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]

Threaded | Flat

Tere is no option for 'I wouldn't consider doing some of the things that I didn't tick, but they don't hurt anyone non-consentually so I don't think they should be banned'.

As well as not doing some of those things I wouldn't watch them either but see no reason for them to be banned if other people want to watch/do them.

Denny, are you willing to share your own personal answers?

I don't think that pornography should be banned, but I do dislike most of it quite intensely. Obviously anything that depicts anything non-consensual (which I believe includes necrophilia & bestiality) should be simulated, but otherwise it would be illegal under other legislation.

It's interesting that 2 of the things in the first section cannot possibly involve consent. These are also the two that come out with long bars for people ticking them.

How would you go about obtaining the consent of an animal?

I'm thinking "Violence - non-simulated." is a difficult one - if it's consentual, is it still appropriate to call it violence?

n 1: an act of aggression (as one against a person who resists);

and

Physical force exerted for the purpose of violating, damaging, or abusing: crimes of violence.
The act or an instance of violent action or behavior.
Intensity or severity, as in natural phenomena; untamed force: the violence of a tornado.
Abusive or unjust exercise of power.
Abuse or injury to meaning, content, or intent: do violence to a text.
Vehemence of feeling or expression; fervor.

I'm guessing so - it's a violent act even if it's received with consent. I'm guessing this is where BDSM gets thorny, yes?

The thing is, you see, that I am completely anti censorship and dont think any of it "should be banned" - I dont want bestiality porn to be produced but there are existing laws that can deal with that.

There are issues about duress/coercion of sex industry workers of course.

This would include a pre-death release form signed by the corpse, in the case of necrophilia.

Eh? I think the whole issue of who owns my flesh after it's dead is an odd one - but I reckon it's certainly not me.

http://society.guardian.co.uk/alderhey/comment/0,8006,431006,00.html for an article "Who really owns our bodies? " - Jane Wildgoose (Tuesday January 30, 2001) after the Alder Hey orcan scandal.

"We accept that however questionable the historical origins of the principle, it has now been common law for 150 years at least that neither a corpse nor parts of corpse are in themselves and without more capable of being property protected by rights." However parts of a corpse are capable of being property...if they have acquired different attributes by virtue of the application of skill, such as dissection or preservation techniques for exhibition or teaching purposes..." Regina v Kelly, aparrently - 01 January 1999

- http://www.swarb.co.uk/lisc/Wills_and_Probate.shtml

Which raises some interesting ideas...

Surely this legislation is about what is portrayed, not how it was produced? So they don't care whether it's real bestiality, or fantastically realistic CGI. I'm curious to know what representations people think should be inherently illegal, not what real performances should not be allowed.

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)

This is such a tricky issue. I did not in the end tick the box saying that non-simulated violence should be banned but this is because once you get to the very extreme ends of human sexuality then the water gets very muddy indeed. I'd prefer to leave violent pornography under the various laws which already exist, those which make it illegal to commit assault, sexual assualt and rape as well as those which make it illegal to profit from crime. Its a mistake to try and legistlate against art in any form, you can only legistlate against what people do to each other (and animals).

As for necrophilia, I see no difference between shagging a corpse and using a large carrot as a dildo.

I said no to bestiality and necrophilia. Even though a corpse can't tell you're having sex with it and therefore won't mind, chances are that corpse has people who loved the person who used to inhabit it, and who would be emotionally scarred if they knew you were having sex with it. I would go ballistic if someone had had sex with my mother's corpse, or with my brother's.

Cruelty to animals, again, I don't believe animals can consent. But more than that, I don't think animals (lacking in the psychological dichotomies we humans are prone to) enjoy cruelty in any form. They lack the understanding and the pleasure-pain threshold we have - at least as far as we know. Doing it anyway because it could be ok is not on as far as I'm concerned.

I'm not into nearly all of the other ones, but that doesn't mean I think they should be banned. Consenting people of an appropriate age, the end.

Clarification notes for my vote:

If an act is non-consensual, it is not porn but is instead evidence of one or more crimes (assault, rape, &c); as such, to preserve the privacy of the victim, it should only be distributed to people who need to see it order to bring the perpetrator(s) of the crime(s) to justice.
I think that necrophilia should be lawful provided that the deceased consented, in sound mind and in writing, prior to death.
Bestiality, with the possible exception of sex with dolphins, is by definition non-consensual and so should be banned.

I *completely* shagged up my answers and realised I didn't tick "bestiality" and "necrophilia"... >_<

So, yeah, uh... just pretend I *did* tick them! :-/

why do people always want to ban things or forbid things?

I mean every ban on something costs money. Writing a law costs money, thinking about it costs money, prosecuting costs money.

If nobody's rights are violated: why ban it?

Save money be liberal.

Threaded | Flat