David Cameron's Been A Bad Boy. And He Should Go To Prison For It.

Banning "Rape Porn" is a step too far.

Okay, let's get this out of the way:

We're all grown ups here. (At least I bloody hope so) So we can talk about this like grown ups. Fantasies are not the same as actions. According to plenty of studies you can find with a quick google search, fantasies of having sex with another person which are on some level non-consensual are far more common than you might think. A significant proportion of both men and women find the idea in some way attractive in a hypothetical scenario inside their own minds. (Interestingly, both sexes prefer to imagine themselves being the recipients of the advances in these encounters, rather than the generally perceived image of men having domination fantasies.)

But apparently, owning videos or images or even written descriptions of "Violent Sex" could result in 3 years of prison time. Three years! For videos, images or stories of people who are either fictional or are consenting and being paid handsomely to have sex just like normal but have a frowny expression on their faces. This is all violent sex as well. Including bondage, submission, and domination. If you like spanking or being bitten or scratched, then it's just a sad day for you. The classic cliches of using hot wax or ice cubes? Not on your life, son. All of these things apparently engender hatred and mistreatment of women. (David Cameron apparently not being aware that men can also be submissive during sex, but looking at the way He's fucking the country so often, that ignorance is understandable.)

Put all of this on and don't remove it until student debt and underpaid workers have crippled the economy.

I don't see what the crime is here. I understood it when it was made a crime to possess actual footage of brutal rapes and child abuse, because you then have a very firm incentive for the accused to point fingers at where they got the material from, enabling the motherfuckers who actually rape and abuse people to be more easily apprehended and dealt with. But when it's faked by consenting actors? What possible tangible offense against the law is being committed?

And you can't tell a massive portion of the population that their sexual musings (which British people already feel ashamed of and repulsed by as it is) are evil or that you're a criminal just for having those thoughts. That sort of backwards attitudes towards sex is one of the more absurd things that future generations will look back on as quaint and stupid. Like Victorians covering up their piano legs. It's especially bad when you realise that the more you repress someone's fantasies, the weirder and crazier they get, and the more likely that person is to actually act on them and do something they will regret. Release of this kind of thing is necessary, and nothing good will come of this law.

Banning sad fiction written by unloved women who don't understand sex?

It won't affect me personally because these are not my fetishes. But I've messed around with them a bit at the behest of another, and they're fun and harmless and pretty damned vanilla as far as devious sexual desires can get. If you don't believe me then you must new to this here internet, and my advice is to leave now and don't come back.

The thing that baffles me the most is just how far into the realm of freedom this encroaches. This is as close as you can possibly get to banning someone's thoughts and ideas without mind-reading technology.

Just think for a minute about our society's attitude to sex. In England if you have a license you can go to a shooting range and practice using murder weapons until you are ruthlessly efficient and reliable. But you can't own a photograph of a couple having sex if one of them is wearing a blindfold.  Does this bother anyone else? In Breaking Bad people are brutally, hideously stabbed to death, incinerated alive, choke to death on their own vomit, have their throats opened with stanley knives, and let's not forget the many, many people who are shot to death. All accompanied by sickening sound effects and disturbingly realistic acting. But there's a few scenes where for a few seconds, two clothed characters mimic sex on camera, with zero breasts or sex organs on display during the entire 6 seasons of the show. But almost all of the controversy around the show came from the "Sexually mature" content. 

Worse than murder?

Is our society out of it's goddamned mind?! I think it must be.

In every case to do with people's "deviant" sexual proclivities, the hard line priests/pastors/politicians/police officers/teachers who try to regulate against it always always end up being really, really creepily into it. And their overcompensation always gets found out. Now, I admit some level of sexual arousal in the idea of David Cameron being into bondage, because then he'd let me bind him, gag him, and throw him into the Thames with a breezeblock tied around his neck.

Just think. We'd never have to hear from him again. Bliss.

So someone in the NSA go and check his search history for us, find the "violent" porn in it, and send him to fucking jail.

This has been an Empirical Opinions Journal, allow me to play you out: