denny | Violent Pornography - poll

Current Mood: curious

Violent Pornography - poll

Okay, I've set this so anybody can vote, but nobody can see who voted for what. Feel free to link both this post and the one before it which explains the options.

TO CLARIFY: do not tick your personal likes/dislikes here - tick the things you think should be banned from being shown/described in any kind of pornography.

Another clarification: assume consent of all performers. I think it's safe to assume that everyone likely to be reading this agrees on the issue of consensuality (if you don't, feel free to explain why in a comment - anon if you prefer). This would include a pre-death release form signed by the corpse, in the case of necrophilia. You can decide your own definition of 'consenting' for an animal for purposes of voting on bestiality (please see my reply to

libellum below).

[Poll #604149]

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I ticked the simulated violence should be banned but only in the case where its not clear it is not consensual.

Its not that I disagree with it, but I can see a valid case for the protection of victims that video footage should clearly show the consensual nature of the act (under existing law this makes the difference between X rated and 18 rated BDSM films)

In which case how do you differentiate between a porn film which simulates non-consensual sexual violence and a film like 'once were warriors' or 'leaving las vegas'? by your current definition they should both be banned.

the only way round it is to come up with some meaningless and arbitrary definition of what constitutes pornography and history has shown time and time again that you cannot apply rigid definitions to art.

Did you like the phrase "This excludes scenes contained in serious dramatic films"? Made me giggle.

never seen either of those films so I cant really say.

But if a case is borderline sufficient camera footage form inbetween takes archived should be enough to strighten the situation up - with the responsibility of the film producer to keep that/submit it along with rating certificate submission. Basically a cover your own ass manouver really.

I'm not a fan of over regulation (or any regulation really) but take a violent rape film for example... how do you protect the "victim" from being a real victim and the producers just claiming it was all staged and here is a signature or vice verser how do you protect the producers in the case it was all staged if the model decides otherwise

You regulate the way in which films are produced, again applying existing laws about working coditions and the rights of workers. If someone got raped on the set of a film getting a cinema release is no difference between that and getting raped on the set of a porn movie.

as an example, 'apocalypse now' was investigated over allegations of cruelty to animals and films involving animals have to satisfy the powers that be that they did not treat the animals badly.

seems about right to me.

either way the new regulations are vastly OTT

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only