I got the wrong end of the stick and thought you were mostly talking about rape porn videos versus real rape videos.:blush:
In general I wasn't, but it is another point to mull. The strange laws of this land now state that you can engage in some pretty hefty BDSM sex in real life, well, anything as long as it's consensual - but under the 'violent pornography' ban they brought in last year, if you filmed it in your own bedroom or otherwise recorded it visually, you're a criminal. Same if you now decided to enact a rape or non-con roleplay scene I suppose, which could come under BDSM. Even if it was between two perfectly consenting adults for their own entertainment. So they're not so much intent at stamping out the practice itself, as they've freaked at the idea of people watching it. I assume they think it'll lead to an increase in sex attacks and rape, or in injuries resulting from violent sex between consenting adults... but given the prevalence of this sort of material on the web if you decide to search for porn, and the apparent high consumption of porn in general in developed countries, by this rationale we should be swimming in criminal rapists and perverts... but we're not. Not statistically, anyway. That's probably because most people know the difference between right and wrong, and most people won't end up as sex attackers. But if the govt. is so intent upon raising the standards of 'sexual decency' in this society, just banning rough and rapey porn is hardly enough to do that, wouldn't you say? They would have to teach sexual etiquette in schools or something instead (my stomach turns at the thought of missionary position and bland foreplay lessons XD) but at the same time appear rather squeamish about teaching kids the sex stuff, even when their advisors have claimed that it would benefit kids to receive their sex ed far
earlier than they currently do. We must preserve their innocence at all costs, they cry, probably ignorant that a good deal of 11 year olds already know full well what sex is, and get their 'education' from their friends... and perhaps they should ban the sort of stuff on TV that has kids being fed sexualised imagery or has them aspiring to be sexual before the all-knowing Brit govt. thinks they should...
Not that such a law is going to stop people recording it and distributing it if they want to, though, they still do. How they actually did sit down and logically categorize this violent BDSM material for this law is anyone's guess, I'd imagine certain types of gay porn might also fall under this umbrella because they refuse to categorize that properly too, and Cameron has implied - rather heteronormatively - that rape is an act that takes place between a man and a woman (so male rape doesn't exist apparently?). You get the feeling most of the people involved in making these laws never sat through an actual BDSM film as part of the lawmaking process, and have simply opted for a set of 'body parts that must not be damaged' which they label as 'most harmful' for the public to see. Sounds like somebody thought, "well if it's not around to see, it just isn't going to occur to anyone to do it, is it?" But I'm fairly certain that there's a streak of it in all human cultures at all times somewhere and a certain number of individuals will experiment in any case. I mean, it's banned now, but realistically do you think cases of rape or sexual violence will go up or down as a result? I'm not a party to what the police or the ONS gets to see on their screens but I'll hazard a guess that there is always going to be enough of that going on to worry about regardless. Yes, it seems when they catch a particularly high-profile pervert out there someone's quick to point out "he had a dungeon of kiddie porn!" or "he owned violent pornography!" as if it's an ultimate vindicator, not so much something an already screwed-up individual would deliberately collect. Yet the sheer prevalence and easy access of this material online should suggest way more people are secretly horrific perverts, then - how the Cabinet sleep at night I don't know. They must be revolving in their beds.
While I wouldn't personally fancy a porno on par with
Ichi the Killer, and I hear some of them can be pretty nasty, I'd sort of like my bans to be suggested by experts in the field, people who study the psychology of rape and sexual violence, or those who study those who commit it, and can comment upon the actual dangers of this material, and do so publicly. We have campaigns about how smoking is harmful, so why not this, if it is so harmful? Sure, one can speak of what they think is 'common sense' (not so common), and that 'surely violent porn can't be good', but these are people's personal freedoms being sliced away, a piece at a time - to underestimate and denigrate that in this age where the word "Freedom" is bandied about as an advertisement for 'how great we are over here' like never before is a mistake, I think. . .
As for artistic, I don't think there should be any restrictions because it's a drawing, a book or a sculpture. People have been drawing naked people since forever, and writing adult novels. That sort of thing doesn't harm anyone, and people have the choice to look or not look.
Besides, if they ban one thing in the name of protecting people, then they will use that excuse again and again to ban anything and everything by making people so afraid or paranoid that they won't stop the ban because they've been made to believe that the ban is for their own good.
Exactly. The government here has already decided that drawings are just as bad as real exploitation, and now certain types of pornographic entertainment as well. I am concerned because they constantly appear to be tying these things up together with paedophiles and child porn and "protecting children" in so many reported articles, quite aside from the idea of imposing a standard of decency... it's as if this idea of the children and their protection from the ever-lurking pedo is the ballast stone for their every argument, and the constant repetition of that is a reinforcement in people's minds that these issues are firmly connected, when only the child porn and pedophilia is firmly connected - strictly speaking, in this debate - and should have nothing to do with the case of access to "adult content", or questionable types of porn. I mean, look -
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23401076
It goes from the issue of the censorship of adult content of the web to "them pedos" in seconds flat. Proving in a sense that those howling for the censorship appear to be allowing their personal fears/preoccupations to override or command the original topic, not to mention making some murky connection between rape porn and pedophilia in the brain when you come away from that article. "Protecting children from seeing adult content" certainly doesn't equal "getting one over on the pedophile menace", or shouldn't. It's an issue of the so-called justification for censoring the entire British web... and all they ever end up ranting about is the pedophiles. At this rate we'll be locking our children up in cages till they're 18.
With Japan, there are news stories of guys groping women on trains, teachers having sex with underage girls, wives having sex with schoolboys, 'health parlours' being raded for using minors...I just hope those kind of news stories are rare...
Quite true, I'm afraid that sort of harassment is prevalent and the Japanese don't like it or accept it any the more for it. Just last fortnight someone I know went on an exchange scheme to live in Japan a while and reported gropey men on the trains. They appear to be trying to tackle the problem - but I think part of the issue is that the gropers are exploiting the overcrowded trains. If they tackled the overcrowding with more trains or facilities, which they need to do anyway in some places, there would be nowhere for these people to blend while trying to grope. They only seem to do it where they cannot be seen, so... removing their cover seems the obvious choice... or the women's only carriages which I hear they wanna implement.
What I find strange with Japan is the censorship laws. They blurr out the genitals, but you clearly know what is going on.:/
It's an old law made way back, like the one that states pubic hair should not be visible... I guess they just don't want to dig up the laws and amend them, or perhaps some people still believe such a pointless censor actually... achieves something.
As for levels of crime, they are lower. You leave your purse somewhere, and most likely it will be handed in to a police box. The Japanese are good for that kind of honesty.There's a societal expectation that they must be that way, and anyone who isn't, is shamed publically.
There is a lot of social and societal pressure in Japan to put on a normal face for the world, keep your problems to yourself and just get on with life, which does lead to a lot of private problems and high suicide rates.
When a person finally snaps in Japan, they do it spectacularly. One adult guy burned his mother alive because she threw out his Gundam figures and asked him to get a job. :blink: At least those cases are rare, just like any other part of the world.
Aye, I know. Like with the gropers, that sort of overt crime isn't usually to be seen where it 'can be seen'.
I don't have a problem with it in a movie or a serious plot; maybe it could help someone, or give them the courage to speak up.
I think it does. There have been some movies I've seen that dealt with rape or gender issues and they can expand your horizons on the subject, particularly if you've ever had these issues, or been attacked, like I have.
, I'll try and get it posted later.
