General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: With all the anti-pornography talk, can we have a sex positive thread? [View all]Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)If one is talking about laws, however, definitions are important. Like legal adulthood, is a bright and easily legally defined line. Consent itself- most people would say, I think, that if someone agrees to appear in film, signs something to that effect in clear mind and not under duress, they're consenting. Certainly the final authority on whether a person consents or consented should be the person themselves, not strangers who look at material they dont like and say "I wouldnt consent to that, so no one is capable of doing so"
Which is the argument we see against porn, all the time. Consenting adults aren't actually consenting adults because someone has arbitrarily decided that the minute a woman takes her clothes off in front of a camera, she becomes incapable of consenting.
Another problem in these threads is that anyone who questions the wording of, say, this UK law- or any law which bans performances, fiction, by consenting adults- is accused of "supporting" the worst of whatever someone can find on google.
i understand why the 1st amendment gives Nazis the right to march; that doesn't make me pro-Nazi. And bad laws, badly written laws, often fall victim to the inevitable unintended consequences effect. Certainly no one in California wanted to see another Polly Klaas kidnapping.. But the "3 strikes" law passed because of it didn't end up incarcerating more Richard Allen Davises, so much as the guy whose "third strike" was stealing a piece of pizza.