Nitpicking - are you a criminal?

So the deal with the new porn laws. Let's get back to that, shall we? Glitterditch is calling for lawyers, or at least a healthy set of government guidelines, because we really want to be clear on this.

We've been reviewing the small print, and trying to work out what the deal is. So far we know that you are not allowed to possess an 'extreme pornographic image.' So far so horribly confusing. We're all adults here, and 'pornographic' causes few problems, but what exactly does 'extreme' mean? Jenna Jameson has an extremely lizardy face, but that's probably still legal, no matter how visually disturbing it is. These ladies have boobs that are so extreme they need to cock up the spelling of the word for emphasis, but we don't think that counts either.

What does seem to count, however, is whether people in the videos are getting beaten up. Which is what has got the kids over at InformedConsent all hot under the collar.

The ladies, gentlemen and transsexuals who frequent the website are all there because they enjoy some combination of hitting, being hit, and wearing stupid rubber knickers, and they're worried that they won't be able to get their jollies when the new laws come into force. Glitterditch is as angry as the next man about the laws themselves, but can't really see the government taking the extreme measure of banning Thelma and Louise because people might pop boners over the rape scene.

And before you start calling us out and telling us that's a joke thread, we'll throw our hands up and admit that we know. We just wanted to draw your attention away from the far more worrying suggestion that the law will apply to extracted clips as well as whole films. Which means that you can own the DVD of 'Boys Don't Cry', but if you've edited a Hilary Swank Rape Hot Highlights section, then you may be in a whole world of trouble. Just FYI. Start wiping that hard drive.

Image courtesy of storem on Flickr. And Giambologna, natch.

Written by Nikki on 15 May 2008 3:46 PM. Permalink