Another reason to dislike New Labour (without mentioning Jacqui Smith)

January 26, 2009 at 10:54 pm (Caroline S, labour party)


The extreme porn law comes into effect today.

  • It’s based on an understanding (developed in the 40s and 50s) that suggests the media acts like a hypordermic needle, injecting messages into a passive audience.
  • It is based upon the premise that pornography has more to do with rape than the actual scumbag himself.
  • It neglects to acknowledge that the case on which it was based (Jane Longhurst’s murder) was actually a great deal more complex than Labour gave it credit for; with regard to the Longhurst case, Graham Coutts’s fascination with asphixiation began years before he began to download the materials found on his computer, in fact he didn’t look at material on the internet til a good 5 years after he discussed his fascination with his GP? Also, not that it really matters to this case apparently, he said himself he wanted to kill women since he was 15, even seeking psychiatric treatment, believing his thoughts would one day lead to criminal actions, 12 years before the murder. But whatever, extreme pornography killed Jane Longhurst.
  • What does this mean? Here’s the long version, and here’s the short: You watch porn of adults consenting to violent or apparently violent sexual acts and you, my friend, are a crim.

Labour for the win!

So yeah, destroy your kinky porn my criminally perverted friends, Jacqui’s watching!

(oops, mentioned Jacqui)

Cross posted at my blog and Sex In The Public Square.


  1. Another reason to dislike New Labour (without mentioning Jacqui Smith) « Better burn that dress, sister. said,

    […] at Shiraz Socialist. Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)Gordon looks for that elusive boostNew Labour […]

  2. voltairespriest said,

    Ha! This post for the win Ms Shepherd, and I mean that!! 🙂

  3. Caroline said,

    I can’t believe anyone would be happy with a government that based a change in the law on such bloody mindless thinking. I mean, Jesus….

  4. resistor said,

    This is putting me off sex, stop it!

  5. voltairespriest said,

    I don’t even want to think about you having sex, Transistor.

  6. Top Stories and Blog Review - 27th Jan – Politics Unlimited | UK politics news said,

    […] Shiraz Socialist succinctly details why the new extreme porn law is a load of whipped balls. […]

  7. Matt Wardman said,

    All this stuff about

    Isn’t the offence just posession of film of violent acts that may lead – or appear to possibly lead (in the opinion of whoever is on the bench or jury today) to death, or damage to bits of the body with there being no defence in the purpose for which it was taken.

    I’m thinking about all the poor sod policemen with their bondage uniforms, handcuffs, spanking sticks, and electric shock Tazer Tit Titillaters … and then they go and film it all with those full immersion helmet-cam things.

    They’ll all be arresting each other.


  8. Matt Wardman said,

    “All this stuff about” – delete.

  9. Matt Wardman said,

    PS My extreme bondage potential snuff pornography is here:

    Girls ‘n’ guns.

    Titillating: Yep.
    Arousing: Yep
    Depicting death: Yep

    Irrelevant Context:

    I’ll be on the sex offenders register with all the policemen.

  10. Matt Wardman said,

    Thanks for the link.


  11. redpesto said,

    Despite the legislation now being law, apparently the police aren’t going to bother enforcing it:

    A statement from the Association of Chief Police Officers said: “The police will not be actively targeting members of the public but will be conducting investigations into the unlawful possession of this material where found.”

    The justice ministry expects to see about 30 prosecutions a year. It estimates that 10 offenders will be jailed, for an average of six months.

  12. Gregory Carlin said,

    It was the same thing with teachers.

    “There will only be a maximum of 10 to 15 prosecutions a year under the new “abuse of trust” law backed by MPs last night, Whitehall officials have admitted.”

    Then the FBI arrived, if the police have a computer, they’re not giving it back if they can work a case.

    It was a culture shock, the cops ha not done teachers before

    They do 12 a day in the USA,

    “It estimates that 10 offenders will be jailed, for an average of six months.”

    We shall see


  13. voltairespriest said,

    Err… Earth to Greg? They’re not the same thing and you are off topic.

  14. Caroline said,

  15. Sue R said,

    I’m sorry, but why would anybody want to watch people being tortured and hurt? Even if it is only play-acting. It maybe that the extension of state power is not a Good Thing, but I don’t know hodw anyone can talk with such jubilation about vile acts.

  16. Matt Wardman said,

    >but why would anybody want to watch people being tortured and hurt?

    Why would people want to watch James Bond – that involves the appearance of people being tortured and hurt? See Daniel Craig and his cane chair, which certainly comes under this test:

    “An act which results in or appears to result in serious injury to a person’s anus, breasts or genitals”

    As I see it the problem is with material where that doesn’t happen, and that the tests are framed around the enforcement authorities “forming opinions” and “making judgements”, which are not necessarily anything to do with the facts.

    Exactly the same problem exists with some of the child protection laws around depictions of “underage sex” – it is framed such that decisions are made on opinions not facts.

    These matters are too important for decisions to be made on that basis.

    Leaving all that aside, basing a law on a single case (as seems to me to have happened) is bonkers.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: