Beware the Book Burner

Book Burners are rarely on the right side of history.  Authoritarian regimes, and the frightened call for books to be burns when they don't believe they can win against the ideas contained within the pages of a book.

It was therefore with a sense of alarm that I read last week of a bizarre campaign in Sunderland to ceremoniously burn copies of the bestselling fiction book, Fifty Shades of Grey.

According to the Sunderland Echo,  Clare Phillipson, director of the women’s refuge, today called for the trilogy – led by Fifty Shades of Grey – to be binned. “It’s absolutely disgusting,” she told the Echo. “It normalises abuse, degrades women and encourages sexual violence. “With it being in the media so much many men and women have rushed out to buy it, and many have come to me and told me how distressed they are by what’s written. “Passages in it are about women submitting to men, obeying their orders and violence being used in a sexual and erotic manner. It’s disgusting and sends out the wrong message.”

The Charity is collecting the books until November the 5th, when they will burn the books.

The following day, TV 'Agony Aunt', Denise Robertson waded in to the row.

According to the Echo, she said:  “I’m not surprised by the book’s success, but I just feel it’s terribly sad that people’s lives are so empty they’ve taken to going to buy a book that’s designed for titilation. I’m absolutely with Clare in getting people not buy the book. “Unfortunately, the more we talk about it, the more people will want to buy it probably.” She added: “It’s a horrible book. “I wish it had never been written. “It’s making S&M seem cool and dressing it up in frilly clothes, making it seem nice when it isn’t.

Let me begin by saying I've read the first book in the trilogy but not the others.  It took me around five times to get through the first few pages as it was so clunky, and badly written.  However, once past this, I flew through the book and did find it engaging, and enjoyable.  However, the book doesn't really understand BDSM.  It's depictions absurd and the longitudinal storyline (which I've not got to) that all you need is redemptive vanilla monogamy to be 'cured' of BDSM is rather silly, if not downright offensive to those who do engage in BDSM.

So, it's a pretty lousy but successful book.  That's not grounds for burning it.  If the book is so degrading to women, so utterly offensive; it's all the more puzzling that women are choosing to buy and enjoy all three novels (and other similar texts).

Robertson's assumption that S&M is not 'nice' is also bizarre and disturbing that a woman who has such a high-profile is choosing to display her ignorance.  I can recall This Morning (the show Robertson made her name on) promoting riding crops and fluffy handcuffs as part of a Valentines gift show a few years ago - surely behaviours which can fall within the boundaries of BDSM?

It's re-assuring to see from the comments on both stories that the public are far more 'switched on', and culturally aware than these two individuals, but any call for a public book burning should always be met with scepticism, if not all-out resistance.

#porntrial - Further Analysis

A number of other reports have emerged following the case of R v Walsh (see this previous post), aka #porntrial.  The solicitor in the case, Myles Jackman, has written a compelling piece on his blog in which concludes:

'It is my contention that the matter is now beyond the remit of the CPS, Met and BBFC and that the subject requires the scrutiny of the Home Secretary, Ministry of Justice and the Law Commission and that questions should be asked in the House.'

Jackman is absolutely right.  The issue of images of consensual sexual acts - both under the Obscene Publications Act and Criminal Justice and Immigration Act should not be decided by more lives ruined, and further costly and clumsy investigations and prosecutions.  We desperately need a sensible review of the law in this area.   Read Myles' full post for his own compelling reasoning.

Daryl Champion has written an excellent piece exploring the messy way that the Daily Mail responded to the case.  It is an excellent forensic exploration and worth a read.

Benjamin Gray also has a very interesting piece on his blog exploring the role of the CPS in all of this, suggesting - and I agree in large part - that anger should be focused on the bad law at the heart of the case rather than the CPS themselves.  Read that piece here.

The post can be seen as a response to a mood reflecting on social media and in some media stories such as this piece by Terri Judd published in the Independent, linking together R v Walsh with R v Peacock and the Twitter joke trial (Chambers v DPP). 

Obscenity Podcast: It's Obscene!

I should have known about this resource sooner but discovered it via the brilliant Melon Farmers website earlier today.  Last month, NorthPod Law produced a podcast exploring the implications of the Peacock case for the law and obscenity.  They assembled an excellent team of Alex Dymock, Myles Jackman and David Allen Green.  Check out the podcast below.

Michael Peacock on Obscenity and R v Peacock

Anyone interested in the recent landmark obscenity case of R v Peacock should check out a splendid couple of videos of Michael peacock aka 'Sleazy Michael' talking about the case - with some rather wonderful props.  It's marvellously open and frank.

Michael Peacock talks about #ObscenityTrial - Part 1 from Absolut Queer on Vimeo.

Michael Peacock talks about #ObscenityTrial - Part 1 from Absolut Queer on Vimeo.

Michael Peacock talks about #ObscenityTrial - Part 2 from Absolut Queer on Vimeo.

Making a Fist of It: The Law and Obscenity

I've had an article published on the Freedom in a  Puritan Age webzine in which I offer my take on the recent Obscenity Trial.  I gathered a few background/analysis pieces together in this previous blog post.

Check my new article out here.

LA Bareback Ban Campaign Launches

The battle over mandatory condom usage in LA (see my previous post here) has taken another step, as the Joe.My.God blog explains. The AIDS Healthcare Foundation has launched a petition drive for a ballot measure that would require condom usage in all porn produced in Los Angeles County. The AHF must collect 200,000 signatures by June 5th in order for the item to appear on the November ballot in Los Angeles County.  This is an additional ballot measure to that which city officials have already gone to court over in a bid to block.

The AIDS Healthcare Foundation called on Los Angeles County officials to mandate that adult films follow the same health department permit process required of bathhouses, sex clubs, and tattoo and message parlours. Under the county initiative, adult film producers would file health permits and pay a fee set by the health department that would pay for inspections and enforcement. If passed, the measure would allow the county to collect a $1,000 fine from adult film producers who do not have a valid health permit. In addition, the county could use nurses to provide spot checks on film sets.

Read more on this latest proposed measure here and in the LA Times here. This is shaping up to be a key socio-legal battle of 2012.

Obscenity Trial Continues

The #ObscenityTrial involving the issue of fisting (among others) goes into day three tomorrow (read my previous post on the trial here).  If you're not already doing so, be sure to follow on twitter the excellent activist and scholar, @lexingtondymock. I'd also suggest following the journalist @NichiHodgson. Both have been providing fascinating coverage through their live tweets from the courtroom.  Many of the exchanges today would be comical, were they not so serious.  I'll blog a comment on the trial once it's over - as I'm sure will many others.

Fisting in the Courtroom

Myles Jackman, a solicitor with Hodge Jones & Allen LLP reports that the firm will be representing the defendant in an important case to be heard at Southwark Crown Court.  It's not often that a key case takes place in a lower court, but this case could help to clarify the law on obscenity.

The defendant in the case, Michael Peacock, is charged on indictment with numerous offences under the Obscene Publications Act for distributing supposedly obscene DVDs. The films in question feature: 'gay' fisting (the insertion of five fingers of the fist into the rectum of another male); urolagnia (in this case men urinating in their clothes, onto each others’ bodies and drinking it); and BDSM (in this case hard whipping, the insertion of needles, urethral sounds and electrical “torture”).

Myles further explores this issues on his blog with specific reference to the CPS guidelines on obscenity (which my students will recall we looked at in the online workshop on pornography and obscenity before the winter vacation).

The case should also provide another perspective on what constitutes 'extreme pornography' under the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008.  An important case and I wish the defendant well.  It will be interesting to see if the jury feels it is indeed helpful to criminalise these kind of images and what the contemporary boundaries of obscenity are.

Read the full post from Myles here.

Post revised 9.52, 3 Jan 2011.

Beware the Pedobear!

Pedobear, Pedobear, does whatever a Pedobear does...as Homer Simpson didn't quite sing.

Some of you might remember a Brass Eye Paedophile special from a few years back in which they satirised the way the media and politicians were treating the subject of paedophilia.  Readers in the UK can watch that episode via 4OD (check it out here).  Even Chris Morris and Brass Eye couldn't make up a story that appears on the Huffington Post today surrounding the latest twist in the 'Pedobear' saga.

This is a cartoon bear originally intended as a joke on paedophiles, acting as a (strangely cute) representation of a paedophile.  However, the image apparently then became re-owned by paedophiles as a symbol of pride.  However - and you couldn't make this up - the New Mexico Attorney General's Office is now investigating following a surge in sightings of bear depictions on vehicles.  They apparently fear - don't laugh at the back - that this may suggest an increase in sex offender behaviour in the Albuquerque area.  Fascinating and bonkers in equal measure.  Check out the full story here.  The HuffPo piece helpfully points out that 'It is not illegal for people to display the Pedobear image in public.'  Well if it was, there would be an amazing first amendment case to bring.  It could finish poor Justice Scalia off!

The piece also explains that 'Some people may be displaying them as a joke, but the attorney general's office said they are taking the bear images seriously and are trying to get the word out.'  Look out for them in Halfords!

Circumcision and the Law

A really interesting story emerged out of the USA this week, as San Francisco announced that a measure to ban circumcision will appear on the ballot in November (for Brits, think Proposition 8 - it's a similar process, but city-based rather than state-based). This marks the first time that there has been a public vote on the issue of circumcision - a hot political topic in the US where the practise among males is common.

In the UK, it's an issue that I've never been able to get passionate about but I've detected in the last couple of years a shift in the mood and this is increasingly becoming a talking point.

The San Francisco Chronicle reported that if the measure passes, circumcision would be prohibited among males under the age of 18. The practice would become a misdemeanor offence punishable by a fine of up to $1,000 or up to one year in jail. There would be no religious exemptions. Stern stuff.

The measure and wider debate hinge on the issue of consent. Given circumcision is typically conducted at a young age, it is the parents who consent on behalf of a child - for a range of reasons - and thus the child is 'mutilated' for life. For many Americans, having a cut cock is seen as more attractive, more hygienic and even healthier - with mixed data about circumcision and HIV transmission. For religious groups, circumcision is an important part of their culture and so the law intervening here, is a legal attack on religion and expression as well as arguably, an individuals private life. Yet, all of these concerns would not stand if we were talking about 'female genital mutilation'. This is a very complex and very real challenge for law.

In Britain the religious angle was explored in the comedy film East is East, exploring the clash between 'western' and 'muslim' values in Bradford in the 1970s:

Sex Censorship v Freedom

Another great video, that I'm ashamed to say, somehow passed me by. Myles Jackman (who is also on twitter as @ObscenityLawyer), is legal affairs advisor to the Backlash group and a solicitor. He made a presentation to the 2009 Libertarian Alliance annual conference on the law relating to 'extreme pornography'. It's really interesting, well-pitched and well worth a watch but I wish the chair didn't look so bored (it obviously went down better in the room than with him), and I'm also irritated that the first questioner makes a rant so there's hardly any other time for other questions. Grrrr! Anyway, check out the video below.

laconf09, Myles Jackman: "Sex Censorship v Freedom" from Sean Gabb on Vimeo.

Positive Porn

I mentioned in tweets and what-not a while back that Treasure Island Media pornographer-in-chief Paul Morris was to launch a HIV positive line. The bareback porn company seems to want to turn up the notch on controversy and so has announced that one of their performers (James Roscoe, pictured right) is HIV positive and will be featuring in the new series. Even more interesting, his ‘real life’ partner (Brad McGuire, pictured second right) is another TIM performer who is HIV-negative and they both (obviously) fuck bareback. Check out the story on Gay Porn Times here.

This is an area of porn I continue to be fascinated by and it forms part of some ongoing research. Morris is on the one hand a guy making money. As such, he is hardly some pure campaigner. Yet, a campaigner he also is. Whilst this latest announcement is a bit of marketing, it is also important in challenging our notions around being positive. It projects, as have previously written, an image of what we are rather than what we seek to be. It documents the raw sex lives of men and in doing so is also a major headache for sexual health campaigners.

In a press release, Morris commented: "As a community we have a moral and social imperative to demolish the HIV positive closet," Morris said. "We are adults and we are participating in a tremendously vital and important sexual culture that is under attack. We know exactly what we're doing, and we will not allow reactionary individuals and organizations to dictate our behavior. James and Brad are fitting role models for young gay men. They are living their lives with honesty and integrity. I couldn't be more proud to have them in the T.I.M. family."

The press release went on to conclude that Roscoe's sero-status hasn't stopped anything for Treasure Island Media. To the contrary, T.I.M. is currently shooting work that features proud poz men engaged in what TIM describes as 'fucking each other to within an inch of their lives'. The first of these poz-only bareback pics is slated for general release in spring 2011.

Although the Free Speech Coalition (an industry) group didn't go massively on the attack, they did seem to offer a mild condemnation of the move, stating that: "Despite our opposition to a state-imposed mandate for the universal use of condoms, FSC does not endorse the exploitation of potential HIV infection of performers for promotional purposes,” Executive Director Diane Duke said. “(S)uch conduct is at the center of the efforts to find appropriate regulations for the adult industry by both Cal/OSHA and the FSC”.

Men are all w******?

The Guardian also carried a piece this week on pornography. Yes, yes another periodic feminist Guardian piece that (yawn) casts men as wankers (in every sense) and women as poor exploited creatures. Women do not masturbate to porn in this narrow so called feminist world. Men are never victims and all men are apparently straight.

The latest story follows the launch of a new ‘campaign’, called the Anti-Porn Men Project. Check out the full story here.

Britain, Britain, Britain...why are we all Outraging Public Decency?

The above Little Britain intros seemed appropriate after reading a number of stories concerning outraging public decency in the UK over the last week. Thanks to Ian for flagging up the first two stories. First off, we travel to Suffolk where the Police found themselves responding to complaints about a naked cyclist. I'm slightly confused by the report which states that the man at the centre of the case has not been cautioned or charged but the case has been passed to the CPS.

The story is truly little Britain for the complaint came about because local villagers had organised a 'speed trap' to presumably catch speeding motorists when they encountered a naked cyclist speeding past them instead. I just can't imagine that happening anywhere other than Britain for some reason.

Should you live in fear of naked cyclists speeding past you, it seems that you're not safe in Scotland either where a 17 yr old apparently"terrified" an 11 year old girl after cycling naked down a country lane. He has been placed on the Sex Offenders Register which seems a crazy over-reaction to this incident. Read that story in full here.

Both cases say much about our attitudes towards nudity and the human body. Namely, we don't like it. We also had a story this week in my neck of the woods - Sunderland. A 25 year old guy was caught wanking on two occasions on a bus and charged with outraging public decency. Interestingly, the defence (which seems appropriate and should work) is that he wasn't actually exposing himself as he was wanking through his trousers. Ah, the curious joys of English law. Whatever happens to this guy, he's been named in the local press and his address given - a public shaming which thanks to the web will haunt him every time someone Googles his name

The activity of wanking in public - on buses and trains in particular - has an enormously high profile on various 'home-made' porn sites in which people upload videos of their public masturbation antics. Many include shots of the public (oblivious) in the background. It's an aspect I need to give more thought to but I suspect these cases will further feed into the current review by the Law Commission of this offence.

In the meantime, from Britain, Britain, Britain, you may find this next song equally appropriate...

Religion and Hatred (pt 1)

I've just been monitoring an exchange on Facebook on Stonewall's group page. One guy had posted:

'yes you shouldn't bully gay people, let god punish them 4 there evil practises, u can see the evil and darkness of sin oozing from there faces, there in constant pain and misery an are evil'

He is apparently a Muslim and the response by Stonewall was:

'Apologies to anyone who read the offensive post by [name deleted] below. This has now been reported to facebook and the police.'

Now then... The chap who posted this statement does appear to be a couple of sandwiches short of a picnic but that's just my view and isn't he entitled to his? On the one hand, the first person to criticise Islam finds themselves committing all sorts of social 'sins' and can quickly find themselves attracting the attention of law enforcement - so you could argue responding in kind is appropriate. On the other hand, is it really the best use of Police time to investigate the guy who posted this? I'm pretty sure the answer is no. As a gay man, do I feel offended by reading this? No. Should I not kiss another guy in his presence? Sod that, he'll just after get over his offfence too. Seeking solace in legislation and law for this sort of thing is to my mind bonkers. I want the right to be offended and to offend.

Had we been talking about hundreds of posts by this guy or a campaign of targeting the profiles of those who are 'friends' of Facebook, I would taking a very different position but I do think there needs to be some flexibility and a couple of unpleasant posts need to be kept in perspective.