Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Possession of rape porn will become punishable by up to three years in jail

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. This is news to me and I’m in Scotland. I probably have stuff that could be classed as such.

  2. What exactly constitutes “simulated” rape? If you and your partner are into BDSM and enjoy BDSM websites, you are viewing “simulated” rape? What is and what isn’t “simulated” rape is completely subjective, depending on who views it, regardless of the true meaning of the picture or video. To me this nothing more than a further invasion into, the public lives, of the populous.

    1. Matthew Leeper 5 Dec 2013, 5:58pm

      Couldn’t agree with you more if I tryed its up to parents to police there kids internet usage no excuses I have two kids myself and I ain’t making excuses the invasion of peoples personal life’s through the enforcement of harsh and unreasonable laws seems to be becoming common place here.

  3. What next? BDSM? Don’t get me wrong, I don’t own or view such material (rape simulated porn) but no crime here is being perpetrated. Granted, it might send out ‘a bad image/message’ but so can pretty much anything these days. Violent video games for instance. Violent rap lyrics. Hollywood movies depicting rape, murder and violence? Theatre? I could sit down and make an extensive list. But the gov’t don’t care about that. They are intent (at least the tory gov’t is) on making the UK a nanny state cross with a police state. We may be adults, but we’re not adult enough to understand that it is only art, and not real life, nor something we should wish to emulate in real life. Granted, some people will, but as I said, that can be applied to pretty much anything.
    Banning simulated rape porn and making it a prisonable offence to view/own such content ( and even though such material doesn’t appeal to me) is absurd.
    Maybe I’m on my own in thinking this.

    1. It sounds like the intent is to close the loophole where real rape scenes are labelled as ‘simulated’ and slipped by the law.

    2. Mihangel apYrs 18 Nov 2013, 9:00pm

      wait for the purge of the national art collection: “Rape of the Sabine Women” into the fire….

      1. Why are governments so intent on criminalizing their citizens? Do you have prisons for profit in the UK like we do here in the United (police) States of Amerika ? They are throwing people (mostly brown people) into prison for life for non-violent crimes such as selling drugs. (Empty cells do not make money)…It is folly to believe that by threatening their citizens with long sentences for offences which THEY deem to be bad will somehow create a perfect society. In their arrogance they believe that they can achieve Utopia by legislation and creating a Nanny state. They will instead create a Dystopian world.

      2. Yes though, to be pedantic, ‘rape’ in the context of the Sabine women is an archaic usage that means ‘[mass] abduction’ rather than ‘sexual violation’.

  4. I completely understand and know why it’s horrible i personally don’t want to see this, however sending someone to jail for this is pointless and uncontrollable this forces more people to use P2P networks to get their content.
    In the bigger picture which non of these governments seem to grasp is that every time they waste money and attack internet freedoms, you multiply that amount of content this then either solves nothing and wastes tax payer money on criminal procedure.

    1. Why is simulated rape horrible? It’s just a type of roleplay, and really nothing to worry about…

  5. Robert in S. Kensington 18 Nov 2013, 6:46pm

    Totally do not agree with this. Odd for a party which believes in less government yet wants to interfere in the lives of adults looking at porn in the privacy of their own homes. How many MPs I wonder are guilty of that?

    Government should instead concentrate on realistic issues such as revising comprehensive sex and sexual relationship education and making the teaching of it mandatory without any exceptions. We are arguably one of the most backward countries in the EU in dealing with sexuality.

  6. Michael Duggan 18 Nov 2013, 6:59pm

    What surreal legislation. One can only wonder this has more to do with the Conservtive re-election campaign than protecting the nations morals.

  7. So can we look forward to seeing the THT exec carted off to jail in respect of http://www.hardcell.org.uk?

  8. Robert (Kettering) 18 Nov 2013, 7:45pm

    What a pathetic piece of Nanny State Legislation. There can hardly be a LGBT person in this country with internet access who hasn’t looked at this sort of Gay porn – and enjoyed it!

    For goodness sake Cameron leave us alone and let US choose what we watch and how we enjoy consential sex, be that in the privacy of our own homes or on the internet.

    PS. Hope you plan to build dozens of new jails to house us all!!!!!!!

  9. Why? Do they think that simulated rape scenes make people go and rape someone?

    Are they going to make war movies illegal? Because they obviously lead governments and MP’s to want to go to war.

  10. bobbleobble 18 Nov 2013, 7:51pm

    I can’t get my head around this one. Imprisoning people for watching actors simulate rape? My brother, a huge David Lynch fan, has Blue Velvet on DVD. Should I advise him to bin it now? I have the Downton episode on my V+ box where Anna was raped and a copy of Shawshank somewhere must I dispose now and if not why not since they also have actors depicting rape? If I were turned on by false depictions of rape then those would do just as well.

    This is yet again puritanical nonsense from a government without a clue. They don’t like how some people get their rocks off so those people must be criminalised. Idiots the lot of them.

  11. The images that will become illegal to posses only apeeal to people because they fit in with images that already exist psychologically. Banning them is as intelligent as banning evil. You can do it on paper but it will change nothing.
    The dark side of the human psyche should not be repressed, that will only displace it to the unconscious where we cannot control it with our conscious reason.
    We must acknowledge that “badness” exist inside us and that we must learn to control it. In order to control it we need to have recognized it.
    Wishful, counterproductive thinking by stupid politicians who think that legislation is the solution to all challenges and that their reach is unlimited.

  12. How are these going to define the threshold of rape versus non rape? This will be interesting to say the least!

  13. Backlash UK 18 Nov 2013, 10:30pm

    Backlash is an umbrella organisation providing academic, legal and campaigning resources defending freedom of sexual expression. We support the rights of adults to participate in all consensual sexual activities and to watch, read and create any fictional interpretation of such in any media.

    Backlash was created in 2005 to collate evidence for an informed debate on censorship and to oppose criminalisation of ownership of material just because the Home Office finds it abhorrent.

    It continues to provide legal advice and defend those caught up in these new laws, raise awareness about why the laws are wrong, won’t work, and have unintended consequences.

    If you want more information on Backlash and the work we do, visit our website

    http://www.backlash-uk.org.uk/wp/

  14. Right Did I just read this right.

    If Im interested in being a victim in a consentual rape scene and get turned on by it I go to jail because my “perverted” mind and intersts are offensive to the young people.

    Wait… isn’t it an offence to watch porn when your under aged?

  15. This is complete and utter nonsense. How the hell can someone determine categorically whether a video or image is considered simulated rape? Does this include all BDSM and any porn where restraints are used? Does there need to be a clear statement of it being “rape”? Is this law going to also cover fiction novels and erotica sold to women? If so, they better start destroying 50 Shades of Grey in public burnings!

    This is such bullsh*t knee-jerk, conservative cr*p and it’s completely unenforceable. Controlling the thoughts of others based on the Victorian attitudes of a fanatical minority is never acceptable, this is an embarrassment to our country – a country where it’s still considered a criminal offense to have an adult DVD or magazine sent to you by post.

    GROW UP CAMORON.

    1. You should see the movie “V for vendetta”

  16. Why stop at porn? Why not ban simulated rape anywhere? Ban Clockword Orange, Straw Dogs, The Accused, Boys Don’t Cry.. The list is endless.

  17. I didn’t even know there was already a law like this in place in Scotland. I looked it up and it brought in by the SNP government in 2-3 years ago. Apparently it’s not a particularly clear law.

    http://m.voices.yahoo.com/scotland-has-pornography-law-7714136.html

    1. probably why I was unaware. The SNP are really quite socially conservative at heart and also have a habit of sneaking things through.

      1. You’ve got that right about the SNP. They don’t seem to be able to do anything without getting approval from the catholic church – cervical cancer vaccinations spring to mind, or their series of meetings between senior government ministers (including Salmond himself) and catholic bishops on same sex marriage, or there assistance and continued support of St. Margaret’s catholic adoption agency. They also have a tendency to favour nanny state laws – this porn law, their minimum pricing of alcohol, their controversial sectarian legislation which Roseanna Cunningham publicy stated could mean someone being arrested for singing God Save the Queen or for blessing themselves.

  18. Robert in S. Kensington 19 Nov 2013, 12:39pm

    Hmmm, I didn’t see any government interference in the Catholic church’s paedophile debacle, no hierarchy arrested for covering up and sheltering the real perverts molesting and raping under age children. Blatant hypocrisy.

    I don’t believe in censorship of any kind and if the government is going to dictate what adults can view or not view online, then they must also apply the same scrutiny to the film and tv industry. There are plenty of gratuitous sex scenes and sexual violence glorified and I really don’t think they’ve realized the implications of such draconian intervention.

    What have other countries done in this regard?

    1. Frank Boulton 20 Nov 2013, 11:31am

      I think that you have almost but not quite hit the nail on the head. I don’t really want to be seen as taking either side in this particular debate. However, I think that we can be sure that the proposed ban on “rape pornography” will not be a blanket ban on all rape scenes. The OED defines pornography as “printed or visual material containing the explicit description or display of sexual organs or activity, intended to stimulate sexual excitement.” The legal question is likely to revolve around whether this was the sole purpose of the publication. Rape scenes in literature and visual material could well be deemed justifiable for “artistic” or historical reasons. Other factors could enter into the equation, such the amount of violence in a scene or its potential to shock. Some material may be viewed as glorifying rape more than other material. As with other legislation about bedroom activity, it is likely to be poorly put together.

  19. Sometimes it’s like the last Labour government never left…

    1. This law is being proposed by a Conservative/Lib Dem coalition government in Westminster and has already been introduced by an SNP government in Scotland. I’m not sure how you can possibly turn that into a criticism of Labour.

      Don’t get me wrong, I’m not a Labour supporter, or a supporter of any party in particular, but I believe in giving credit where it’s due and criticising when necessary. From your comments on this and other threads, you are clearly a Lib Dem supporter who simply can’t see beyond blindly supporting your party, even when that means giving them credit for stuff they didn’t do (repealing Sect.28 in Scotland) or ignoring when they’ve got it wrong and trying to blame Labour instead!

      1. Perhaps it is because the extreme porn law was introduced by Labour with Lib Dems voting against and Tories abstaining!

        1. So Labour brought in the laws against extreme porn in the first place, while Gordon Brown was PM if I remember correctly, and by all means criticise them for it if you think they were wrong to do so.

          But this story is about the current Conservative/Lib Dem government who are going to update the laws to include a jail term. It seems strange to criticise it in the way Jen did, by completely ignoring the parties in government who are proposing it just now, and instead criticising the party who brought it in years ago. Why focus only on the Labour aspect of it and completely ignore the Conservatives/Lib Dems?

          I’ve been leaving comments on Pink News for a few years, and I’ve noticed that people who support or are members of a political party can be blinkered by that support, blindly defending the party no matter what. It’s not just Pink News, you can see it on other news sites too. I’m glad that I’m not in thrall to a political party and I can actually have opinions of my own.

        2. The fact the Lib Dems voted against the laws when Labour introduced them makes it even more wrong that they are proposing introducing a jail sentence to the laws at present. Surely they deserve even more criticism in that case?

  20. Mary Whitehouse would have been delighted. How can a government which legalized gay marriage then come out with nonsense like this?

  21. Stephen Frost 20 Nov 2013, 2:28am

    I doubt anybody ever became a rapist from watching this sort of thing any more than people became murderers from playing Mortal Kombat. This government has introduced a series of censorships and bans, based on little to no logic or research, in order to prove they are still right wing, to garner back some lost support. They’d be better off doing something useful like educating people about the illogical nature of victim blaming which prevents victims from coming forward. It’s rather insulting to suggest people don’t know fiction from reality. I’ll watch a horror film and scream that they should kill the annoying person next, but I’m certain I wouldn’t act the same way in a real situation!!

  22. England is a horrible litlle country with no concept of freedom of expression. So glad I don’t live there.

    1. Well I wouldn’t like to hear what you think of Scotland since the Scottish government brought in this law about 3 years ago. At least there’s still a chance it might not happen in England (& Wales). It’s already in place in Scotland.

  23. I would rather see governments put forward stronger efforts to stop actual rape.

  24. Colin (Queenstown-London) 1 Dec 2013, 6:59pm

    Totally against this but I can never ever agree with rape lets make that clear.

    However I’m not sure what images they refer to but a guy tied up being shagged to me is not rape. Websites like bound and gagged, Kinky etc are to me simply sexual play.

    I’d much rather someone got off on that than raping people. To me it’s a bit like prostitution legalise it, make sure those involved are being looked after, checked medically and are not being forced into it. OR have women raped. Countries like Australia and New Zealand are enlightened. I’d like to know the religions of the people behind this Bill.

    Infact I’m rapidly wanting to have a register of religion for all public and private people who are attempting to influence governments both nationally and locally. This would be similar to that Parliament and local government requires of bus interests

    I think this is stupid. However please show us the evidence that these proposals are based on. We are the people who will be affected.

  25. This new law seems like it goes a bit too far and is so ambiguous it can’t be good. – http://issuesofhumanity.blogspot.co.uk/2013/05/extreme-porn-and-law-what-can-be-done.html

  26. Other similar legislation means that Fellini’s Romeo and Juliet is illegal because it purports to show two people under 16 years old in bed.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all