No Porn Please, We're British

Post Reply
ronmcd
Posts: 603
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 4:13 pm
Location: Sunny Scotland
Contact:

Re: No Porn Please, We're British

Post by ronmcd » Tue Jul 23, 2013 10:48 pm

mistermack wrote:
ronmcd wrote: If the material APPEARS to be completely real, ie violent rape, and it was created for pornographic distribution, then possessing it (ie downloading it) will be illegal.
I honestly don't see where you are getting that from. There's nothing in the excerpt that you posted that indicates that.
How do you come to that conclusion, when the defence of apparent and not real is so clearly stated?

What's the difference between simulated, and "apparent and not real" ? It seems clear to me that the two have exactly the same meaning.
The act is real in rape porn. It's not apparent. The only question is if the participants are acting in terms of intent - the violent rapist and the victim. The only people that part might help might be the "actors", as long as they didnt intend it for distribution. Which rape porn actors would presumably. Here is the quote again:
There is also a defence for those who can prove that they participated in the act depicted, that the extreme nature of the act was apparent and not real and there is no intention to distribute the material.
And therefore the material would be illegal if it was recorded as porn with the intention of distributing it.

Your original link to the English CPS, I agree that it is more concerned with violent acts which present a danger to people, so doesnt cover rape porn, only violent rapes with apparent danger (not sure theres any other kind, but anyway). Thats why its being changed. But the Scottish law already includes rape as well as violent rape.

The recent law in scotland explicitly states acting is not excluded, it's now covered by the law in Scotland, for rape as well as violent rape. If it's "explicit and realistic". I found the part in the current Scottish law:
The question of whether an act depicts in a realistic and explicit way an act of rape or other non-consensual penetrative sexual activity will be for the court to determine. An image or series of images made using actors may, depending on the context, nonetheless fall within the definition if the depiction is explicit and realistic.

User avatar
mistermack
Posts: 15093
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 10:57 am
About me: Never rong.
Contact:

Re: No Porn Please, We're British

Post by mistermack » Tue Jul 23, 2013 11:35 pm

ronmcd wrote: The act is real in rape porn. It's not apparent.
Well, that's the crux of where we differ.
Yes, the "act" is real. Real sex. Not real rape. You're jumping from one to the other with no justification.

It's not illegal to depict real sex. Only real rape.
Simulated rape is real sex, but fake compulsion.

The extreme nature of the act is the compulsion, not the sex. Consenting sex is not of extreme nature at all.
And the defence clearly says " that the extreme nature of the act was apparent and not real ".
The compulsion is exactly that in a rape simulation. Apparent, not real.
The question of whether an act depicts in a realistic and explicit way an act of rape or other non-consensual penetrative s
exual activity will be for the court to determine. An image or series of images made using actors may, depending on the context, nonetheless fall within the definition if the depiction is explicit and realistic.
This could mean virtually anything. It's just a bland catch-all statement.
"May, depending on the context" tells you nothing. I'm sure that the actual law is more specific than that.

It basically takes you back to what I said at the start. Simulated rape is a grey area that goes all the way from black to white, with no dividing lines.
All that bit in red tells us is that a judge can draw a line wherever he likes, depending on the mood he's in. I'm sure that the actual law will need to be more precise than that.
While there is a market for shit, there will be assholes to supply it.

ronmcd
Posts: 603
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 4:13 pm
Location: Sunny Scotland
Contact:

Re: No Porn Please, We're British

Post by ronmcd » Wed Jul 24, 2013 12:14 am

mistermack wrote:
It basically takes you back to what I said at the start. Simulated rape is a grey area that goes all the way from black to white, with no dividing lines.
All that bit in red tells us is that a judge can draw a line wherever he likes, depending on the mood he's in. I'm sure that the actual law will need to be more precise than that.
*sigh* the actual law in Scotland which does already exist and has been enacted, IS more precise. There are conditions it has to meet, but the point is if they are met then images which involved actors are not exempt ... IF the criteria are met. Go and read the whole law if you like.

In England and Wales rape porn is legal, and Cameron etc are wanting to change that, which would bring the law roughly in line with Scotland.
I have no doubt whatsoever that they want to make rape PORN illegal (photos as well as videos), not videos of actual rapes. It isn't about actual rapes, it's about porn.

Now, you might be right that it will be a minefield, legally, to try and prosecute someone. But that is the intention, to make rape porn illegal.

User avatar
mistermack
Posts: 15093
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 10:57 am
About me: Never rong.
Contact:

Re: No Porn Please, We're British

Post by mistermack » Wed Jul 24, 2013 12:26 am

Right. All that's established is that simulated rape is NOT illegal in Scotland.
It's illegal in certain mysterious non-defined circumstances.

And just to fuck it up even more, there is a clearly worded allowable defence. So the law as it stands is self-contradictory.
Well done, Scottish lawmakers. They have fucked up and left a mess.

That's what happens when you devolve serious legal matters to local amateurs.

If Cameron intends to copy that mess, he'll deserve all he gets.
But I'm pretty sure he won't. It's all for show, and vote-getting.

Once the election is over, it will probably be left simmering till the next one.
While there is a market for shit, there will be assholes to supply it.

User avatar
mistermack
Posts: 15093
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 10:57 am
About me: Never rong.
Contact:

Re: No Porn Please, We're British

Post by mistermack » Wed Jul 24, 2013 12:26 am

Edit double post. Fuck it, I never clicked it twice.
While there is a market for shit, there will be assholes to supply it.

ronmcd
Posts: 603
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 4:13 pm
Location: Sunny Scotland
Contact:

Re: No Porn Please, We're British

Post by ronmcd » Wed Jul 24, 2013 8:24 am

mistermack wrote:Right. All that's established is that simulated rape is NOT illegal in Scotland.
It's illegal in certain mysterious non-defined circumstances.
No, where an image meets certain criteria, it is a criminal offence to possess it or distribute it. AND there is an additional note making clear that the people in the image could be actors but that doesnt prevent the image being caught by the law, basically if it looks genuine, "if the depiction is explicit and realistic".
mistermack wrote:And just to fuck it up even more, there is a clearly worded allowable defence. So the law as it stands is self-contradictory.
No, there is a clearly worded defense for people who were involved in the act ONLY, that it was not real (ie not rape), and was (crucially) NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION.
There is also a defence for those who can prove that they participated in the act depicted, that the extreme nature of the act was apparent and not real and there is no intention to distribute the material.

ronmcd
Posts: 603
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 4:13 pm
Location: Sunny Scotland
Contact:

Re: No Porn Please, We're British

Post by ronmcd » Wed Jul 24, 2013 8:27 am

mistermack wrote: Well done, Scottish lawmakers. They have fucked up and left a mess.
That's debateable, but all laws are written with some complexity to catch the particular circumstances intended. Maybe you should write all England's laws, I'm sure you would find it simple and straighforward.

User avatar
mistermack
Posts: 15093
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 10:57 am
About me: Never rong.
Contact:

Re: No Porn Please, We're British

Post by mistermack » Wed Jul 24, 2013 1:46 pm

Re the allowable defence, you're assuming that you have to fulfill all three exceptions.
It doesn't say that.
It doesn't say that any single one qualifies either. Basically, the Scottish Government can't even write a summary, without fucking it up. I just hope that the actual law is clearer. But I really doubt it.

Maybe I could write better law that the Scots. Maybe not. But nobody could fuck it up any better than that official crap on the website.
Nice work, Alex.
While there is a market for shit, there will be assholes to supply it.

ronmcd
Posts: 603
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 4:13 pm
Location: Sunny Scotland
Contact:

Re: No Porn Please, We're British

Post by ronmcd » Wed Jul 24, 2013 2:59 pm

mistermack wrote:Re the allowable defence, you're assuming that you have to fulfill all three exceptions.
It doesn't say that.
It doesn't say that any single one qualifies either. Basically, the Scottish Government can't even write a summary, without fucking it up. I just hope that the actual law is clearer. But I really doubt it.

Maybe I could write better law that the Scots. Maybe not. But nobody could fuck it up any better than that official crap on the website.
Nice work, Alex.

I'm going to forward this thread to legal authorities everywhere, your excellence & expertise in legal draughtsmanship cannot be allowed to go unseen by those with the power to implement such ... well, genius.

Beatsong
Posts: 444
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 11:33 am
Contact:

Re: No Porn Please, We're British

Post by Beatsong » Wed Jul 24, 2013 3:04 pm

The Scottish law makes perfect sense to me, and it seems clear to me from reading it that the exception you are referring to requires all three conditions to be met.

To be honest I've been a bit lost trying to follow the conversation of the last few pages, because you don't always seem clear on the difference between (a) the Scottish law, (b) the English law as it is now and (c) the English law as it is intended to become.

My understanding is that the English law currently contains most elements of the Scottish law (ie banning images of sex with animals, acts that are physically injurious etc.), but doesn't outlaw the depiction of simulated rape, as the Scottish law does. The purpose of the proposed changes Cameron is talking about is to introduce such a ban upon possessing depictions of simulated rape, bringing England broadly into line with Scotland.

The discussion about images of ACTUAL rape is a red herring, because possession of those is already illegal in both jurisdictions. As for the different types or degrees of simulated rape, the Scottish law specifies that the depiction must be explicit and realistic. I would interpret "explicit" as meaning the actual sex acts are shown, as opposed to just two actors close to each other trying to act out a rape by the expressions on their faces, as sometimes occurs in a mainstream movie. But I'm no lawyer and could be wrong about that.

We don't know what exact wording the English law will take - it's currently an intention, not a fully drafted law, so there's no point speculating about that. It may be virtually the same as the Scottish law, or may not.

But I'm not aware of any evidence that the law in Scotland has been particularly problematic to implement or given rise to any more contentious cases than other laws. Some degree of interpretation and exception is normal in law, and there's no reason to suggest that a legal change will need to be immune to the need for that to be workable. Law is almost never that simple.

User avatar
mistermack
Posts: 15093
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 10:57 am
About me: Never rong.
Contact:

Re: No Porn Please, We're British

Post by mistermack » Wed Jul 24, 2013 3:34 pm

ronmcd wrote:
mistermack wrote:Re the allowable defence, you're assuming that you have to fulfill all three exceptions.
It doesn't say that.
It doesn't say that any single one qualifies either. Basically, the Scottish Government can't even write a summary, without fucking it up. I just hope that the actual law is clearer. But I really doubt it.

Maybe I could write better law that the Scots. Maybe not. But nobody could fuck it up any better than that official crap on the website.
Nice work, Alex.

I'm going to forward this thread to legal authorities everywhere, your excellence & expertise in legal draughtsmanship cannot be allowed to go unseen by those with the power to implement such ... well, genius.
They will hardly take the word of a dumb cunt like you though, will they?
While there is a market for shit, there will be assholes to supply it.

User avatar
mistermack
Posts: 15093
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 10:57 am
About me: Never rong.
Contact:

Re: No Porn Please, We're British

Post by mistermack » Wed Jul 24, 2013 3:49 pm

The conversation was about the claim that depicting simulated rape was illegal in Scotland. Which turned out to be bollocks.
Simulated rape CAN in some circumstances be illegal in Scotland. Depicting rape with actors CAN, if it's extremely graphic and realistic, and other non-explained conditions are met, be illegal. On a thursday, in a month with an R in it, if the judge is in a bad mood.

Of course, as simulated rape goes all the way from silly horseplay, through dominance/submission and bondage, right up to something that could be extremely disturbing and horrific, it makes sense to leave it open to be able to convict those who push the really horrific examples of it.

That's an awful lot different to claiming that possessing a depiction of simulated rape is illegal in Scotland.
While there is a market for shit, there will be assholes to supply it.

Beatsong
Posts: 444
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 11:33 am
Contact:

Re: No Porn Please, We're British

Post by Beatsong » Wed Jul 24, 2013 5:36 pm

mistermack wrote:The conversation was about the claim that depicting simulated rape was illegal in Scotland. Which turned out to be bollocks.
Simulated rape CAN in some circumstances be illegal in Scotland. Depicting rape with actors CAN, if it's extremely graphic and realistic, and other non-explained conditions are met, be illegal. On a thursday, in a month with an R in it, if the judge is in a bad mood.

Of course, as simulated rape goes all the way from silly horseplay, through dominance/submission and bondage, right up to something that could be extremely disturbing and horrific, it makes sense to leave it open to be able to convict those who push the really horrific examples of it.

That's an awful lot different to claiming that possessing a depiction of simulated rape is illegal in Scotland.
No it isn't.

Possession of pornography explicitly simulating rape in Scotland is illegal. That's the law. Yes, the law relies on the qualifier "explicit". So what? There is also one, very specific exception to that law which appears to be perfectly clear and understandable to everyone else, but for some reason incomprehensible to you. Again, so what?

You act as though the existence of such qualifiers and exceptions renders the law wholly irrational and ridiculous, as if we are living in some neat perfect world where laws never have exceptions. But of course we aren't. The law is no different in this respect from plenty of other laws that function perfectly well.

User avatar
Strontium Dog
Posts: 2229
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 3:28 am
About me: Navy Seals are not seals
Location: Liverpool, UK
Contact:

Re: No Porn Please, We're British

Post by Strontium Dog » Wed Jul 24, 2013 5:59 pm

I see no reason why footage of consensual sex between adults should ever be illegal. Frankly, moralising fascists can go fuck themselves (but not film it, obviously).
100% verifiable facts or your money back. Anti-fascist. Enemy of woo - theistic or otherwise. Cloth is not an antiviral. Imagination and fantasy is no substitute for tangible reality. Wishing doesn't make it real.

"If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear" - George Orwell

"I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!" - Barry Goldwater

ronmcd
Posts: 603
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 4:13 pm
Location: Sunny Scotland
Contact:

Re: No Porn Please, We're British

Post by ronmcd » Wed Jul 24, 2013 6:22 pm

Strontium Dog wrote:I see no reason why footage of consensual sex between adults should ever be illegal. Frankly, moralising fascists can go fuck themselves (but not film it, obviously).
I'm not sure there is any suggestion footage (or images) of consensual sex would be illegal. That necessarily excludes rape.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 27 guests