Thought crime in the UK; Redux

[izzfan]

Hi, I have decided to start a new thread rather than continuing the one I made a few weeks back for several reasons. Firstly, the previous one went off topic slightly. This is not a bad thing and there were some really interesting debates but I have recently read some new and shocking news which I feel merits a new thread to bring it back on topic.

Today I read on melonfarmers that Harry Cohen's very sensible proposed amendments to the Government's "extreme pornography" bill [which would have exempted depictions of material between consenting adults] have not passed (http://www.melonfarmers.co.uk/gch.htm#Extreme_Censorial_Violence). As it stands, this bill could land anyone in possession consensual BDSM images in the UK in prison for 3 years and mentioned on the sex offender's register.

For a Government that bleats on about 'tolerance', 'diversity' etc... every five minutes or so then this is a very hypocritical measure. This legislation is very open to interpretation and even if this Government doesn't use it to aggressively persecute anyone who is into BDSM then what's to stop a future government interpereting the law in such a way?

Apparently the Government is now trying to justify its totalitarian bull....sorry, bill by claiming that viewing BDSM material is 'harmful', I agree that viewing non-consensual material is probably not a good thing. But the ambiguous wording of the bill makes no difference between consensual and non-consensual activity..... a disturbing thing in itself. But to claim that someone is 'harmed' by watching BDSM is absurd.... in fact I would actually say the complete opposite. If someone has a highly sadistic aspect to their sexuality, surely it is better to allow them a safe, legal outlet for these desires [eg: consensual BDSM pornography] rather than blocking ANY such outlet and waiting for any possible tragic consequences.

Also, there is the psychological issue - by banning and persecuting all BDSM material and, by extension, those of us who happen to [for reasons we do not know] be into BDSM. Surely constantly living in fear of the Blairite gestapo knocking on our bedroom doors, keeping said BDSM inclinations in the closet for fear of derision and prejudice (which will be fuelled by the new law) and all the self-hatred this will inevitably generate, to be rendered virtually uneployable and seen as pariahs if the NKVD...sorry, police catch you with a picture of some consensual whipping, bondage [even if it is a photograph of yourself] etc... I'm sure all of that is about a million times more harmful than any possible "harm" caused by viewing S&M images.

S&M is in the same place homosexuality and bisexuality were back in the 1950s... there is widespread stereotyping and even criminalisation [look up the "spanner case" in the 90s which effectively criminalised a lot of consensual BDSM activities] of sadomasochists. There are very few groups fighting for BDSM rights - the only ones I can think of are the spanner trust and backlash. Prejudice against those who happen to enjoy consensual BDSM goes unchecked and is legal. A large numbers of sadomasochists still feel compelled to remain in the closet out of fear.

If this authoritarian and repressive law is passed, things will only get worse... it needs to be stopped! Once, Britain was a nation of tolerance, freedom and democracy and it was envied by many people abroad because of this.....but thanks to New Labour, Britain is slowly turning into something that is beginning to resemble soviet Russia. The people are cowering in fear of a Government which, had it been around a few decades back, would have probably been quite rightly thrown out of office swiftly (possibly even by force). We can't protest near parliament any more, our troops are fighting America's war in Iraq, we can't speak freely in case someone somewhere is "offended", we can't enjoy a cigarette in our pubs, we are tyrannised by the 'health and safety' brigade, we will soon get identity cards and have lots of additonal personal information held by a Government that can't even keep 2 discs safe, our motorists are overtaxed [we need US fuel prices!], where environmentalism is used to justify micro-managing people's rubbish, our Government will probably try to impose extra restictions of drinking (it just can't stand the thought of people having fun), our family courts are heavily prejudiced against fathers..... I could go on for ages about what a crappy country the UK has become over the past decade thanks to Blair and Brown but this post would be more of an essay than it already is.

The scary thing is that this proposed law doesn't shock me too much... of course, the implications of it scare the hell out of me but they do not 'shock' me. It is certainly a tragic age where people are so used to having their liberties trampled on by repressive, absolutist legislation that they eventually do not see it as shocking. Maybe I was just unlucky to be born in the late 80s... as I did not grow up in a time when this country was a much better place [eg: 60s-80s].... I know it wasn't perfect back then but at least the Government didn't constantly meddle and intervene in people's private lives.

Izzfan :flag3:

[darkeyes]

Once, Britain was a nation of tolerance, freedom and democracy and it was envied by many people abroad because of this.....but thanks to New Labour, Britain is slowly turning into something that is beginning to resemble soviet Russia. The people are cowering in fear of a Government which, had it been around a few decades back, would have probably been quite rightly thrown out of office swiftly (possibly even by force). Izzfan :flag3:

Izzie Izzie..me agrees wivya on lotsa wotya says..moren ya mite imagine... but don imagine that Britain wos always such a triff cradle of freedom an liberty..like every otha place on this planet it has always had its darker side, an measures passed by Kings, Lord Protectors an Parliaments wich wer intended 2 restrict our freedoms, It always has been the case, and it remains the case..an the next government will make sure they get in ther share!!

Aint gonna go inta the specifics of wotya mention... its lotsa thhings but it aint totalitarism. An abuse of the democratic system by a government wiv totalitarian tendencies sure, an a bit nannyish.. but Cameron an the Tories will do ther bit..an nannyish will b dropped from the agenda.. thats Torysim how it has always been, an always will b...

But me complaint boutya post is only wotya says in the bit me quoted above. We have been a beacon of a form of democracy an liberty sure..an tolerance certainly..in the main.. but always wiv qualifications.. an that persists an will persist for a long time yet. Aint similar 2 Soviet Russia by a long way... sure ther r many things wich r sinister an yas mentioned lotsa them..they r similar 2 every regime on the planet..they lead on sum an play catch up wiv othas.. all of it means we spied on an kept a eye on more an more an this will 2 continue.... but the real crux of ya post is this... that we r cowerin in fear of the government???? Jeez babes...don make me laff! Fear?? Look around ya at every shop, pub an bus, train street an footie crowd.... dus they look an sound as if they in fear of the government??? Government always cum inta office an give peeps jope of reel change..an they always blow it...an they always end up as butt of all jokes... Blair's Brood, now Brown's Bonkeronia wer no diff...same will happen 2 Cameron's Clowns if God forbid they eva gets elected. In end they r held up 2 scorn an ridicule an out they go on ther arses!

No Izzie..we don live in fear of government..as ne who reely knows this country will tellya..they mite h8 wot governments do an grumble an moan bout it... even gerrup of ther arses every so often an take the bastards on head first..but scared of em??? Thats jus a tadge fanciful.

Ther is much 2 fear in the UK an me don dismiss ne of it. Violence, crime, drug use hypocrisy, the rise of the BNP, the disenchantment of youth an the immigrant community, the way the fuzz act an throw ther weight bout, as well as many otha parts of the community, the increase in xenophobia, summa the measures passed by placed before parliament, but of Government as an institution? Ya's havin a laff aintcha?

Sad thing is Iggie..we aint...but we mayb shud b..certainly we shud b more wary of the sods..an more questionin.. an actin more directly 2 stop mosta the more authoratarian measures they pass... summa the 1s ya mentioned aint so much authoratarian as populist.... even considered by many as beneficial..smokin in public places bein 1... not all.. but sum. But babes.. no..yas rong..we don cower from em..we may h8 wot they dus..but as brits do invariably in faca summat they don like...they ridicule it...

[FalconAngel]

This is really bad.

When I was in the UK (23years ago) I remember it as being pretty progressive, sexually. I guess all good things come to an end, unfortunately.

It's legislation like that which is the beginning of the end for our freedoms. We have similar issues here ever since the supposed "patriot act" was pushed through.
And while we may not agree about the things that we are into, sexually, we can all agree that what happens between consenting adults is their business and not the governments.

I would bet that the people behind that proposed legislation is just like the "faith-based" initiatives that get started here. Some church group decides what they think is bad and try to make church doctrine into law.

In our case, we have a clearly defined seperation of church and state which has helped to curtail some efforts, but not enough.

We can only hope that the "extreme pornography" law does not pass there, or gets changed to allow for consensual acts.

[darkeyes]

An actually Falcon Angel..jus 2 clear up ya point on this...the UK is a far freer an betta place for the Gay bi an TG community than it eva has been..an mucha that is down 2 the present government... it remains in many ways progressive (tho in othas God help us, much less so) an that has been born out by its progressive an in the main, compassionate treatment of the likes of us, an it still is, tho even the best of us sumtimes make mistakes an its attitude 2 s&m seems 2 b a reel howler.. at present the government is hardly the best of us... but dus give credit wer its due an overall, on Gay Bi an TG the UK has make lotsa progress since 1996 wen it wos 1st elected...

[Germanicus]

Its funny, but in this posting, and in the prior thread on this issue, there was no mention of why this piece of legislation came about.

The context is important, since it puts these whinges about "totalitarian government" into perspective:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/crime/article/0,,1862752,00.html

[izzfan]

Germanicus....where do I start?

Let us begin by the fact that this article includes a lenghty quote from Julie Bindel, the same Julie Bindel who made various transphobic comments a while ago [ you can see her bigoted rantings for yourself here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/weekend/story/0,3605,1134099,00.html] and I find it hard to take her seriously. The article leaves out any comment from members of the BDSM community....ok, it has a couple of anti-censorship people so it isn't totally unbalanced, yet not consulting the people it will eventually criminalise sort of makes the article lose crdibility in my opinion.

Ad Hominem criticisms of Julie Bindel aside, as for the Longhurst case - sorry if this sounds cold, but just because one unbalanced person who happens to watch "extreme pornography" ends up killing someone does not mean that all people who are into BDSM are killers. To blame a murder on a few images is absurd to say the least - it is an easy scapegoat.
Also, there is the emotive aspect of all of this - most of the fuss about "extreme pornography" has been kicked up by hysterical mindless tabloids and there is nothing Governments like more than knee-jerk legislation [look at the 1984 video recordings act caused by a panic about 'video nasties', or the 1997 ban on licensed handguns etc...] - a Government should be rational and look at facts (not biased 'studies' conducted by feminists and people who hate porn of any kind which deliberately don't consult the BDSM community.... despite the fact that the legislation would affect them) and logic rather than the latest panic-laden headlines of the gutter press . The fact is that more than 99% of people who view consensual BDSM images are not muderers and to claim [as the government seem to be doing] that all sadmomasochists are murderous psychopaths just because of the actions of one person is ignorant at least and just plain, genuinely offensive (and I don't mean this in the whingning politically correct sense of the word) at most.

As for the "snuff movies" mentioned in the article you posted. If you look at my previous thread on the subject, I make it clear that non-consensual material should be criminalised. In fact the reason I have started a second post on the same theme is because a sensible and wise amendment propsed by Harry Cohen MP which would have exempted consesnual material has been rejected and the proposed law continues in its original form.

Germanicus, how would you like it if the Government passed a law effectively criminalising your sexuality and also implying that you are somehow a dangerous psychopath? Would you meekly accept their propaganda and start preparing for imprisonment or would you let the righteous anger pass through you and campaign against it, raise awareness of the issues and fight against it as much as possible?

Darkeyes, I'm not a tory but surely having less of a nanny state is a good thing? I, for one, would like to be treated like an adult by the Government. As for your view that people don't fear the state.... I would love to agree with you but with all this hysteria about 'terror' that the Government seems to be whipping up in order to pass repressive legislation, I;d say that this Government is trying to rule partially by fear [ I mean, in the past we had a much greater number of terror attacks, from the IRA rather than Islamic fanatics, and there was much less hysteria back then].

Also, with trying to ban everything and threatening ordinary people with arrest etc... for doing things that were legal a few years ago (protesting near parliament, enjoying a pint and a fag [the british meaning of the term, I don't want any americans taking offence] in a pub, criticising religions etc...) I;'d say this Government is trying to scare people into mindless obedience.

Izzfan :flag3:

[diB4u]

Today on my lunch break, I was watching the news and this came up. In the area where I live a Ts who was reported as a transvestite was strangled to death.

I have provided the short link...

It's so sad, and the news reporter later on- I saw the local news, state that the person was familiar to the local woman... 'But is not a danger to the local public'.... Basically what he meant was well thats up to you to judge.

My sorrows go to the family.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7108720.stm

[Germanicus]

Germanicus....where do I start?

Let us begin by the fact that this article includes a lenghty quote from Julie Bindel, the same Julie Bindel who made various transphobic comments a while ago [ you can see her bigoted rantings for yourself here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/weekend/story/0,3605,1134099,00.html] and I find it hard to take her seriously. The article leaves out any comment from members of the BDSM community....ok, it has a couple of anti-censorship people so it isn't totally unbalanced, yet not consulting the people it will eventually criminalise sort of makes the article lose crdibility in my opinion.

Ad Hominem criticisms of Julie Bindel aside, as for the Longhurst case - sorry if this sounds cold, but just because one unbalanced person who happens to watch "extreme pornography" ends up killing someone does not mean that all people who are into BDSM are killers. To blame a murder on a few images is absurd to say the least - it is an easy scapegoat.
Also, there is the emotive aspect of all of this - most of the fuss about "extreme pornography" has been kicked up by hysterical mindless tabloids and there is nothing Governments like more than knee-jerk legislation [look at the 1984 video recordings act caused by a panic about 'video nasties', or the 1997 ban on licensed handguns etc...] - a Government should be rational and look at facts (not biased 'studies' conducted by feminists and people who hate porn of any kind which deliberately don't consult the BDSM community.... despite the fact that the legislation would affect them) and logic rather than the latest panic-laden headlines of the gutter press . The fact is that more than 99% of people who view consensual BDSM images are not muderers and to claim [as the government seem to be doing] that all sadmomasochists are murderous psychopaths just because of the actions of one person is ignorant at least and just plain, genuinely offensive (and I don't mean this in the whingning politically correct sense of the word) at most.

As for the "snuff movies" mentioned in the article you posted. If you look at my previous thread on the subject, I make it clear that non-consensual material should be criminalised. In fact the reason I have started a second post on the same theme is because a sensible and wise amendment propsed by Harry Cohen MP which would have exempted consesnual material has been rejected and the proposed law continues in its original form.

Germanicus, how would you like it if the Government passed a law effectively criminalising your sexuality and also implying that you are somehow a dangerous psychopath? Would you meekly accept their propaganda and start preparing for imprisonment or would you let the righteous anger pass through you and campaign against it, raise awareness of the issues and fight against it as much as possible?

Darkeyes, I'm not a tory but surely having less of a nanny state is a good thing? I, for one, would like to be treated like an adult by the Government. As for your view that people don't fear the state.... I would love to agree with you but with all this hysteria about 'terror' that the Government seems to be whipping up in order to pass repressive legislation, I;d say that this Government is trying to rule partially by fear [ I mean, in the past we had a much greater number of terror attacks, from the IRA rather than Islamic fanatics, and there was much less hysteria back then].

Also, with trying to ban everything and threatening ordinary people with arrest etc... for doing things that were legal a few years ago (protesting near parliament, enjoying a pint and a fag [the british meaning of the term, I don't want any americans taking offence] in a pub, criticising religions etc...) I;'d say this Government is trying to scare people into mindless obedience.

Izzfan :flag3:

Izz, rant less since you sound like those you rage against.

Finally, having grown up under 18 years of Tory mis-rule (and spending three of them as an undergraduate at the same university as you) ... I could go on, but life is too short and its Friday night

[darkeyes]

Izzie don confuse fear of government with fear of summa the things they try 2 warn ya against..ther is reason 2 fear terrorism an they use that2 get away wiv things we wud othawise accept. Peeps aint scared of the government yas gettin 2 b an sound silly now... sumtimes they may fear summa the tools of governemnt an in sum cases that is rite an just... ifyas a naughty boy r gal, or a fraudster or drug supplier a murderer... but of government iself??? naa babes..its jus aint the way of things in this country an aint been for a long long time. Governments will always try an scare ya inta lettin em do things but it aint the same as bein scared of government itself. They try 2 rule by fear not of them, but of that wich they tell us we shud fear..sumtimes they rite 2...often they aint.

An don xaggerate gain...they aint tryin 2 ban everythin... they do sumtimes get it rong an badly rong..its arguable wetha the smokin ban is rite or rong...me an x smoker who happens 2 hav been opposed 2 the ban, cos the majority of peeps who enjoy a smoke r the working classes an the poorer end of society.. Beer an fags wos summat they enjoy an the pub wer they luffed 2 b 2 do it an socialise wiv ther m8s. Also plays havoc wiv me an me m8s havin a joint in clubs..but thats anotha issue! The argument is that it wos a health issue..an actually me dus accept that... accept that it shud b dun in workplaces mostly, but ther r a few exceptions wich they hav overruled..it is the severity an the lack of provision for smokers themselves wich is the prob..its an addiction an its a leagl addiction..no thought has been made to provide for them.. it is in short 2 draconian a measure..an ifya look at the stats an the polls tho..its actually a popular measure... ther is nanny an nanny.. me actually a believer in the nanny state..the health an social care state wich looks afat us from cradle 2 grave..gives us health care, education an provides a bottom limit through dole an social security payments through wich no 1 will fall..an no 1 will starve cos they cant work. Ya can b too nannyish, me accepts that an ther r times me cud scream at summa it...but essentially the priniple is rite... believe me..if it wosnt ther..ya wud hav summat 2 scream bout..but it is an its rite that it is.

An actually peps have never had the rite 2 demonstarte ouside parliamnt wile it is in session..they can demonstrate in 1 way by lobbyin their MPs actually inside the building itself. They even letya out gain if ya says wot they don wanna hear.

Finally.. scare us inta mindless obedience huh?? yep...they always hav..an they will always try.... but they don often manage 2 get ther train inta the station!!

[darkeyes]

Izz, rant less since you sound like those you rage against.

Finally, having grown up under 18 years of Tory mis-rule (and spending three of them as an undergraduate at the same university as you) ... I could go on, but life is too short and its Friday night

Aint that the truth Germanicus babes...:tong:

[FalconAngel]

An actually Falcon Angel..jus 2 clear up ya point on this...the UK is a far freer an betta place for the Gay bi an TG community than it eva has been..an mucha that is down 2 the present government... it remains in many ways progressive (tho in othas God help us, much less so) an that has been born out by its progressive an in the main, compassionate treatment of the likes of us, an it still is, tho even the best of us sumtimes make mistakes an its attitude 2 s&m seems 2 b a reel howler.. at present the government is hardly the best of us... but dus give credit wer its due an overall, on Gay Bi an TG the UK has make lotsa progress since 1996 wen it wos 1st elected...

Glad to hear that it is still far more progressive than here. But then, there have been some great strides all over the free world as far as GLBT rights and protections.
At least there is that, but when any government starts to enter the bedroom with legislation to tell us what consenting adults can and can't watch or do, then it is the beginning of a serious regression back to when it was a crime to be anything but straight. That may sound extreme, but if legislation like that passes, then it is only the beginning. In many ways, small legislation is the way to start building up more restrictive legislation.
No one notices when things are whittled away a little bit at a time. And they don't object to little things going away until they one day wake up and realize that all of the things that made life good for them is no longer legal.

We must be watchful of those.

The real price of freedom is vigilance.

[darkeyes]

Glad to hear that it is still far more progressive than here. But then, there have been some great strides all over the free world as far as GLBT rights and protections.
At least there is that, but when any government starts to enter the bedroom with legislation to tell us what consenting adults can and can't watch or do, then it is the beginning of a serious regression back to when it was a crime to be anything but straight. That may sound extreme, but if legislation like that passes, then it is only the beginning. In many ways, small legislation is the way to start building up more restrictive legislation.
No one notices when things are whittled away a little bit at a time. And they don't object to little things going away until they one day wake up and realize that all of the things that made life good for them is no longer legal.

We must be watchful of those.

The real price of freedom is vigilance.
Not the case in everythin babes..but placin legislation before parliament aint always same thing as passin it.... so wile its still shorta bein an act ther hope yet ...

[12voltman59]

Seems pretty much par for the course for politicos--write vague legislation that can be a "slippery slope" that allows for stopping all kinds of things that they don't like.
If there is any way to fight this proposed legislation---I would try to fight it on that basis--the thing is--they turn the argument and say that people opposed to the law must like BDSM and they ask "how can any decent person support something so repugnant as BDSM?" so they shut down any contrary discussion--and the media--being the good lap dogs they tend to be these days--play into the that game.

[FalconAngel]

Seems pretty much par for the course for politicos--write vague legislation that can be a "slippery slope" that allows for stopping all kinds of things that they don't like.

Very true.

How often, in this country, do we hear of some law or another being fought on the grounds of being "unconstitutionally vague"?

We already have laws like that, which are not being fought; All of which are making life miserable for people dealing with the family courts.