> Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2006 5:44 PM
> Subject: Re: [backlash] RE: can you all post what you have been doing
> > Any such comments would have to be carefully considered to avoid any own
> > goals, but it would certainly be better to have the case presented from a
> > non sterotypical person (women, the disabled and people from the older
> > generations etc). It shouldn't be that way but thats the way it is.
> >
> > Author wrote:
> >> I've been wondering if there's any mileage to be made out of making this
> >> personal.
> >> For example,
> >> "I understand Mrs Longhurst's grief, but why does she want to take it
> >> out on me?"
> >> Or, in answer to the feminists, "Why are you calling me a murderer or
> >> rapist?" (even more effective when it's a woman asking the question!)
> >> I think that a lot of the pro-legislation campaigners find it very easy
> >> to demonise the users of the material in question, because they're able
> >> to build nice, comforting models of those users as demons and "not like
> >> us". As long as it's possible for them to stick to their theories, they
> >> don't have to face up to the actual impact of what they're proposing.
> >> Maybe my idea of presenting the proposals as personal attacks on kinky
> >> people in the way I suggested (asking, in effect, "why are you doing this
> >> to *me*?") is not the best way of doing it, and would turn out to be an
> >> own-goal, but maybe there is a different way of developing an undermining
> >> of their neat theories.
> >> Ta,
> >> SnowdropExplodes
> >> Teddysmith2@hotmail.co.uk wrote:I will also be writing to the Reading
> >> post today. We have to be a little careful, as the local people there
> >> have a close affinity to the Longhurst case. Best to leave it to
> >> reasoned, non-emotive arguments?
> >> T.
> >> Author wrote:
> >> > I have been posting on groups, developed a myspace account and group,
> >> > have been working to get some graphics for the new flyer.
> >> > I want to get a press release as a response to the Reading evening Post
> >> > article out by Friday.
> >> > Next week I will contact Bizarre magazine about an ad andd an
> >> > editorial.
> >> > I have been working with someone who volunteered to lobby the probation
> >> > service and the Baroness.
> >> --
> >> If you want to share pictures, use the calendar, or start a vote
> >> visit http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/Backlash
> >> To leave the Group, email: Backlash-unsubscribe@smartgroups.com
> >> Report abuse
> >> http://www.smartgroups.com/text/abusereport.cfm?gid%3D3271426&mid%3D5087
> >> ---------------------------------
> >> Inbox full of spam? Get leading spam protection and 1GB storage with All
> >> New Yahoo! Mail.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > If you want to share pictures, use the calendar, or start a vote
> > visit http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/Backlash
> >
> > To leave the Group, email: Backlash-unsubscribe@smartgroups.com
> >
> > Report abuse
> > http://www.smartgroups.com/text/abusereport.cfm?gid%3D3271426&mid%3D5091
> >
Chris, 23 Jun 2006 07:22:01
I've been holding back from writing to my MP (Jacqui Lait, Tory) because I
wasn't sure what tack might possibly be productive, but finally figured out
an angle. Reposted here in case it helps anyone else.
-----------------------------------------------------
Dear Mrs Lait,
You will, no doubt, be aware of the consultation launched last year by the
Government into proposed legislation against the Possession of Extreme
Pornographic Material.
I'm sure you will also share my concern regarding both the manner in which
this consultation has been conducted, and the potential implications of such
legislation, were it to be enacted.
i) The consultation was conducted in a biased fashion,
with emotive, loaded questions.
ii) Despite having yet to publish the result of the
consultation (which is now some three months overdue) the Home Office
appears, according to press reports, to have recently met with supporters of
the proposals (including Martin Salter MP), assuring them that they intend
to press ahead with the legislation.
iii) The proposals, if enacted, would enact legislation that
advice from Rabinder Singh QC concluded is incompatible with European Human
Rights legislation.
As my representative in the House of Commons, I would be very grateful if
you would formally pursue on my behalf:
a) whether the Government has conducted a consultation in
spite of, apparently, having made up its mind before even commencing the
consultation;
b) whether NOT proceeding with legislation is a realistic
alternative for the Home Office (and if not, why not?);
c) why the Government is wasting resources pursuing
proposals that, if enacted, will almost certainly fail at the first court
challenge.
I would ask you to, as I have, put to one side any distaste you might feel
for the material under consideration, and consider the merits of legislation
that will not halt the production of the pornographic material to which it
refers, will indiscriminately oppress those who accidentally encounter
material as well as those who seek it intentionally (hence criminalising
children who encounter such material unintentionally), and will do nothing
to protect the public from dangerous criminals.
I will be very interested to hear your views on this matter, and what plans
you have for challenging the Government on the appalling waste of resources
in support of its increasingly common knee-jerk reactions, that simply
pander to the worst excesses of the tabloid "opinion-formers".
Kind regards,
demolitionred, 23 Jun 2006 11:55:33
Thanks for the letter. Is it ok to reproduce it on the main site?
Graham Marsden, 23 Jun 2006 13:18:38
Hi there,
-OJT- wrote:
> I've been wondering if there's any mileage to be made out of making
> this personal.
>
> For example, "I understand Mrs Longhurst's grief, but why does she
> want to take it out on me?"
I can see where you're coming from, but a strategy like this could be
very dangerous as it risks us being branded as callous and uncaring or
even getting headlines like "Perves don't care about Jane Longhurst's
death".
> Or, in answer to the feminists, "Why are you calling me a murderer
> pr rapist?" (even more effective when it's a woman asking the
> question!)
This one, I think, has more mileage. We're not attacking someone
personally, we're just asking a question. They are saying that anyone
who looks at this material is a potential murderer or rapist (shades of
Dworkinite feminism) but that's just a ridiculous generalisation.
If they come back with "well you might not be, but others might" we can
then hit them with "presumed innocent until proven guilty" or "thought
crime" etc.
Cheers,
Graham.
Teddy, 24 Jun 2006 02:50:36
Hi Chris,
"hence criminalising children who encounter such material unintentionally"
I am a little bit unsure as to whether this is really a strong point, even to our sceptical viewpoints. A more likely scenario, perhaps, is that an unsupervised(!) child surfing might download proscribed material, hence exposing their parents/guardians to malicious prosecution?
T.
Author wrote:
> I've been holding back from writing to my MP (Jacqui Lait, Tory) because I
> wasn't sure what tack might possibly be productive, but finally figured out
> an angle. Reposted here in case it helps anyone else.
> -----------------------------------------------------
> Dear Mrs Lait,
> You will, no doubt, be aware of the consultation launched last year by the
> Government into proposed legislation against the Possession of Extreme
> Pornographic Material.
> I'm sure you will also share my concern regarding both the manner in which
> this consultation has been conducted, and the potential implications of such
> legislation, were it to be enacted.
> i) The consultation was conducted in a biased fashion,
> with emotive, loaded questions.
> ii) Despite having yet to publish the result of the
> consultation (which is now some three months overdue) the Home Office
> appears, according to press reports, to have recently met with supporters of
> the proposals (including Martin Salter MP), assuring them that they intend
> to press ahead with the legislation.
> iii) The proposals, if enacted, would enact legislation that
> advice from Rabinder Singh QC concluded is incompatible with European Human
> Rights legislation.
> As my representative in the House of Commons, I would be very grateful if
> you would formally pursue on my behalf:
> a) whether the Government has conducted a consultation in
> spite of, apparently, having made up its mind before even commencing the
> consultation;
> b) whether NOT proceeding with legislation is a realistic
> alternative for the Home Office (and if not, why not?);
> c) why the Government is wasting resources pursuing
> proposals that, if enacted, will almost certainly fail at the first court
> challenge.
> I would ask you to, as I have, put to one side any distaste you might feel
> for the material under consideration, and consider the merits of legislation
> that will not halt the production of the pornographic material to which it
> refers, will indiscriminately oppress those who accidentally encounter
> material as well as those who seek it intentionally (hence criminalising
> children who encounter such material unintentionally), and will do nothing
> to protect the public from dangerous criminals.
> I will be very interested to hear your views on this matter, and what plans
> you have for challenging the Government on the appalling waste of resources
> in support of its increasingly common knee-jerk reactions, that simply
> pander to the worst excesses of the tabloid "opinion-formers".
> Kind regards,
Chris, 24 Jun 2006 08:18:30
I think it depends on how you view it. The proposal, as I understand it, is
for a strict liability offence of possession. If a child downloads
something (even unintentionally), and as any parent knows children are
curious creatures who are educated to explore and experiment, then that
child *has* committed a criminal offence. It opens up a whole string of
uncertainty as to with whom responsibility lies, especially in households
with shared PCs.
The point I was trying to make, without writing it in letters six inches
tall (I think even MPs should be able to join the dots) is that the
proposals protect nobody, and potentially criminalise the innocent - or
their unwitting parents.
My intention wasn't to try to demolish the whole of the proposal, as I don't
think that any MP is going to spend time reading a letter that is too long,
and certainly not if they are, in principle, likely to be in favour of the
legislation. I was aiming instead to hand her a number of pre-packaged
brickbats she could chuck at the Home Office, should she desire to make the
Government uncomfortable.
Since the role of the opposition is to call the Government to account, with
a subtext of showing them unfit to govern so that they will be unseated at
the next election, I felt that might be a worthwhile approach, putting us in
the role of "my enemy's enemy is my friend". The Home Office has been doing
a pretty good job of showing its incompetence lately, and I figured that a
Tory might welcome the opportunity to turn the screw a little.
Teddysmith2@hotmail.co.uk, 24 Jun 2006 08:18:30
Hi Chris,
"hence criminalising children who encounter such material unintentionally"
I am a little bit unsure as to whether this is really a strong point, even
to our sceptical viewpoints. A more likely scenario, perhaps, is that an
unsupervised(!) child surfing might download proscribed material, hence
exposing their parents/guardians to malicious prosecution?
T.
Teddy, 24 Jun 2006 16:53:04
Another thing to mention, with regards to point (ii) of your letter, might be the fact that there are no signs yet of the HO publishing the responses and results of the consultation,. enabling the public to see the balance of views for themselves.
T.
Author wrote:
> I think it depends on how you view it. The proposal, as I understand it, is
> for a strict liability offence of possession. If a child downloads
> something (even unintentionally), and as any parent knows children are
> curious creatures who are educated to explore and experiment, then that
> child *has* committed a criminal offence. It opens up a whole string of
> uncertainty as to with whom responsibility lies, especially in households
> with shared PCs.
> The point I was trying to make, without writing it in letters six inches
> tall (I think even MPs should be able to join the dots) is that the
> proposals protect nobody, and potentially criminalise the innocent - or
> their unwitting parents.
> My intention wasn't to try to demolish the whole of the proposal, as I don't
> think that any MP is going to spend time reading a letter that is too long,
> and certainly not if they are, in principle, likely to be in favour of the
> legislation. I was aiming instead to hand her a number of pre-packaged
> brickbats she could chuck at the Home Office, should she desire to make the
> Government uncomfortable.
> Since the role of the opposition is to call the Government to account, with
> a subtext of showing them unfit to govern so that they will be unseated at
> the next election, I felt that might be a worthwhile approach, putting us in
> the role of "my enemy's enemy is my friend". The Home Office has been doing
> a pretty good job of showing its incompetence lately, and I figured that a
> Tory might welcome the opportunity to turn the screw a little.
: Teddysmith2@hotmail.co.uk, 24 Jun 2006 16:53:04
> Hi Chris,
> "hence criminalising children who encounter such material unintentionally"
> I am a little bit unsure as to whether this is really a strong point, even
> to our sceptical viewpoints. A more likely scenario, perhaps, is that an
> unsupervised(!) child surfing might download proscribed material, hence
> exposing their parents/guardians to malicious prosecution?
> T.
demolitionred, 26 Jun 2006 07:32:23
pls feel free to start with this...
MG wrote:
> >
> > As far as I know it is increasingly difficult to get access to the fringe
> > meetings but it will be impossible if we're not even trying.
> Whilst it may not be possible to gain access to the official fringe meetings
> there is nothing stopping us from taking a decision to organise our own
> fringe meeting and to publicise it at the conference venue and delegate
> hotels by lobbying and leafleting delegates in addition to local media
> releases.
> MG
Alan, 13 Jul 2006 20:41:16
Hello
I emailed my MP stating my views and concerns and he has written to John Reid on my behalf. The MP is John Bercow.
Just another two pennies worth in the cause but who knows what effect a good few letters to MPs might have
Al
Author wrote:
> in this really vital stage of the campaign.
> We have a tiny and narrowing window of opportunity to affect the content of the review of the consultation and to show our opposition.
doulos, 13 Jul 2006 20:45:01
Bercow is cool. I met him once ages ago.
On 7/13/06, alan_slaughter2000@yahoo.co.uk
wrote:
> Hello
>
> I emailed my MP stating my views and concerns and he has written to John Reid on my behalf. The MP is John Bercow.
>
> Just another two pennies worth in the cause but who knows what effect a good few letters to MPs might have
>
> Al
> Author wrote:
> > in this really vital stage of the campaign.
> > We have a tiny and narrowing window of opportunity to affect the content of the review of the consultation and to show our opposition.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> If you want to share pictures, use the calendar, or start a vote
> visit http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/Backlash
>
> To leave the Group, email: Backlash-unsubscribe@smartgroups.com
>
> Report abuse http://www.smartgroups.com/text/abusereport.cfm?gid%3D3271426&mid%3D5205
>
demolitionred, 13 Jul 2006 21:20:04
Thanks for that. pls let us know how it goes.
Author wrote:
> Hello
> I emailed my MP stating my views and concerns and he has written to John Reid on my behalf. The MP is John Bercow.
> Just another two pennies worth in the cause but who knows what effect a good few letters to MPs might have
> Al
> Author wrote:
> > in this really vital stage of the campaign.
> > We have a tiny and narrowing window of opportunity to affect the content of the review of the consultation and to show our opposition.
Teddy, 14 Jul 2006 02:09:12
Nice work! I may also write to my MP again; he's not been very prompt in his previous reply and I wish to make the point to him that the responses to the consultation MUST be made available to the public.
T.
Author wrote:
> Hello
> I emailed my MP stating my views and concerns and he has written to John Reid on my behalf. The MP is John Bercow.
> Just another two pennies worth in the cause but who knows what effect a good few letters to MPs might have
> Al
> Author wrote:
> > in this really vital stage of the campaign.
> > We have a tiny and narrowing window of opportunity to affect the content of the review of the consultation and to show our opposition.
doulos, 14 Jul 2006 02:22:23
Cool. I am going to try and tackle some of the Scottish Consultation
responses by sometime next week.
This week, I have been involved in promoting Backlash. So if everyone
could add this banner to any websites (suitable for mainstream sites)
they can, that would be cool:
http://www.backlash-uk.org.uk/banner.html
On 7/14/06, Teddysmith2@hotmail.co.uk wrote:
> Nice work! I may also write to my MP again; he's not been very prompt in his previous reply and I wish to make the point to him that the responses to the consultation MUST be made available to the public.
>
> T.
>
> Author wrote:
> > Hello
> > I emailed my MP stating my views and concerns and he has written to John Reid on my behalf. The MP is John Bercow.
> > Just another two pennies worth in the cause but who knows what effect a good few letters to MPs might have
> > Al
> > Author wrote:
> > > in this really vital stage of the campaign.
> > > We have a tiny and narrowing window of opportunity to affect the content of the review of the consultation and to show our opposition.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> If you want to share pictures, use the calendar, or start a vote
> visit http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/Backlash
>
> To leave the Group, email: Backlash-unsubscribe@smartgroups.com
>
> Report abuse http://www.smartgroups.com/text/abusereport.cfm?gid%3D3271426&mid%3D5208
>
Graham Marsden, 14 Jul 2006 14:43:08
Hi there,
doulos wrote:
> This week, I have been involved in promoting Backlash. So if everyone
> could add this banner to any websites (suitable for mainstream sites)
> they can, that would be cool:
> http://www.backlash-uk.org.uk/banner.html
Added to
http://www.affordable-leather.co.uk/links-directories-news-information.htm
Cheers,
Graham.
Bill Mackrory, 14 Jul 2006 23:04:12
Hi,
I have added it to several pages of my site.
http://www.spanishdreams.cc
All the best,
Billy Mack
-------Original Message-------
graham, 14 Jul 2006 23:04:12
Hi there,
doulos wrote:
> This week, I have been involved in promoting Backlash. So if everyone
> could add this banner to any websites (suitable for mainstream sites)
> they can, that would be cool:
> http://www.backlash-uk.org.uk/banner.html
Added to
http://www.affordable-leather.co.uk/links-directories-news-information.htm
Cheers,
Graham.
====================================================================<<<
Orange Broadband click below:
http://ads.smartgroups.com/adclick/CID=000000b7c79a99a500000000
--
If you want to share pictures, use the calendar, or start a vote
visit http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/Backlash
To leave the Group, email: Backlash-unsubscribe@smartgroups.com
Report abuse http://www.smartgroups.com/text/abusereport.cfm?gid%3D3271426&mid%3D5210
Attachment:.
message.html (text/html)
Attachment:.
butt_05_tile.gif (image/gif)
Attachment:.
butt_05.gif (image/gif)
Attachment:.
imstp_uk.gif (image/gif)
Amelie, 17 Jul 2006 15:49:10
added it to my website http://www.youareunique.co.uk/altsex.htm
----- Original Message -----
"graham" , 17 Jul 2006 15:49:10
To:
Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006 2:34 PM
> Hi there,
>
> doulos wrote:
>
>> This week, I have been involved in promoting Backlash. So if everyone
>> could add this banner to any websites (suitable for mainstream sites)
>> they can, that would be cool:
>> http://www.backlash-uk.org.uk/banner.html
>
> Added to
> http://www.affordable-leather.co.uk/links-directories-news-information.htm
>
> Cheers,
> Graham.
>
>
>
>
> --
> If you want to share pictures, use the calendar, or start a vote
> visit http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/Backlash
>
> To leave the Group, email: Backlash-unsubscribe@smartgroups.com
>
> Report abuse
> http://www.smartgroups.com/text/abusereport.cfm?gid%3D3271426&mid%3D5210
>
Teddy, 18 Jul 2006 20:29:11
Another letter to my MP, as promised. I've been dissappointed by the response of this guy so far, but we'll see...
-------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Mr Howarth,
Although I don't wish to presume or pre-empt your position on this issue, I would like to make an additional point regarding the recent Home Office consultation on "extreme" pornography.
The consultation closed on 2nd Dec 2005 and it seems that the HO have yet to give any summary of the results of the consultation, yet alone state their subsequent intentions. Whilst I personally hope that they will decide the new legislation is both unneccessary and unworkable (and quite probably unlawful within the terms of the ECHR), I hope you will agree that it is imperative that there is absolute transparency and candour in the government's decision making in this area. In this light, I would suggest that the full set of responses to the consultation MUST be made publicly available (as the ScotExec have done on their website) and I would like to think that our elected MPs will pressure the HO to ensure that this happens. Otherwise the legislation may be rail-roaded into being, without a complete picture of the many complex issues involved having been properly offered for public consumption and understanding.
Yours Sincerely,
----------------------------------------------------------
Author wrote:
> Nice work! I may also write to my MP again; he's not been very prompt in his previous reply and I wish to make the point to him that the responses to the consultation MUST be made available to the public.
> T.
> Author wrote:
> > Hello
> > I emailed my MP stating my views and concerns and he has written to John Reid on my behalf. The MP is John Bercow.
> > Just another two pennies worth in the cause but who knows what effect a good few letters to MPs might have
> > Al
> > Author wrote:
> > > in this really vital stage of the campaign.
> > > We have a tiny and narrowing window of opportunity to affect the content of the review of the consultation and to show our opposition.
Alan, 23 Jul 2006 14:25:30
Have posted a warning and info in 30 odd asphix etc sites now to hopefully raise awareness of the threat
Al
Author wrote:
> in this really vital stage of the campaign.
> We have a tiny and narrowing window of opportunity to affect the content of the review of the consultation and to show our opposition.
Teddy, 23 Jul 2006 15:57:52
Hi Alan,
I would imagine that most of the UK users of these sites will have some idea of what is happening! However, I think the main point is to let these folks know that there are others fighting to defend their rights and not to feel intimidated about doing likewise...
T.
Author wrote:
> Have posted a warning and info in 30 odd asphix etc sites now to hopefully raise awareness of the threat
> Al
> Author wrote:
> > in this really vital stage of the campaign.
> > We have a tiny and narrowing window of opportunity to affect the content of the review of the consultation and to show our opposition.