Study in Hypocrisy

The proposal is shot through with hypocrisy. Here are some examples…

It should be illegal to possess extreme pornography. Why just pornography ?

Given that the Government’s specific reasons (see justifications) for singling out pornography don’t work, it’s inconsistent not to ban all violent material (e.g. mainstream horror films).

It’s also inconsistent not to ban the practices that correspond to the pornography – i.e.consensually violent sexual activities and (consensual) role play of non-consensual activities.

Why the inconsistency? Because the Government is essentially telling people how to have sex, but pornography is an easier target.

Violent material should be illegal
to possess if it was produced primarily for the purpose of sexual arousal.
Why not also make it illegal to possess violent material if it is owned primarily for the purpose of sexual arousal (regardless of why it was produced)? I.e. if someone is aroused by watching mainstream horror films, why not make that illegal too?

Again, pornography is an easier target.

Extreme pornography might be
seen by children.
But so might
• normal pornography
• certificate 18 films
Extreme pornography causes violent behaviour. Aside from doubts already mentioned, there’s a much better case for saying the same of
• religious practices and materials
• alcohol
  • © Backlash 2005-2014. Articles may be reproduced elsewhere, provided attribution of authorship is preserved. We would prefer reproduced articles to link back to
    This site does not use cookies
  • Backlash is an umbrella organisation providing academic, legal and campaigning resources defending freedom of sexual expression. We support the rights of adults to participate in all consensual sexual activities and to watch, read and create any fictional interpretation of such in any media.