Tag Archives: backlash

Grrrrrreat

3 Replies

I’ve talked a lot in the past about the ambiguously-worded “extreme porn” legislation of recent years. Now, Backlash is taking a stand, along with victims of problematic convictions.

Andrew Holland, a man from Wrexham, was charged under Section 63 of the 2008 Criminal Justice and Immigration Act. He was accused of possessing a short video showing a woman having sex with a tiger. A friend had sent it as a joke. He had watched six seconds of it. Predictably, the case toppled over as soon as the court heard the tiger – actually a man in fancy dress – inform the camera: “That beats doing Frosties ads for a living!”

Despite the farcical nature of the case against him, Holland had his reputation, job, family life and health destroyed as a result. This is just one of many examples of the harm caused by this legislation.

Things, however, are about to change. Here’s a snippet of Mistress Magpie Corvid’s article in the New Statesman:

“In a letter to the head of the Crown Prosecution Service, Holland’s solicitors have claimed that even five years after its enactment, the law is so unclear and poorly understood – including by police, prosecutors and solicitors – that it too easily traps the innocent. Assisted by a specialist legal team and advised by the sexual freedom campaigning group Backlash, the former defendant has called on CPS head Allison Saunders to review the implementation of Section 63; if no such review is forthcoming, the law will be challenged via judicial review… In the challenge, Holland’s legal team, advised by Backlash, emphasise the Act’s violations of human rights. With the concept of “extreme” pornography poorly defined, and without reliable guidance from CPS to prosecutors, individuals find it difficult to determine what is and isn’t legal. Perhaps, this is why a law which experts predicted would get less than 30 cases a year has had over 5,000 convictions since its inception. It’s impossible to know how many people have pleaded guilty to possession of images that were not actually unlawful.”

Read the full New Statesman article here.

Learn more about Backlash here.

Read a blog on the case by Obscenity Lawyer here.

Read an article for Politics.co.uk by Jane Fae here.

Read the Independent article here.

Moral Panic Film Club

Leave a reply

I’ve spoken before about Backlash and the important work they do, but now they have a special treat for you. Here are a few details from the Facebook event:

“Did you know that you could potentially be prosecuted for taking consensual, private pictures of yourself or your partner, if the government deems them to be obscene?

Join us in an evening of disgust and moral panic to raise funds to support Backlash UK’s academic, legal and campaigning resources defending freedom of sexual expression and the right to personal privacy.

The evening will consist of film, talks and round table discussions by specialists including our solicitors, external campaigners and academics, then music and drinks until closing time!

When: Friday, February 7th 2014, form 7pm till late.
Where: Hackney Attic, 270 Mare Street, London, E8 1HE

Tickets: available on the Hackney Attic website.
Single ticket price: £15

Why a fundraiser? As Backlash becomes better known, more people are turning to our solicitors for help. Court cases are costly but important affairs, because they ensure that our defendants get a fair trial by being represented by specialist lawyers who defend adult’s freedom of sexual expression; their right to participate in all consensual sexual activities and to watch, read and create any fictional interpretation of such in any media. All money raised will go the increasing amount of court cases that Backlash has been asked to assist with.
The current moral panic has resulted in Backlash’ solicitors’ expertise being increasingly on demand to advise and often, represent, people charged with crimes that go from the possession of extreme images of consenting adults, to OPA charges of creators of artistic content and sexual discrimination at employment tribunals…”

Got to the Facebook page for more information on the event and to vote for a previously banned film to screen at the Moral Panic Film Club. Current nominees are:

1. A Serbian Film
2. Caligula
3. Deep Throat
4. Freaks
5. Dawn Of The Dead
6. Henry – Portrait Of A Serial Killer
7. L’Empire Des Sens (In The Realm Of The Senses)
8. Salo 
9. The Devils
10. The Texas Chain Saw Massacre
11. Tenebrae
12. The Human Centipede 2

98a8i (1)

Blurred Lines

3 Replies

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.

bl_slogo