Thursday, 27 November 2008

I think I CAAN

Well actually I never have, probably never will do and really it's not my thing! If you don't know that CAAN stands for Consenting Adults Action Network then you are probably a little confused at this point!

As well as Wacky Jacqui's legislation concerning prostitution, which I've already mentioned here, there is some more idiocy that I guess she at least is over-seeing now even if she didn't concieve it in the first place (not sure about the exact history).

Essentially from 26th January 2009 (as The Register reported) it will become illegal to "possess material that is both pornographic and extreme". You can read the full details of the bill here, having just had a more detailed look at this I'm intrigued by:

"(9) In this section references to a part of the body include references to a part surgically constructed (in particular through gender reassignment surgery)."

I wonder why they felt it necassary to be so inclusive/specific? Maybe it's just thorough, or an attempt to avoid calls of discrimination (though I would pretty much think that any transexual would accept that "genitalia" covers them both pre and post-op). Or maybe there is some specific set of images that they felt should be included in the legislation and concerned GRS. If that is the case then that section seems pretty much like discrimination, victimisation, or at the very least a little too targetted.

I have no interest at all in extreme porn, or really any variety at the moment but I see no reason why other adults can't enjoy looking at the things that do it for them no matter what, assuming of course that in capturing the pictures they aren't doing anything illegal.

And that's the bizarre thing: with this legislation you can still do lots of pretty unpleasant things (or simulate them at least) but you can't take a picture of it. For example there are, apparently, people into the vampire/goth kind of thing which pretty much involves lots of fake blood and other tortuous things - they can still do all this but a picture of it would mean then would break the law, even if it was just part of a private collection and not published.

This seems like pretty weasely legislation; if you don't agree with extreme sexual acts then at least come out and say that and have an honest and open debate. Don't try and stigmatise people and effectively threaten them into not being so 'perverted'.

And, even worse, don't try and propogate stereotypes which some people will not be able to live up to, it's not governments role to dictate how our relationships and sex lives should be and certainly not when this is based on some archaic notion that there is a preferred and 'moral' ideal.

No comments: