Rape porn to be illegal

[RiotsNotDiets]

here

About bloody time!

Does the banning of rape porn only apply to video images, or photographs and literature as well?

turtle the psychological evidence is that there's no link at all between people watching violence and committing it.

I have no problem personally with porn in which is it clear the participants are consenting, including rape fantasy porn - in this you will generally see the participants discussing what they plan to do and afterwards how it went and how much they enjoyed it. This to me is a good model for clear communication around sex of whatever type.

I do have a problem with mainstream portrayals of 'sex' - there's lots of film and tv and book plots of 'sex' which is actually rape - at the very least coercive and not empowering and not involving decent communication between partners. Children are more likely to see and and everyone is more likely to be influenced by the latter as it's meant to be realistic. That is where I would prefer to fight against rape culture. Consensual kink activities have nothing to do with it.

This is an excellent blog post on why rape porn should be banned:

chillercold.wordpress.com/2013/06/16/kink-rape-child-porn-and-blurred-lines/

Also bollocks to anyone saying "Oh they could put a little speech in about how it's all consensual really". As if that can't be faked or coerced either.

Why should raping a woman be considered normal sexual behaviour aturtlenamedmack? Do you want to be with a partner who fantasizes about raping you?

Not wishing to speak for them, but I think turtle's point was about women having rape fantasies, not men. I believe Nancy Friday produced a book, 'Secret Garden', where this was one of the themes. That was why I asked earlier if literature is also covered in the ban, or if it should be.

There was a recent BBC drama about a serial killer, The Fall, which showed graphic attacks on women. Could stuff like this also be made illegal?

If you opt out will it be illegal to stream it? Is streaming different to possessing? If not people could still be accessing it all day everyday, legally.

She said people with forced intercourse fantasies, CiskoKid. Lets face it in a rape "fantasy" someone has to do the raping. I don't want a partner who fantasises about raping me. Do you?

About time.

A fantasy is something which happens in your head and which you might role play with a consenting partner. Rape porn is not that. It's a cultural product which adds to the cultural environment in which women have to try to live their lives. It has wider consequences.

Cisco as far as I'm aware what's being proposed is an amendment to section 63 of the 2008 CJA, which applies to images and video but not to literature. If you read my post a page back you'll see that it's all about context. The Fall would be OK because its primary intention is not pornographic but if someone made a compilation of just the graphic attacks on women, questions would be asked.

Happily, the opt out is nothing to do with rape porn being made illegal. The opt out only applies to legal porn. If it's illegal, it doesn't matter whether you've opted in or out, it's still illegal. I don't imagine it would make a difference if it was streamed or downloaded.

I thought the opt out was going to be hand in hand with making possessing violent poem illegal.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-cameron-to-announce-crackdown-on-violent-internet-porn-8725011.html

It's the possessing bit I don't understand, does it include streaming?

It's just been announced at the same time as part of a raft of measures. You won't be able to 'opt in' to anything that's illegal.

It's just all so murky... thinking about what was classed as "kinky" 15 years ago, compared to now, makes me worry about the world my son will grow up into.

Thanks PoPG. I hope it blocks it from international sites too. Don't really know how it works.

I think it's a shame that the two things are being reported as one and the same thing.

Should rape porn be illegal - absolutely, in my opinion. Rape is illegal, just like child abuse and bestiality, it doesn't make sense that somebody is allowed to film it and put it online or film somebody pretending to do it and put it online. The argument seems to be "Well some people are turned on by the idea of simulated rape" - really? Why is that even acceptable, I'm sure some people are turned on by the idea of sex with animals where the animal isn't getting hurt, seems to be happy and is free to get away (eww, sorry, shudder) - aside from the WTF/ick/taboo factor there's really no moral harm being done in that one specific situation, but nobody objects to bestiality porn being illegal?

The porn blocking in general is a totally different thing and I can see why people may object to that as censorship in general, but I don't see why they are being treated as one and the same.

Rape is horrible, illegal and wrong and it is wrong to be turned on by it. It should have been included in the list of unacceptable/illegal things in porn from the beginning really.

Thanks to those who answered my question, it's really interesting to hear other peoples opinions as I don't know much about the subject.
scallop in answer to your question, of course i don't think rape should be considered 'normal' sexual behaviour, nor would i want my partner to fantasise about raping me.
My question was in relation to studies I had read which seemed to conclude that many of the women questioned fantasised about being the 'victim' in a simulated rape.
So i would imagine that if these women wanted to act on their fantasies then they would want a partner who was turned on by playing the role of 'rapist'.
As distastful as that is, it seems to be a more common fantasy than one would assume.
I definitely agree with oddsocks when she says that the cultural environment that we accept is what is most harmful and having read what plenty has to say, that this type of pornography adds to that.

I disagree mack, admittedly I haven't read the studies personally, but anything that speaks or asks about "rape fantasies" to me is a fallacy; there is no such thing as a "rape fantasy" from the position of the victim, it is an oxymoron.

I think it's a problem of language and semantics, when thinking of the (apparently common) "rape fantasy", nobody actually fantasises about having something happen to them that they don't want to happen. So what are they really fantasising about - someone else being in total control, the idea of a stranger finding them so irresistibly sexy, sex which moves fast with no apology, sex which is rough and possibly painful, sex which is unexpected, sex in an unusual location, sex which you aren't expected to/don't have to pretend to enjoy (that one's pretty fucked up but I'm sure it's in there)

I don't see, if rape porn was banned, that there couldn't still be porn which caters to all of the above categories (with the possible exception of the last) but with consent. Of course this relies on a magical world of porn where consent is open and transparent and honest which currently doesn't exist, but... I think that the actual "kink" behind what we tend to think of as a "rape fantasy" could actually be expressed in loads of other, way more healthy ways, without also satisfying the very real fantasies of a real life rapist. I don't think those fantasies are valid or healthy, any more than somebody who fantasises about child abuse or cannibalism. And I don't think we should be normalising/enabling them because there is this perception that women have "rape fantasies" whereas actually they quite like the idea of many other things which are nothing to do with rape.

Also, I find it a bit of a stretch that many people would view a violent portrayal of rape and consider it normal sexual behaviour to be recreated at home where as I find it very believable and upsetting that many young people might view some of the pornography available that is so disrespectful towards women (such as cumshots, gagging while giving oral sex etc) and think that that was perfectly normal and go home and experiment with that.
I think a change in culture and a clearer education for young people about what to expect within a relationship (not just sex) would be a very helpful way of protecting them.

You've persuaded me I think yoni

By the way op, just noticed your user name, love it! I have a tshirt with it on!

A lot of "rape porn" that I guess would be covered is (or was) heavily featured on mainstream porn sites, and featured unconscious women. Whether they were really unconscious (hard to fake?) or had consented to having someone have sex with them while unconscious (is that reasonable consent if they can't then say if they don't want a certain act done?) that seemed to be a big thing.

So not a rape fantasy in the meaning of nancy friday / erotica type stuff (which I don't think comes under the ban) but visual depictions of real people doing stuff to someone unconscious.

i would imagine that a fantasy of a man / men doing stuff to you while unconscious would be a fairly niche fantasy for the man/woman on the "receiving end" as it were.

So there's that.

Interested to know if people want the existing laws surrounding obscene publications repealed.

Oh so I guess my point was that the depictions above - very common and depicting an unconscious woman being raped - the question of consent is moot IMO. And how can anyone watching it possibly know that it's not real. Anyone can upload stuff to these sites, and frankly a lot of it probably is just actual rapes being filmed and put on the net and then people watching it thinking "oh well this can't be real".

Again, no problem to me to ban it, adding it to the list of already banned obscene images, and on the same terms.

Do we have a Tory Prime Minister who actually cares about people?

No, he thinks this is a vote winner. I think caring about people is going a bit far.