Britain bans sale/production of BDSM porn

[adannyboy]

"Pornography produced in the UK was effectively censored on Tuesday after an amendment was made to the 2003 Communications Act. It banned a list of sex acts by demanding paid-for video-on-demand (VoD) online porn is regulated by the same guidelines set out by the British Board of Film Censors (BBFC) that DVD pornography (R18 films) must adhere to.

 

Three banned acts were deemed life threatening: strangulation, facesitting and fisting.

 

Other acts banned included spanking beyond a gentle level, full bondage and restraint (in conjunction with a gag and all four limbs restrained) and - bizarrely - female ejaculation.

 

Abusive language during sex is now also banned, alongside depictions of non-consensual sex."

 

 

Read full story:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/uk-porn-legislation-what-is-now-banned-under-new-government-laws-9898541.html

[+ quoththeraven]

This is so stupid. I'm not sure how BDSM porn would fare in the US under the Miller test for obscenity, but at least we have the 1st amendment and the Equal Protection clause, which might prevent something like this happening here. People think the US is more backwards than other developed countries when it comes to the depiction of sex, but it isn't always the case.

[Guest ChrisW]

Who doesn't like a little bit of abusive language during sex? I call shenanigans!

 

[+ honcho]

In 1987, the British police raided a consentual SM play party in Manchester , and convicted the participants who faced actual jail time.

 

The case was appealed to the EU court in the Hague, but the British Government prevailed.

 

There's a wikipedia entry about it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Spanner

 

A rights organisation was set up. Its web page is http://www.spannertrust.org/documents/spannerhistory.asp

 

Given this legal/cultural context, it is unsurprising that Britain would issue such a ban.

[adannyboy]

^^ ouch. that sucks.

[+ deej]

Given this legal/cultural context, it is unsurprising that Britain would issue such a ban.

 

If you were a politician hoping to get reelected would you have voted against it? The oppo ads almost write themselves: "He voted for perverts!".

 

Sad, but true.

 

Have you seen the video of (the late, great) Molly Ivins describing the legislative debate in the Texas dildo wars? "Nobody'd vote against it cause people would think they's perverts."

 

Oh, here you go:

 

[video=youtube_share;GaUl6x1YXpg]

[+ quoththeraven]

In 1987, the British police raided a consentual SM play party in Manchester , and convicted the participants who faced actual jail time.

 

The case was appealed to the EU court in the Hague, but the British Government prevailed.

 

There's a wikipedia entry about it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Spanner

 

A rights organisation was set up. Its web page is http://www.spannertrust.org/documents/spannerhistory.asp

 

Given this legal/cultural context, it is unsurprising that Britain would issue such a ban.

 

That's true anyplace with a legal system inherited from the British, though, including here in the US. (It may be true more generally as well.) Consent is a defense to tort liability in civil court, where the defendant is asked to pay money to compensate for injuries or refrain from injurious actions, but it's not a defense to a criminal charge. For whatever reason, arrests and prosecutions for consensual BDSM activity are rare to non-existent in the US. Maybe it's because the police here are far busier dealing with gun violence (heck, violence in general) than they are in Britain.

[justaguy]

deej hit the bullseye