Parliament is currently considering, as part of the upcoming Criminal Justice and Courts Bill, criminalising the possession of what the government refers to as ‘rape porn’. Sex & Censorship have submitted a response to oppose this new law (Clause 16 in the new bill).
The response was written by Jerry Barnett of Sex & Censorship, and Dr David Ley, a psychologist specialising in sexuality. We raised seven issues, which are summarised below (Dr Ley’s response formed point 5).
Theresa May is Watching You
Install a Secure VPN
- The proposed law results from a moral panic over ‘rape porn’ rather than any evidence of harm.
- Although headlined as ‘rape porn’, the wording of the law would criminalise consenting (but perhaps non-standard) sexual activity.
- The law blurs the distinction between consensual and nonconsensual sex, and so may hinder, rather than help, attempts to reduce sexual violence.
- There has been no evidence presented that viewers of the content in question may be driven to commit sexual violence as a result of viewing it.
- Conversely, there is evidence that such content may serve as an outlet for people who are prone to sexual violence and may reduce rather than increase their likelihood to commit harm.
- In general, possession laws are draconian as they place an impossible burden of legal and technical knowledge on members of the public.
- Censorship itself is harmful to free expression. Censorship laws should, therefore, only be introduced in response to compelling evidence of harm rather than on the basis of moral values alone.
The full response document (PDF) can be downloaded by clicking this link: S&C parliament rape porn submission.
We Recommend Private Internet Access