> struan posts on ADT: Apparently, the BBFC (British Board of Film ‘Censorship’) have banned the Viv Thomas movie “Sisters”, describing it as “sexually depraved”!

Equally disappointingly, Viv Thomas has meekly accepted this (IMO) pathetic censorship, and has submitted a heavily censored version, which has even had to change its title to “I Love Jo”, in an attempt to get an R18 certificate(for those unlucky enough to be limited to the potentially, and seemingly increasingly, censored category).

First Digital Playground’s “Pirates” was hacked to bits, now a ban on a Viv Thomas movie – the BBFC go from bad to worse

> Lost Horizon posts: In this case I do not think the BBFC is too exceptional. Many countries that are more liberal in what they allow in porn than the UK still find incest porn problematic – not least among them the US. Viv Thomas has toyed with hints at incest-themes before (eg Pink Velvet 3 throughout, but particularly the first scene where Cameron Cruz seduces a young girl while repeatedly telling her how much she reminds her of her daughter and the extras where the women playing mother and daughter are shown in a long kiss) but he would have been fully aware that an out and out incest-themed porno was not going to make it passed the BBFC and he made this film in that knowledge.

>Laurie cameron Fan posts: I don’t know if there were actual sisters in that VT’s production , if not then what’s punished is not the action or the incest because it wasn’t but the sin since according to what is stated in a lot of churches everybody is a sinner even because of his thoughts.

Many countries have already begun to punish not a crime but a sin , but no one seems to be concerned about this.

Tinaka Posts: i stopped giving a fuck about stupid R18 years ago. Just ignore them.

Struan Posts: If it were only that simple – The problem is that if Customs happen to open an order and they believe it contains material in excess of R18, they have the perfect excuse to confiscate it. Worse, Customs have frightening powers of access, and if they happen to decide that the material in question, though still consensual adult, is particularly ‘dodgy’, they can turn up and kick your door in at 06.00, acting first, then asking questions later, and you know what they say, no smoke without fire! As far as I can see, Customs, like all UK authorities, are obsessed with porn, and the only reason that they allow the importation of R18 equivalent material is because it would be illegal to stop it, under EU law.

At the moment, the UK and Scottish Governments are proposing to criminalise the mere possession of so-called ‘extreme’ porn – one of the options listed in their consultation would be to extend the OPA, which currently only applies to distribution & importation, to possession also, which would mean that it would be a criminal offence to possess everything in excess of R18, punishable by up to 3 years in prison. This option would be the worst case scenario, but do you trust the people who came up with these ridiculous proposals in the first place to do the right/sensible thing?

So, although I have never bought R18 (and won’t, as long as they remain censored), it is not entirely easy to just simply ignore it, IMO.

> Joey Starr posts: Shame on the BBFC!!! I wish Viv Thomas released their uncut/uncensored version outside the UK, but I know that’s highly unlikely.

> Tinaka writes: I’m fully aware of all that. I think it’s a little parnoid though.

About the proposed new laws. It was reported on melonfarmers there was meeting between the BDSM community and the Home Office that plans would be “far less reaching”. But who knows.

>Laurie Cameron Fan writes: It’s happening everywhere not only in UK and it’s not paranoia it’s a calculated pattern , of course the first step was to put an R18 (or equivalent) law in order to determine a border usually to defend children from kiddyporn is the issue then the second step is to extend its power to obscenity to put some strict border to porn itself give an immense power to those in charge of controls because being obscenity an individual feeling no law can state its limit clearly, then step by step to block pornography completely.

There are in some country laws to not only to punish a real crime but punish what simply seems to be a crime for example an actress portraing a minor carachter such as a schoolgirl or a cheerleader it might be considered as kiddyporn even if the actress is 30 years old because it’s considered as material destinated to kiddyporners so it doesn’t matter whether the actors are or not adults because of the the resemblance to minors , producers and customers will be punished even if there’s obviously no crime. This is a low with the purpose to frighten porn users especially because kiddyporn is a international crime and it’s very easy to find a judge which will prosecute at will.

There’s no paranoia nor obsession there’s a well directed will, by whom I can’t answer by now

struan writes: The uncensored version IS available outside the UK, AFAIK – Thankfully, the Free World is not subject to UK censorship.

Struan adds: Perhaps, but better to be safe than sorry, IMO – you only have to look at all the existing censorship & prohibition of consensual adult material, not to mention the fight the authorities put up to stop the legalisation of some HC at R18, to see how repressive & illiberal they are when it comes to porn, again, IMO.

The report on the meeting between Backlash & the Home Office contains the following, potentially worrying, statement:-

“The Civil Servants explained that the intent had never been to criminalise material which it wasn’t already an offence to publish or distribute under the Obscene Publications Act.”

Unless it is just poorly worded, I take that to mean, at least potentially, that they DO wish to criminalise the possession of everything that falls foul of the OPA?

struan continues: The prison terms for the proposed criminalisation for the possession of so-called ‘extreme ‘porn means that such material would be effectively treated the same as child porn.

It appears, from various reports I have read, that the current US administration has attempted similar ‘linkage’ in their ‘war on porn’.

P.S.:Yes, they are actresses, and unrelated – the BBFC seems to object to the mere depiction/fantasy roll play – or perhaps nobody told them it was just fantasy?