wrote:
> violence in a primarily sexual context or for erotic
> purposes, occasioning grievous bodily harm (or worse).
Well that would certainly include 'Hellraiser': Frank gets ripped
apart with hooks, a smile of happiness on his face, and *somewhere* in
my flat (damn my untidiness!) I've got a tape of an old Newsnight
interview with Clive Barker, where he states explicitly that he'd
consider the film a success if a couple came out of the cinema and
went home feeling that they'd like to experiment more sexually.
So the author's admitted intent was to show GBH for erotic purposes.
Nevertheless, doesn't anyone else think it would at least weaken the
government's arguments to point out that, if I were to take a still
image of the deceased James Coburn in 'Charade' and put it on a
website called "A Pinch of Snuff - the UK's premier erotic bondage and
asphyxiation site" with a suitably lurid caption, it would
miraculously become illegal?
Especially as someone would have to deliberately seek out such
material on the Internet, whereas the examples I've given could be
stumbled on by anyone turning on their TV at the wrong moment.
--
Peter
Mage, 13 Sep 2005 07:56:11
Author wrote:
> I'd just like to make a point here:
> If we're thinking about an exhibition to challenge the
> proposed legislatio on the grounds of already
> available material, we need to be able to demonstrate
> how the material we are displaying (despite having
> been passed by the BBFC) meets the criteria for
> "extreme pornography" that are listed in the act.
>
> Ta,
> SnowdropExplodes
Surely the point we are intending to illustrate is that of duplicity.
Quoting the preceding examples (as well as others mentioned elsewhere) give clear indication that the consultation document and its proposed legislation are ill thought and contradict existing legislation.
Tanos, 13 Sep 2005 22:32:59
-OJT- wrote:
> violence in a primarily sexual context or for erotic
> purposes, occasioning grievous bodily harm (or worse).
>
> Displaying a lot of BDSM-themed adverts and movie/TV
> clips isn't actually going to help much, as far as I
> can see.
It includes simulated GBH/murder in a sexual context,
so that includes a lot of films.
I think one excellent example to use would be "The Life
of David Gale" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0289992/
in which Kevin Spacey's character is convicted of the
murder of a woman who is found naked, with her hands
handcuffed behind her back, a plastic bag over her
head and having been fed the key to the handcuffs.
You see all that in the film, because someone has
videoed it, and you see the full video, with her dying
like that.
**SPOILER WARNING**
The twist, is that Spacey and the victim are anti
capital punishment activists, and they both give
their lives to try to discredit it (the full version
of the video shows her setting up all the above, not
Spacey doing it to her, and is released after his
execution.)
So as a campaign tool for us, that works on two
levels: as Peter has pointed out, you put some stills
from a film with a fcuking BBFC 15 certificate on "A Pinch
of Snuff - the UK's premier erotic bondage and asphyxiation
site" and suddenly even LOOKING at them becomes a thought-crime.
But also, the film itself is saying, "You're stupid if
you take video images at face value."
Regards,
Tanos
slowshark, 14 Sep 2005 14:46:28
Erm... ok not too sure how posting here works, so if this goes wrong....
Anyway, for a massive long list of mainstream films with BDSM in them follow the link below... it also has a little description of the relevent scene, so it looks to be easy to skip the less useful films.
http://www.sexuality.org/l/bdsm/bdsmfilm.html
«No Name Set», 14 Sep 2005 23:40:10
Yes.
For that matter, I don't think it would have to be posted in
such a dramatic fashion on a website. If it were found on a PC,
just as an unexplained still image, when the boys and girls in
blue had decided you were worth investigating, I'm sure it would
be miraculously illegal.
Or, for that matter, a short clip, out of context, as others
have mentioned.
I'm all in favour of highlighting the flaws in the proposals by
finding material which - at least in context - is inocuous, or a
good giggle and nothing serious, but which fall foul of the
proposed rules if you take a clip or a still. Or could be
interpreted as such, if you take the Spanner case - as regards
the amunt and duration of "harm" done - as a guide.
I also think it would make more impact on passing journos and
the interested-but-uncommitted if we had pics they'd look at,
giggle, smile, comment "Oh, I remember that one..." and then
with a shock "Thye can't mean *that* would be illegal? Surely
not?? Good grief!"
In which vein:
One of the "young Ones team later make a TV series about a young
idiot who suddenly gets elected as a Tory MP, knowning nothing
about either his constituency or the job of being an MP, or of
politics in general. Was it called "The Young Statesman"?? One
episode he goes to Madame Thingy's Spankorium - with fairly
predictable results, like the arrival of the Vice Squad who
promptly find their boss among the clientele, our hero waking up
in the morning and flipping on Breakfast TV only to find he's
supposed to be appearing on the show in about half an hour, and
trying to hail a taxi to get him there pronto with his bum too
sore to be able to sit down (lasting injury=ABH?), and trying to
deny to the taxi driver where he's been.
SUrely, somewhere, sometime, Yes Minister must have mentioned MPs
visiting Miss Whiplash - ??
And for the really ludicrous category - Kind hearts and
Coronets. One of the relatives standing between the narrator
and the fortune awaiting inheritance is, ah, horizontal and
passionate in a punt with a young lady when they both get bumped
off.
--
Rosemary
rosalee, 14 Sep 2005 23:48:56
It was called The New Statesman starring Rik Mayall as Alan B'stard.
Ginny
----- Original Message -----
: Rosemary, 14 Sep 2005 23:48:56
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 3:44 AM
Subject: Re: [backlash] RE: images of BDSM in the mainstream
One of the "young Ones team later make a TV series about a young
idiot who suddenly gets elected as a Tory MP, knowning nothing
about either his constituency or the job of being an MP, or of
politics in general. Was it called "The Young Statesman"?? One
episode he goes to Madame Thingy's Spankorium - with fairly
predictable results, like the arrival of the Vice Squad who
promptly find their boss among the clientele, our hero waking up
in the morning and flipping on Breakfast TV only to find he's
supposed to be appearing on the show in about half an hour, and
trying to hail a taxi to get him there pronto with his bum too
sore to be able to sit down (lasting injury=ABH?), and trying to
deny to the taxi driver where he's been.
SUrely, somewhere, sometime, Yes Minister must have mentioned MPs
visiting Miss Whiplash - ??
And for the really ludicrous category - Kind hearts and
Coronets. One of the relatives standing between the narrator
and the fortune awaiting inheritance is, ah, horizontal and
passionate in a punt with a young lady when they both get bumped
off.
--
Rosemary
--
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%3D511
Attachment:.
message.html (text/html)
Graham Marsden, 14 Sep 2005 23:57:20
Rosemary wrote:
> One of the "young Ones team later make a TV series about a young
> idiot who suddenly gets elected as a Tory MP, knowning nothing
> about either his constituency or the job of being an MP, or of
> politics in general. Was it called "The Young Statesman"??
The New Statesman starring Rik Mayall as Alan B'Stard.
> One episode he goes to Madame Thingy's Spankorium - with fairly
> predictable results, [edit] with his bum too
> sore to be able to sit down (lasting injury=ABH?), and trying to
> deny to the taxi driver where he's been.
An interesting point, although possibly not in the category of "Violent
Pornography"
slowshark, 15 Sep 2005 00:15:50
> SUrely, somewhere, sometime, Yes Minister must have mentioned MPs
> visiting Miss Whiplash - ??
I have them all (both YM and YPM) on DVD and although i havn't checked (as it will take a while), i'm fairly sure that they didn't. The only one that might mention sexual indiscretion is the YP-YPM bridge episode - but if so, the reference is so mild that it's not worth persuing. All are classed either U or PG (not that thats saying much given other evidence)... the BBFC classed it as infrequent, mild sexual innuendo. So no.
«No Name Set», 15 Sep 2005 23:19:56
Yes, yes!! That's the point. Of course the show isn't
"violent pornography". But if one takes a still shot, or a
brief clip, then what? Could one find a still or a clip that
would come under the proposal? - the aim is to show how
ridiculous the proposal is, if it bans stills from such
"ordinary" TV shows.
--
Rosemary
Chris, 17 Sep 2005 12:35:37
A couple of movies that I don't think have been mentioned :
Baise-moi - contains explicit, violent rape. Concerned citizens will be relieved to know that in order to receive its 18 certificate, the BBFC required 12 seconds to be cut (explicit close up of sexual penetration of woman during rape scene; sight of gun being pressed into man's anus prior to being fired) but the punches to the face and head butting of the victim whilst the rapist subdues his victim is untouched.
Crash - the David Cronenberg film, of course, which has violent sexual imagery pretty much from soup to nuts.
SnowdropExplodes, 17 Sep 2005 14:33:19
--- relaxedlondon@hotmail.com wrote:
> A couple of movies that I don't think have been
> mentioned :
>
> Baise-moi - contains explicit, violent rape.
> Concerned citizens will be relieved to know that in
> order to receive its 18 certificate, the BBFC
> required 12 seconds to be cut (explicit close up of
> sexual penetration of woman during rape scene; sight
> of gun being pressed into man's anus prior to being
> fired) but the punches to the face and head butting
> of the victim whilst the rapist subdues his victim
> is untouched.
>
> Crash - the David Cronenberg film, of course, which
> has violent sexual imagery pretty much from soup to
> nuts.
Baise-Moi is of little use to us, because the rape
scene was passed because the BBFC considered that it
was filmed in such a way that so sexual enjoyment by
either the victim or the perpetrator could be assumed
from the sequence. This is the explanation given by
the BBFC when other films with rape scenes were
rejected, and Baise-Moi was presented as an earlier
precedent.
It could be argued that since Baise-Moi shows GBH in a
sexual context that it is covered by the description
in the consultation paper, but since the BBFC has
already ruled that the scene is clearly not presented
for the purpose of sexual arousal, it doesn't match
the description in paragraph 37 (
http://www.smartgroups.com/vault/Backlash/consult.htm#p37
).
I haven't seen Crash (or read the book), but I imagine
that would be a more useful film to use.
Ta,
SnowdropExplodes
___________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Manniq, 17 Sep 2005 21:16:32
Author wrote:
> http://www.diesel.co.uk
> look under current campaigns.
> This is currently on a 20 foot high billboard in central London.
And the opposite side of the coin: things that seem to have fatal consequences but are otherwise totally innocuous.
Check out, in today's papers the young boy who killed himself, apparently attempting to imitate an episode from 'The Pirates of the Caribbean'.
I say ban Disney now!
Regards,
M
Amelie, 18 Sep 2005 11:23:40
there are lots of other related activities equally hard to understand if you
have not tried them: are these to be outlawed too? perhaps include fasting,
extreme sports, olympic training - the point is that we have the right to
push ourselves to extremes and learn about ourselves
http://www.bmezine.com/ritual/A50718/ritfaint.html
----- Original Message -----
, 18 Sep 2005 11:23:40
To:
Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2005 9:16 PM
>
>
> Author wrote:
>> http://www.diesel.co.uk
>> look under current campaigns.
>> This is currently on a 20 foot high billboard in central London.
>
>
> And the opposite side of the coin: things that seem to have fatal
> consequences but are otherwise totally innocuous.
>
> Check out, in today's papers the young boy who killed himself, apparently
> attempting to imitate an episode from 'The Pirates of the Caribbean'.
>
> I say ban Disney now!
>
> Regards,
>
> M
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> 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%3D538
>
>
DAury, 29 Sep 2005 20:42:36
There are several scenes in the film "The Life of David Gale" (starring Kevin Spacey), which show a naked, raped (we are told), and badly bruised woman who is handcuffed and has a plastic bag taped over her head. In one scene her actual suffocation and death is shown, although the film later reveals that this is actually suicide.
Considering the part played by the Longhurst murder in the inception of the proposed legislation, I would have thought that this scene would be particularly damning.
Oh yes, the film also has a 15 certificate in the UK - children can legally watch this.