidence of that, where it's coming from, why it's not being stopped in the country of origin), the countries in which they're being made should address that, and the UK government should be pushing those countries to do so. The answer is not criminalising anyone who has pictures of themselves engaged in consensual SM.

I don't trust that the law will be applied sensibly, so that is a problem we're not going to agree with one another on. You may say we wouldn't be prosecuted. Maybe not. But be unable to send our laptops away to be fixed? Yes. Be questioned by the police when they've impounded the lap top while they investigate? Yes. Be exposed to public shame and ridicule and questions about whether we should be allowed to have children etc? You bet.

But I think your real issue here is that you believe watching this stuff is anti-woman. You don't answer my question about the evidence for the link between watching staged and consensual violence and actually committing the same. It might be distasteful to you that some people enjoy watching fantasy depictions of rape and torture of women, but governments just cannot legislate on taste, and I firmly believe that's what's going on here.

Anyway, that'll be my last comment on the subject for now, but feel free to give me your come back, and links to any evidence.

Re: Because of the Internet

[surliminal.livejournal.com]

Ok this is my last comment too as I have to work.

Supose people get off on real videos of real women being raped. is that just about "taste" too? If not why not? Why don't we leave that issue, of regulating the rape of women , to the place where it happens and happily watch it?

Also to expect the country of server to regulate is disingenuous. Countries like Moldova and the FSU have more to worry about than cracking down on unfindable servers and lucrative porn traders who pay the right bribes.

Why is it me who has to give evidence that torture porn might be harmful? Why not you? We live in a world steeped, drenched in violence against and hatred of women. Shouldn't we start from a presumption that having less images out there of women being humiliated killed and raped for fun might be a good start?

In summary: Some values are actually more important than some percentage of the population getting its maximum rocks off, hard as it is to come across that sentiment on LJ.