I’ve been meaning to address this for ages, but it deserves more time and energy than I’ve had recently. The media has focused on porn’s relationship with rape for several months now, and grandstanding politicians have taken turns to spurt unresearched rhetoric about how access to any porn turns ordinary boys into sexual predators and girls into wanton sluts. Anti-porn feminists have long claimed that all porn is rape, and the current debate about “rape porn” has escalated into David Cameron proposing a block on all internet porn.

There are a whole load of reasons why an opt-out filter is potentially disastrous, not just for open discussion about sexuality and consent, but also for freedom of speech and access to information on the internet in a wider context. For instance, in 2011 the City of London police classified Occupy and UK Uncut activists as “terrorists”, just as the FBI have. Potentially, by this logic, websites that authorities consider to be politically dissenting voices could simply be blocked by default. Filters are far from discerning either. Many have highlighted the dangers of non-porn LGBTQ and sex education sites being blocked en-masse, further limiting young people’s access to sensible, responsible information about the issues that they often (wrongly) look to porn to provide answers to in the first place.

As for what is termed “rape porn”, we aren’t talking about actual filmed rape, or anything that purports to be so. This is already illegal, just as it should be. What the proposed ban refers to is simulated “rape” – consensual non-consent play, something previously discussed by the excellent Emily Rose. By law, pornographers already have to jump through hoops to prove that participants are fully consenting adults. When people speak of “rape porn”, they are not talking about actual rape. They are talking about filmed BDSM scenes that, despite depicting seemingly forceful sex, are explicitly consensual.

Of course, the porn industry still has a long way to go. Practices should be as ethical as possible, but ironically it’s BDSM pornographers that are at the forefront of promoting enthusiastic consent, despite their work also being most demonised by anti-porn campaigners. I will post more on this subject soon, as it’s an ongoing story which is due to progress significantly in the near future with respect to proposed laws and possible challenges to them (also it’s currently 2:35am and I should probably go to bed now).

In the meantime, donate to Backlash if you can. Their work on the above is more important right now than you might imagine.