Wednesday, August 30, 2006

Banning violent pornography

I was all ready to write something about New Labour having found another thing to ban. But read further down this BBC report and what do you find?
Others, such as Liberal Democrat MP and campaign supporter Sandra Gidley, say the government should have acted sooner.

"It's absolutely the right decision. The scandal is it's taken so long to come to this decision.

"You cannot look at this sort of material and not be affected."
Other Liberal Democrats take a more sensible view. The Whiskey Priest, for instance.

5 comments:

Tabman said...

Jonathan - whilst not a friend as such, I did know Jane Longhurst and was appalled at the tragedy that befell her.

This is a complex issue. I accept that banning is a blunt instrument, but at the same time there is evidence that excessive exposure to shocking imagery desensitises people, and when what was once shocking becomes commonplace there is perhaps a greater risk for persons of a certain propensity to indulge ion acts that might have never been given a focus.

So I think Sandra and Gavin are both right, and both wrong.

Stephen Tall said...

But Tabman - the same could be said of any intoxicant - eg, the link between excessive consumption of alcohol and public displays of violence (and far more widespread domestic violence).

We are all responsible for our individual actions - alcohol or pornography can never be an excuse for violence.

And if we're looking for root causes isn't it more instructive to look at what motivated that individual in the first place to get their kicks from violent pornography?

Chris Black said...

Peter, Stephen, what are your concerns here- the principle of banning violent pornography, or the mechanics of the law - or both?

Anonymous said...

There is currently a petition to the PM being gathered at

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/Violent-Porn/

Please support the fight against "thought crime"!

Teddy

Anonymous said...

There is no evidence that shows exposure to pornography or violent pornography causes behavioural change.

If you are not pre-disposed to commit violent acts then viewing such acts will not cause you to commit them.

Not even the evidence put forward by anti-pornography campiagners claims it causes a behavioural change.

Adults know very well the difference between fantasy and reality. Fantasising about violence is quite common, even sexual violence. This does not mean those ordinary decent people who indulge in such fantasies will, or even want to, carry them out in real-life.

Think of the horrendous ordeal of a sex-offenders trial... are we going to put people and their families through that for commiting a 'crime' for which there is no evience of harm?

That would be piling tradegy on top of tragedy.