General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Iceland campaigns to restrict internet porn [View all]Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)which probably ought to tell someone, something.
According to this article, the "government's main concern is violent pornography". However, the people who have pushed for anti-porn legislation in countries like Canada- Catherine MacKinnon, in particular- have clearly been arguing from the philosophical position that the visual depiction of the sex act itself is violent and degrading to women. This is taken as gospel truth in certain quarters, taught as an unchallengeable axiom at many colleges.
It is, supposedly, "not up for debate". The penetrative sex act is a Patriarchal institution and EVERY act, particularly that which is caught on film, constitutes inherent oppression and a class action harm against all women.
http://www.economist.com/news/international/21576366-iceland-determined-outlaw-worlds-oldest-business-can-it-succeed-naked-ambition
The governments main concern is violent pornography, says Ms Gunnarsdottir, and it wants the law to reflect this. For that, however, a clear definition of pornography is needed. It should include the depiction of violent or degrading sexual acts, says Robert Spano, dean of the faculty of law at the University of Iceland.
Violent is probably a small amount more doable, but I'm really curious as to how they're supposed to define "degrading".