[Warning] Very much NON FICTION

[terra_nova]

Not sure of the location for this post but it seems to be most relevant to the stories section.

It seems that the removal of general liberties from the UK public has continued unabated and a story depicting the rape and torture of the girl band Girls Aloud has landed a chap in some serious trouble. i.e arrested, charged, and currently awaiting trial where if he loses could face up to 3 years in prison. some of the stories outlining the case are in the following links (i know its not good practice to link to other websites but i think these serve as evidence to back up my post and are therefore important).

http://www.out-law.com/page-9485

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/10/22/obscene_publications_trial/

This is an interesting case as it contains no images or videos and is purely based on the written content of the post. Therefore it is bringing stories such as the ones posted here in line with the Obscene Publications act, which rather generically states;

'According to the Act it is an offence to publish something likely to "deprave and corrupt persons who are likely, having regard to all relevant circumstances, to read, see or hear the matter contained or embodied in" the article.'

No idea what that actually means but it may be wise for all users to take note of the Act itself and perhaps apply it to any posts they may have made in the past, or will make in the future. It basically seems like extreme material does fall into this category, and i would advice (with absolutely no legal training at all) for any posts/stories that may be seen as borderline to wait until this case is tried in court.

A bootnote is that currently this law resides in the UK, but as the case suggests isn't limited to content hosted in the UK.

Just something that i think we should all be aware of. (it is highly probable that some of the more extreme dares would also fall into this category)

Regards,

Terra

[interesting]

Thank you for pointing it out.

Thought police, but a relevant notion nonetheless.

We're bound to have a debate around freedom of expression here!

[terra_nova]

Yep, its getting crazy being a UK citizen, i shall try not to get into a rant over whos fault it is etc etc. Another note is that this act covers hand drawn pictures, as well as photos that depict pain, but are not classified as pornographic. The full Act is here.

http://www.iwf.org.uk/police/page.22.38.htm

There is also the new Extreme Porn Act to be aware of

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/sep/01/civilliberties.gender

1984 much?

[CleverGirl]

I have to say it. This is ridiculous. Certain things, like child porn, should definately be banned, because they directly hurt the persons involved. In this particular case, I agree that the guy should have been arrested. Not, however, because he published explicit material, but because he used real people as the center of his story, without their permission. I certainly believe that people should ask for permission before writting an erotic story about anyone being totured and killed. I would certainly be offended and hurt if I found an erotic story about my torture written online, without my consent! And if a person doesn't give said permission, it should be illegal for any one to write such brutal things about them. This hurts the person involved. But to ban all violent or sexual material? That is just stupid. Literature often needs to refelct brutally to explain a truth. Erotic stories about torture online can also be an outlet for persons with such fantasies. Instead of going out and torturing or killing people in real life, they can release their violent and sexual tension in a healthy way, by reading or writting such stories. Such writting can actually curve crime. And seriously, even if you forbid such stories or pictures from being published, there will still be rapists out there, but quite simply, people will become less aware of it and will be placed in even more danger because they can't read about such situations! Finally, sites like this can actually help people deal with their potentially violent fantasies in a constructive way. For example, because sites like these exist, people can learn about loving M/s relationships, and so do not have to feel the need to force their dominance upon an unwilling person. They know that they can find a willing submissive! Here, they can educate themselves on healthy ways to cope. Whenever you try to ban anything that could create violence, you just end up encouraging it, by making people less aware of it. Further more, what about literaty license? Art should be able to take on any form, as long as it does not DIRECTLY harm anyone. That's the key word. Directly. Child porn and erotic stories centered around real people, without their permission, harm persons directly. But if an erotic story encourages someone to go out and rape people, shouldn't we punish the rapist, not the writer? Martin Luther King Jr., in A Letter from Birmingham Jail, stated that white moderates, not extremists, were the major problem in the struggle for racial equality. Why? Because they favored law and order over justice. And King's words can certainly be applied here. Freedom of expression is a human right, and you can not take it away in favor of law and order. The white moderates said that King was in the wrong for engaingn in peaceful protests because they resulted in violence. But, in his own words, "should we punish the robbed becaue his money was an incentive for robbery?" The robbed did nothing wrong. And writers, unless they directly cause harm, should not be punished for the rape and torture initiated by other people. This law is ridiculous, and needs to be modified. Child porn and stories or pictures centered around persons without their permission should be banned. Other explicit material should have an age block for persons under eighteen. But to completely ban violent and sexual material? This is ridiculous. Sorry for the long rant, but I am a huge fan of free speech. Thanks for posting this!

[CleverGirl]

Okay. I just read the thing on banning "extreme pornography." I have to rant again. This is f*cking ridiculous. They don't even make a distinction between art and porn? How stupid can you possibly get? First off, as long as it doesn't directly harm any one, how can you possibly justify banning it? Secondly, the person writting the article is in favor of banning such images because they objectify women? This guy does realize that thebtheory of woman's inferiority is an opinion, an idea, right? Certainly he is not so stupid as to believe otherwise. And you can't ban opinions. Otherwise, you'll end up with a closed minded, technologically inferior, society. In a society where it is legal to ban ideas, to ban opinions, thought stops and you get a stale society. Even worse you get an unjust society. Imagine if, during the early years of slavery, it wa sillegal to even right about racial equality because people 'disagreed" with said opinion. We'd still have slaves! This is, from a practical standpoint, exactly what happens in such a society. We get Mill's "tyranny of the majority." I don't think women should be objectified either, but I am a sub, and find submission in the right context, or for fantasies, quite beautiful. And seriously, once more, you can't ban any art or opinions or ideas just because you disagree with them. It was tension and disagreement that forced the issue of racial equality and equality for women onto society in the first place. Now you want to take that away? Furthermore, portrayal of violence, even objectification of woman, can be used in art as a means of codemning said actions. How can you address, and condemn, then concepts of violence and objectification if you cannot portary them? Plus, pornography can be used to, once more, release violent and sexual tension at home, without actually going out and commiting crimes. This stuff reduces crime! Finally, sex and violence are parts of life. By trying to ban such things, you're merely legalizing denial. How sick. And come on, banning art?!?! Free expression!?!? That which makes our time so great. D.H. Lawrence was a misunderstood genius whose works were banned for their sexual content. Now he is recoignized for his magnificent work! I am so annoyed. I thought we were a more intellectaully advanced society! But alas, I am fooling myself. Oh where have all the smart people gone. WHERE!!?!!?!! This is only in the UK, right? I am an American. I am safe, right? Please tell me I am safe from the madness!!! (At least for now).

[terra_nova]

I know, i had to really chill before posting. I think its important to get this sort of stuff out. We in the UK are sleepwalking into this sort of society, and the people who say "I have nothing to hide therefore nothing to fear" are as bad if not worse than those handing out the legislation.

It would appear non of the smart people decided to take up politics, and in this age of 'yes men and women' it seems any law can get through, as long as it cites one of the 4 horsemen of the information apocalypse (Bruce Schneier) terrorists, drug dealers, kidnappers, and child pornographers. read more here (http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2005/12/16/the-four-horsemen-of-the-information-apocalypse/) Sorry CleverGirl, thats a US one :). It would seem that citing one of the 4 grants carte blanche to any agency that wants to monitor people. I agree, some things are bad and should be stopped, but geez, dont stop free choice in the process!

Terra

I guess the question is, who do we REALLY need protecting from?

[SubMissChievous]

This discussion would suit best in the Lounge so I'll move it there.

[ewitch]

As of 26th of January the maximum sentence is going from 3 to 5 years.

The same act that increased the sentence also removed Blasphomy, and blasphomous lible as common law crimes.