Skip to content or view screen version

No Freedom for Sexual Freedom

Backlash UK | 11.02.2011 12:29

The Coalition’s Protection of Freedoms Bill published today shows up Liberal inability to make really extensive changes in rolling back Labour’s many new laws curtailing civil liberties.



Sexual freedom of expression is evidently a freedom too far.

Section 63 of the CJIA 2008, the so called extreme images law, will not be repealed. This despite it being in the top ten of Civil Liberties laws voted for repeal in the online consultation exercise in 2010, and opposed by Liberals in Parliament when originally enacted.

Backlash research, to be made public shortly, will show that s63 offences are several hundred times higher than projected by the then government when the law, based merely on a hunch and moralistic shudder, was whipped through Parliament.

Alexandra Dymock of Backlash, (1) the sexual civil liberties organisation fighting a growing number of legal cases for incorrect prosecutions, said “Most lawyers don’t understand this law and advise their clients to plead guilty.”

“Already there have been too many miscarriages of justice(2,3,4) and ruined lives(5) that result from this ill-conceived, insufficiently researched, ineptly written and incompetently prosecuted (6) law.”

“This law is a waste of valuable legal aid and police resources. It should be repealed. We will continue to lobby for repeal during the passage of this Bill”.

Ends

Notes for editors

(1) Backlash  http://www.backlash-uk.org.uk/ is an umbrella organisation providing legal, academic and campaigning resources defending freedom of sexual expression.

(2) www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/6918001/Man-cleared-of-porn-charge-after-tiger-sex-image-found-to-be-joke.html

(3) www.backlash-uk.org.uk/wp/?page_id=856

(4) www.theregister.co.uk/2010/08/06/tiger_freed/

(5) www.backlash-uk.org.uk/wp/?page_id=866

(6) www.backlash-uk.org.uk/wp/?page_id=860

For further information, or for interview, please contact:

Myles Jackman on myles ampersand backlash-uk.org.uk

Alexandra Dymock on alex ampersand backlash-uk.org.uk

Backlash UK
- Homepage: http://www.backlash-uk.org.uk/

Comments

Hide the following 4 comments

critic of domination/submission

11.02.2011 14:56

Perhaps you should consider why you want to be in posession of extreme images [insert* why is violence, hierarchy and domination eroticised in this society? Is that something to support... or critique in light of anarchist values of challenging power over/submission/hierarchy]. Cartoon images of child abuse and photos of extreme violence against women/men are unethical- difficult to try to tackle this without implementing law. If there weren't people who get off on abuse, they wouldn't need to impose laws. I can think of greater freedoms to fight for than the freedom to possess images of extreme violence/child abuse

C

@C

11.02.2011 17:48

You seem to suggest that domination/submission is wrong within a hierarchical society - perhaps wrong par se. There's some truth to this, but it does not answer why consenting adults (and nobody other than you is talking about anybody else), should not be able to follow their sexual identity in full awareness of the 'norms' of our society. The view that they cannot is as repressive as the hierarchical society that you seem to criticise.

I thought last year's PlayFight! project ( http://radicalx.ox4.org/) was interesting in exploring some of these issues in a mature way without having to lump everybody into categories such as 'extreme violence' and 'child abuse' (which I suspect you have created as a straw man [sic] argument).

Me

re: critic of domination/submission

11.02.2011 21:13

Maybe we should ban murder mystery books as well, hmm? How can people be entertained by reading of the ending of another human being's life? Agatha Christie should be ashamed of herself!

anon

re: critic of domination/submission

12.02.2011 01:30

Perhaps you should consider why you want possession of such images to be a criminal offence?

This is about consensual acts and fantasy. If you think that anarchism is about telling other people what their sexual fantasies should be, and using the force of law to control that - well, I'm dismayed.

"Cartoon images of child abuse"

This is nothing to do with child abuse. Although since you bring it up, cartoon depictions are nothing to do with child abuse anyway - unless you think that an episode of South Park (which depicts a child masturbating an animal) should be illegal.

The issue is also not about non-consensual or extreme violence. The issue is about consenting adults, and even including staged acts or faked images, which are all covered by the law - and which have resulted in prosecutions.

"I can think of greater freedoms to fight for than the freedom to possess images of extreme violence/child abuse"

No one is talking about child abuse. Do you think that child sex is the same as adult sex?

What are these greater freedoms? According to you, we can only fight for The Most Important Thing TM right?

By the same logic, there are far greater things to worry about than people watching images in private.

Mark