...to think that today's "porn protest" outside parliament was a load of misogynist. er, wank?

[ArcheryAnnie]

On the one hand: loads of people singing "sit on my face and tell me that you love me" outside parliament is quite funny.

On the other - oh dear god, the placards and the speeches that have been reported. I don't think making a placard describing what the PM may or may not do with his wife in bed is in any way radical or "sex-positive" - it's ignoring women's boundaries and dragging a woman's sex life into a public debate without her consent. It's deeply, deeply misogynist, whatever your party politics. And apparently some of the speeches were making fun of "prudes" and people who have "boring" sex - and I don't see how shaming people for the (adult, consensual) sex they do or don't have is in any way "sex-positive".

I was further not impressed by people on twitter using the hashtag #ICantBreathe - a community response to a horrific racist killing - as an "amusing" way to refer to face-sitting.

Did I think the legislation they were protesting was poorly-thought-out? Yes. Do I think these misogynist, racist assholes will help change this poorly-thought-out legislation? No.

I have no idea what's gone on outside parliament today or why they were protesting, but I don't see how placards about the pm and his wife having sex are misogynist. Surely they are as offensive to Dave as they are to samcam?

Rushed to BBC news to look this up. Hard to find.

Then I thought - if you are right, it is good that it is hard to find. No oxygen of publicity.

Job done!

Parliament wasn't even sitting today so I wonder who they thought they were protesting at?

I do wonder about the effort that some protestors go to sometimes ... I see a lot of protests outside the Foreign Office or opposite Downing Street and the number of times I walk past and couldn't even tell you why they are unhappy is, well, too many times. I am interested in learning about issues people! I might even care! Just make it clear what the bloody problem is!

WooWooOwl - the placards were referring to her sexual response, not his. Also, she's not the one involved in making legislation.

Ultimately, all we're discussing is an amendment to an existing piece of legislation. Do I prefer legislation amended in the House and scrutinised by the Lords, or created on the fly by people who sit on each others' faces in the street

let me think about that for a minute.

Sorry OP, but by assuming that the placards are offensive to Sam and not Dave, it sounds as if you're the old-fashioned sexist. Is her sexuality any more precious than his because she's a woman? I have no doubt that if it were Maggie Thatcher passing this idiotic legislation, there would be a lot of amusing placards about Denis.

sick of seeing that Everything is misogynist. its a protest for gods sake. They obviously have different opinions, but failing to see why it's hateful towards women. Which is what the word means.
On MN it seems words such as that, and Entitled, have lost their meanings and developed new ones.

can someone explain what they were protesting for, what is the legislation?

Here:
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/a-long-list-of-sex-acts-just-got-banned-in-uk-porn-9897174.html

But, in fact, most of the current amendments are simply clarifications of earlier declarations.

ok
still at a loss as to why that being banned is a bad thing

This amendment forbids some (fairly random) sex acts to be shown in UK produced porn:

• female ejaculation

-"watersports"

-extreme whipping or caning

-face sitting
...

Ironically I have considered (and still am considering) the law to be sexist seeing that the "unacceptable" acts seem to outlaw female pleasure ( fem ejaculation is bad, male ejaculation, including bukake, is fine) and bdsm acts, especially where the woman is dominant.

But of course censoring female pleasure is not sexist at all and only done for our own protection [sarcasm]

In several cases they're not actually being banned at all. They're having restrictions placed upon how they're portrayed, when filmed in the UK. My take on the protest is that it's just a bunch of people gobbing off because they can.

If it hadn't been for this post, I'd never have known about it. I thought the change in the law it was simply trying to bring on-line stuff into line with what the cinema permits. Still its a free country (or so we're told) so let's have a protest.

Anyone know how many there were? Did it beat the 5 who turned up to protest against the Miss World contest last week?

It only affects stuff made in the UK. It is legal to view this type of stuff that has been made abroad.
It doesn't seem logical to me though - if face sitting is banned then surely deep throating should be as well.

Nooo, do not ban face-sitting! (ok, TMI)

Yes, Babycham, clearly I am an old-fashioned sexist for noticing that the placard was focused on her sexual response, not his, despite the fact that he's the legislator who this protest is presumably aimed at, not her.

Not that I think it's appropriate to discuss anyone's sexual response in public without their express consent.

To describe a satirical depiction as anything more than that is to miss the point of satire. If I draw a twelve foot billboard of Boris spitting out porridge, it's not Boris' response to cooking that you are discussing. What you're discussing is my picture.

I cannot tell if you are approving or disapproving of the placard, Dora.

I know I wouldn't want placards speculating about my sex life being paraded around in public. (And, like it or not, there is a difference between public depictions of female sexuality and male sexuality - eg a man who has had many partners is portrayed as a player, a woman with the same is portrayed as damaged goods, etc etc. It shouldn't be like this, but to pretend that it isn't currently so, and that women are punished for it, is disengenuous.)

I haven't seen any Prime Minister banners, so it might not be quite as prevalent as you say. That said, they have girls sitting on Santa's face, I don't think we can really take a crude joke about the PM at that protest and take it too seriously.

There is all sorts of cunnilingus in porn still, so it's not censoring female sexuality. Face sitting was never main stream in the first place.

In any case, trying to censor porn is like trying to put glitter on shit to make it more palatable.

How about making sure that all contracts are fair and business standards are adhered to and protecting sex workers before cutting down parts of their business.

I felt the same as archery.

Have people saying this was a joke about the PM actually seen the sign in question?

Because I saw it and I felt awful for her. Really low and cheap to target a woman just because of the man she's married to. How can that not be misogynistic?

Now, if they'd banned, say, sodomy and someone had a poster about Dave bumming Gideon, I wouldn't give a fuck (excuse pun). But dragging some woman who has nothing to do with it into it to make a joke? Not good.

But, that's simply a poor taste in humour, not misogyny.

No, I don't think it is.

Misogyny is systematic discrimination against women.

This 'joke' or 'satire' targeted a woman, precisely because she was a woman and the wife of the person who should have been their real target. She has nothing to do with the passing of the law, except she's married to the PM.

Women aren't extensions of their husbands, and that's how they treated her.

I agree with the OP: it's outright misogyny. It's definitely not sex-positive either.

Misogyny is the denigration of womanhood. It is not defined as making bad jokes at the expense of the Camerons.