Obscenity laws have been changed to allow distribution of BDSM and fetish porn

[userschmoozer]

''Pornography depicting a number of previously banned sex acts has been made legal in the UK after a review of obscenity laws.

Essentially, sex acts that are not illegal in another context can now be shown in pornography.''

''Certain types of violent porn are now permitted so long as the sex acts are consensual (focusing on ‘full and freely exercised consent’,) do not cause serious harm to participants, are not ‘inextricably linked with other criminality’ and are not likely to be viewed by anyone under the age of 18.''

uk.news.yahoo.com/violent-porn-including-bdsm-no-longer-illegal-uk-long-performers-consenting-155930303.html?_guc_consent_skip=1548958244

There's a painting of him here in a furry suit

www.theguardian.com/law/2015/sep/09/one-lawyers-crusade-defend-extreme-pornography

And oh-look, he's doing it all for the wimminz

"In particular, Jackman urgently wanted me to understand “the patriarchal bullshit” – so he suggested I join him at the Adult Entertainment Business Conference (“Xbiz”) and meet some of the female producers and performers on whose behalf he believed he was battling. "

"Jackman introduced me to Itzi Urrutia who runs a website called the Urban Chick Supremacy Cell – stated mission: “To destroy the Patriarchy. To hunt down all City Boys and other capitalist sexist male scum vermin ... To crush the cock and destroy the male sex!” There were clips for sale on her site of men bound and gagged and caged and whipped by hooded women."

[aside: Itzi has a MA in Fine Art from Goldsmiths - of course she does. ]

"We toured the various dungeons together: medical, torture, play. Men and women were locked in cages. Some were being hung or suspended on ropes (“it’s very safe and careful,” Jackman clarified). A woman was having sex with two men at the same time – orally and vaginally. A man with a woman on a lead was “allowing” her to stand on another man. The second man lay on the floor and enthusiastically licked her heels or suffered their pressure on his naked torso. Afterwards, he thanked her. (Her master forbade her from talking to me so I could not find out how she felt.)"

" (He earns so little money from his work, which is often pro-bono, that his mother is, not unreasonably, worried about where – and how – he is going to live when Charlie takes her flat back."

"Jackman wanted to “come out” about his sexuality. He felt that it would be hypocritical not to state on the record that he is an active member of the BDSM community, so he was perfectly happy to proclaim loud and proud: “I’m kinky.”"

How fucking dare they lie like this, the dishonest porn-sick, lazy slapdash wankers.

If anyone missed this excellent line the first time, so good - worth repeating.

this is for england and wales- the law remains unchanged in scotland.

also remember next year the government has planned to block all porn sites unless you verify your age with a card. an easy way round this would be to just use TOR or a VPN. if most people don't know what those are now I guarantee word would spread fast once porn sites are all blocked.

the risk that would cause is once you are on TOR or a VPN nothing is blocked (putting the user at a greater risk), plus your ISP is unable to see what you look at (which would mean users would feel more confident to look at content which may fall foul of this law we're discussing)

There's a far stronger case to be made for the damage caused by 'normalising' marriage and monogamy. Men who hurt or kill women for leaving them, being unfaithful - or for failing to provide enough domestic service - frequently get away with it and have done for centuries - just look at every single report of 'family annhilation' cases, it's always a 'spurned lover' or a 'devoted husband and father' or a 'good man who snapped'.

There are abusive, dangerous people in every area of life - and yes, that includes the fetish scene - but the existence of eg abusive martial arts enthusiasts doesn't mean that all martial arts enthusiasts are abusers. People who are interested in kinky sex are mostly perfectly OK individuals who have a moderately unusual hobby that involves some physical risk. Like cave divers, hang gliders, historical re-enactors, anyone into contact sports...

Oh, and there's a long history of blatant dishonesty, hype and scaremongering from opponents of pornography - quoting selectively from long-discredited studies (they are still citing Malamuth and even fucking Zillman), spurious statistics, not letting on that either their backers or they themselves are into fundamentalist superstition and 'traditional' values like anti-abortion activism...

Do you accept any of the anti porn arguments, SGB?

There's a far stronger case to be made for the damage caused by 'normalising' marriage and monogamy. Men who hurt or kill women for leaving them, being unfaithful - or for failing to provide enough domestic service - frequently get away with it and have done for centuries - just look at every single report of 'family annhilation' cases, it's always a 'spurned lover' or a 'devoted husband and father' or a 'good man who snapped'.

But that’s just the other side of the same coin as porn and prostitution.
That men are conditioned to see women as existing for them and in some way owing them something.

I don’t think that the radical feminist argument against violent porn is the same as the conservative one, we can critique violent porn AND marriage and monogomy.

Agree calvin

I really do not want my DS`s expecting certain activities from girlfriends when they venture into sex. Anal, spanking, whatever they have gleaned from the internet and thinking that is normal.

So someone tell me how this move protects young women from my sons if this is what they see when they become curious.

7Days: the problems with porn which need addressing are the problems which need addressing in any other industry: exploitation, ripping people off, bullying, abusive behaviour from co-workers or employers. Porn is no more free of these problems than any other industry - and if it is slightly more prone to them than, say, the fashion industry, this is more to do with the stigmatizing and criminalising of porn, which means more criminals (who don't care about health and safety or workers' rights any more than they care about paying their taxes) and less inclination on behalf of those who have been mistreated to report it, as they fear (often with good reason) that they will be prosecuted/deported/laughed at.

Justasking: why would it matter to you if your DSs like anal/spanking/etc? If you have raised them to value consent and communication when it comes to their sex lives, WTF has it got to do with you - or anyone else - what specific activities they and their potential partners want to engage in?

Yes, I agree with you there SGB, but there are also societal consequences to widespread use of porn.

You can't have a generation that has been conditioned from puberty to associate orgasms with disrespect/degradation/abuse and not have ed it spill out into rl. And that type of porn is the mainstream, its in everyone's pockets, and sex does have an emotional and psychological dimension.

It's impossible to say that it has no bearing on r l, the only question is whether the effect is positive or negative.

What do you think about that side of it?

7days: No, that argument is scaremongering and dishonest, and starts from the belief that there is something inherently wrong with sex for pleasure rather than procreation. Yes, OK, young people won't necessarily learn about real sex from watching porn any more than they will learn to drive by watching Top Gear or playing Grand Theft Auto - but the solution to 'young people learning sex from porn' is proper sex education rather than dubious superstition-backed pro-abstinence programmes.
(BTW, good sex education would start with the premise that sex is more often about fun rather than reproduction, and that there is a lot more to it than marital PIV. It would emphasise consent and communication first and foremost, and acknowledge that different people want different things.)

Porn doesn't have a 'massively damaging effect'.

Teen girls with anal prolapse?
Teenagers feeling coerced into trying anal despite both partners knowing it will be probably be painful/unenjoyable for the woman?
Women being killed by men they have only just met due to "consensual breath play"?
Women having their throats slashed and dying because "they liked it rough"?
Women increasingly getting labiaplasty because they think their genitalia looks wrong?
Teen boys and young men having increasing amounts of sex difficulties (ED, delayed ejaculation) from getting too used to watching porn and walking?
Sex addicts saying that internet porn started/escalated their addiction and all the fall out from that to them, their wives and families?

People arguing that their individual kink justifies the harm that porn is doing to society as a whole are being extremely selfish I think.

Couldn't give a shit if you want to be strangled/beaten/pissed on/fisted etc but please stop making out it's all totally harmless just to avoid your own feelings of shame or embarrassment.

Oh btw I can evidence all the above I just couldn't be arsed but please ask if you want the links

I saw this on David Allen Green’s Twitter the other day and was surprised to see him congratulating Myles Jackman.
It’s a bit like Brexit (bear with me!): something dressed up as “Freedom of Choice” (like “Sovereignty”) that nobody can quite explain why it really is a good thing, even the clear apologists in the thread ramble on about photos in the homes which is irrelevant.
But overall this does not benefit humanity in any way.
It might benefit some rich men to the detriment of others.
Those who will suffer immediately are poor and female.
And the long term effects on the young are incalculable, hideous and being completely ignored.
See? A bit like Brexit.

And to those who think that porn isn’t bad, or kids need to get used to it and respect consent etc, I was speaking to someone who had knowledge of a rape that had happened in a primary school. The boy was about 9, I believe, and the girl was younger. He was a “naice” boy, no family background to cause concern. Though clearly he’d been exposed to porn. When asked why he hadn’t stopped when the girl was crying, he said “but they always cry in the videos”. Horrible.

Quentin, beautifully explained.

Stately - there are now words.

Stately - predictive text. I meant there are no words for what that little primary school child endured. How does a nine year old get access to porn like that.

Sex offences in schools esp primary schools do not seem to be tackled well at all. At least now we're hearing about it. Multiple news articles if anyone wants to look. It seems clear the assailants are copying what they have been exposed to. Some will be abused themselves which is maybe why the focus is so heavily on helping the perpetrator and doing nothing for the victim. Many though will be imitating content seen online /shown by older siblings or friends or just finding it themselves.

Young children notoriously have little understanding of long term consequences and empathy is something they are taught... That's normal for younger children. So show them them standard porn images ( standard now including content that used to be niche or 'hardcore') and its no surprise what happens. Back in the day when only hedge porn was available young boys would try and look down girls knickers. Things have moved on.

I don't understand why anyone would deny a connection its a plain as the nose on your face.

Nothing on telly your comment "I don't understand why anyone would deny a connection its a plain as the nose on your face."

Because they have their own sick agenda, to normalise acts so they can kiddy fiddle to their hearts content.

Justasking- Google.

Not difficult.

Many parents have little understanding of net, or aren't interested. Protection can be confusing to set up. Older siblings, friends can show them.

It's ubiquitous of course children will see it.

Some may see it after seeing public images like the other thread about house of fraser and googling ' woman tied up' or something more innocuous - they may wonder why she is trussed up or be curious and bingo straight into imagery that is pretty extreme and plenty of it. Including (or at least a few years ago) women being asked while out cold ( or pretending but let's be realistic--one of the major outlets wanted a round of applause for taking content of this type off. Images of rape. I mean WTF shows how bad it is that they think this is super progressive of them).

I don't think that's SGB agenda but SGB I do think you have a big blind spot with this topic.

You can support something while accepting its not 100% brilliant all the time for everyone.

I mean I know it's not SGB agenda.

She is lovely generally but blind spot

(I'm a name changer been arounnd for yonks and gave her some advice once! )

QuiteContraryMary - I think you massively underestimate how many women watch porn if you think the audience of it is 95% male.