Tuesday, May 24, 2005

Ban This Filth

Originally posted by The Realist

A mixed day of liberal news yesterday, but the main story which caught my eye was the ‘banning of porn by post

I am horrified that anyone would even dare to try to stop what I, an adult, am able to watch and how I am able to watch it. If I want to watch Schindler’s Fist or Shaving Ryan’s Privates, I should be able to do so. This is a hideous throwback to the ‘would you want your wife and servant to see this?!?’ days of judges knowing best. The BBFC has finally allowed hardcore to be sold legally, albeit only through the seedy network of sex shops, but porn should be available to adults everywhere. And yes, even on tv. Well, on mine anyway.

This ban is academic on a number of levels. Firstly, as was pointed out in court, people will simply order, legally, from abroad, where there are fewer restrictions (you don’t have to be a connoisseur to know about the stuff that comes out of Germany…) Millions in lost taxes! In addition, the convergence of net (where there is no ‘abroad’!) and tv means that in two years from now, muck will be available 24/7 in people’s homes.

Well, in mine anyway.

13 comments:

ph said...

It is not a ban, they are just applying the existing law.
Anyway I doubt you are 'horrified', I am sure that you reserve that emotion for more important causes. I think using pornography to raise the flag of Liberalism is probably fraught with contradiction.

The Realist said...

Dear god ph - who are you? I do enjoy your input and you are always almost right. Almost right. Firstly, good point, however landmark rulings like this help define law by challenging current practices and *are* able to set legal precedents (think Roe vs. Wade).

'Horrified - To cause unpleasant surprise to; shock.'- The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language.

ph said...

I don't leave comments to be right, that is dull.
Yes rulings on the interpretion of law in British courts do set precedents, but wasn't the Roe v Wade case American. Not sure that the definition of horrified that you cite really catches the essence of the emotion.

The Realist said...

Roe vs Wade was, indeed, American. Same system applies here however.

I have no idea why I'm trying to tone down the definition - to be honest, ph, I *am* horrified about this. If this were France, there would be riots in the streets, like there were over Baise-Moi in 2002.

For the record, that film is crap - it should have been banned based on the acting alone!

Anonymous said...

PH, I think you're getting a little too hung up on the word 'horrified' (rather disingenuously I'd say). Perhaps you'd actually like to give your own *opinion* on the case in point?

For my part, on the one hand, it does mean that adults will no longer be allowed to buy their usual hardcore pornography from the comfort of their own home (delivered in plain brown packaging), and instead be forced to make a judgement as to whether 'anel und spunken' is going to give them actually what they are looking for.

Or, go to the 'Original bookstore' (yes, that one)and be forced to interact with a guy with three earrings and a sweaty hand.

Anonymous said...

On the other, it is probably important to prevent Johhny and his friends from viewing something that could put years on their "innocence".

ph said...

Anonymous - The pornography business 'in my opinion' is very exploitative and because of this a very poor candidate for the liberal cause.

sparx said...

Kids could probably do with some exposure to pornography. I'm sure some films (i have never, ever seen)would put your average teenager off the though of sex for a few years. Then there might be a few less 12 year old mums sucking the benefit coffers dry.

Laura said...

ph. The freedom of speech and expression are very much liberal causes.

I don't like pornography. But who am I to tell other consenting adults what they can and can't do.

You CAN'T star in pornographic film, even though enjoy it! You CAN'T watch pornography even though you get off on it. You can't do these things because I'm uncomfortable with it. What's that all about?

The porn industry isn't going anywhere and so the only way to make it less exploitative is to bring it out from the underground.

ph said...

Ms Jones - Pornography is mainstream, and is still exploitative. It's a dehumanising industry where money is absolute king. I feel that you may have been watching too many channel 5 'titillating documentaries' about the porn business. However there was one C4 insightful proper documentary (about 3 years ago) which really was an eye opener, and that is why I feel that freedom of speech and pornography should not be used in the same sentence(ooops)

Citizen Sane said...

I find porn rather dull, but that's just me. Surely though, the more open the industry becomes, the less exploitative it would be. Like with drugs (also an exploitative industry because of its illegal status), bring it out in the open where it can be properly regulated, taxed, etc.

Anonymous said...

Or better still get homeless people to sell it (as suggested in Viz)! This would see their takings increase tenfold.

Anonymous said...

I have a Black friend that says 'they're all bitches except your mammy and your sister' I think porn supports his view.
dw