|
Age and Censorship |
PDF |
| Print | |
E-mail |
|
Written by robbie
|
|
Friday, 17 July 2009 13:23 |
|
One of the main problems we have with censorship issues in Australia is that the censors are too old. The average age of Australia’s Classification Board (CB) is about 40 years old. The average age of the Classification Review Board (CRB) is even higher. The average age of the majority of DVD watchers is about 25 plus.
Successive governments in Australia have never given people between the ages of 18 and 30 a fair go. There is only one person in their twenties on both censorship bodies. John Howard hand-picked the last CRB under his watch. Most of them were grandparents! He even had the hide to pick a former 60 year old conservative Attorney General. Like that bloke really needed the job and like he really understood what a 20 year old living in Fitzroy or Darlinghurst wanted from a censorship scheme…
If the bulk of entertainment media users are in their 20s and 30s then the makeup of official censorship bodies should reflect that. Were not living in China or Iran. And not some dweeb fresh out of the Catholic University who goes to youth fellowship every second night either. No. There should be a 20 year old, gamer with a couple of tatts and a ring through her nose sitting up there with all the suits and representing the millions of young men and women like her in Australia. In a democracy, surely that’s what its all about. But of course Rudd and Turnbull couldn’t care less about the community standards of 20 and 30 year olds because they are vastly different from theirs. Rudd and his new censorship minister, Brendan O’Connor, have no interest in creating R and X rated categories for computer games and neither have they any interest in taking on the states to standardise their outdated laws on X rated films. The only thing that is stopping Rudd from creating adult categories for computer games is a small change to the way that the State and Commonwealth Censorship Ministers agree to conduct their business. At the moment the stuffy old Christian Attorney General from South Australia says he thinks R and X rated computer games are bad for the community and so the rules say he can veto all the other State Attorneys General who have already said they’ll allow an R category. If they were real Attorney Generals they’d take this son of a bitch out the back of the toilet block and tell him to mind his own business! But no…they’re too polite and overawed by ‘protocol’ to consider rocking the boat for what the majority of Australians want here. In fact Rudd should be the bovver boy and just change the damn rules for their silly meeting game and say the ‘majority rules’. Surely he knows there’s one idiot in every team and to reduce the team to that level is madness.
And where’s the grand poohbah federal Attorney General, Robert McClelland, in all this? Oh, that’s right. Censorship is so below his station in politics that they have to give all this distasteful tits and bums stuff away to a junior minister who is not even in Cabinet. Mr McClelland only deals in big picture issues like national security, you know.
Extremely discriminatory and ageist attitudes underly current censorship policy and young people need to vote hard against this sort of bullshit before it goes any further.
|
|
|
Filtering game madness |
PDF |
| Print | |
E-mail |
|
Written by ASP Staff
|
|
Friday, 10 July 2009 15:54 |
Filtering Games Madness
Communications Minister Senator Conroy’s recent remarks that the filter will block gaming websites that feature adult games just highlights how broken our existing censorship scheme is.
Conroy now states that he only wants to mandatorily block sites that feature material that would be refused classification. It almost sounds reasonable BUT this would mean that any site that sells or advertises computer games that have been refused classification would have to be mandatorily blocked.
I had a quick look on Amazon and they stock the games Sexy Poker, Fallout 3, Reservoir Dogs and Dark Sector, all of which have been refused classification in Australia. While they are refused classification here they don't even get a parental warning on Amazon!
To further illustrate the madness Reservoir Dogs the film is quite legal but the game is not. The film Ultimate Poker Babes is absolutely legal but the game Sexy Poker is not. I even noticed that we have banned a game called Spin the Bottle - Adults Only! But as far as know it is still legal to play it with a real bottle.
The classification variances also extend to publications and films. What is legal in a publication may not be in a film. For example Japan Bondage is a legal category 2 publication but the film Bondage Japan Part 1 is refused classification.
The filter exposes these anomalies. According to Senator Conroy a site showing reservoir dogs the film is okay but a site selling reservoir dogs the game is so bad that it must be mandatorily blocked to protect Australians. A site showing the art of Japanese rope tying in photos will be legal but a site showing a film of the same content will not!
While we all know the filter is a very bad idea it is time to bring our classification scheme into the 21st century and allow adults to decide what they view and in what format.
Currently we have a complicated and inconsistent scheme with two adult categories for films (R and X), two for publications (Category 1 and category 2) and none for computer games. How about we have one classification for all adult material regardless of the format?
|
|
Sexuality and disability |
PDF |
| Print | |
E-mail |
|
Written by Dr George Taleporos
|
|
Tuesday, 07 July 2009 10:00 |
There are many people with disabilities who are prevented from leading enjoyable and active sexual lives because of the serious barriers that we face. As a person with a physical disability and a PhD in psychology, body image, sexuality and disability, I understand that these barriers are largely social and stem from the negative attitudes that many of us have towards physical difference. The most prevalent and painful social attitude for many people with disabilities is that we are are unworthy sexual partners destined to a life without sexual relationships.
It is very difficult to change social attitudes and as an advocate for people with disabilities I have had to put that one in the "too hard basket" for now. Sexuality and disability advocacy can begin instead at the level of social policy by challenging the range of discriminatory practices that attack the sexual rights of people with disabilities. For example, we need to change the rules that prevent people with disabilities who are living in supported accommodation from having sex and relationships in their own homes. We need to remove restrictive planning laws that make adult shops inaccessible to wheelchair users. We need a sex positive approach to the provision of disability services so that the sexual needs of people with disabilities are not only considered within the context of "inappropriate behaviour" but as an important part of a person's life.
The Australian sex party, is the first party that I know of that has a platform to address these issues and protect the sexual rights of people with disabilities. Historically Fiona Patten has been a very strong advocate for people with disabilities on sexuality and broader issues. I am excited by the prospect of a party with Fiona Patten at the helm being elected to Parliament, she is a fantastic ally with a long-term commitment to speaking out for the sexual rights of people with disabilities. I look forward to seeing people with disabilities get behind the party and help shape its policy platform.
|
|
Why we still oppose .xxx TLD |
PDF |
| Print | |
E-mail |
|
Written by Fiona Patten
|
|
Tuesday, 07 July 2009 17:24 |
Top Level Domain names are back on the agenda and of course a number of people are clambering for the adult domain .xxx
A few years ago ICANN rejected the persistent applications of the company ICM for this TLD on the grounds that they did not appear to have industry support (and they didn’t). This time round the rules may be somewhat different and we could see a bidding war for domains such as .xxx that could result in the winning bidder paying millions of dollars for this TLD. The result could be that registration for your company’s .xxx name (to protect your trademark) could be very expensive and there would be great incentive for the winning applicants to get government support to force adult sites onto this domain.
I attended the ICANN meeting in 2006 in Wellington NZ where .XXX was debated in general and by GAC (Government Advisory Committee). I attended with a representative from the US industry group Free Speech Coalition. The adult industry had no doubt where this was heading. Firstly, all businesses would need to purchase their business name within the .xxx domain and secondly government regulations could have forced all adult sites into the ghetto of .xxx.
In 2006 after a lot of meetings, drinking and phones running hot the .XXX domain was rejected by GAC. The then Australian Communications Minister Senator Helen Coonan opposed it on the grounds that adult content was already banned from being hosted in Australia and concerns that a new adult domain would only increase the amount of adult material on line. This opinion was echoed by conservative and religious organisations.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
Written by Fiona Patten
|
|
Monday, 06 July 2009 11:47 |
 I have just had a brilliant diving holiday on the northern edge of the Great Barrier Reef and southern end of the Coral Sea. Of course it was fantastic and totally immersing, literally and figuratively. While I barely thought of work, the sight of sea cucumbers and giant clams kept thoughts of sex to the fore. The Coral Sea is effectively the breeding ground for much of the fish population that we enjoy eating, fishing for and watching while diving and snorkeling.
Most political parties don't include sex in their environmental platforms. In fact, most wildlife and conservation groups don't mention it either. But its one of the main causes of diminishing wildlife species. Habitat loss is not just about having no food to eat. Its also about the fact that there's nowhere left for many animals to breed. And the first aspect of the breeding cycle is having spaces where animals want to have sex.
This fact is never acknowledged by political and environmental groups because many of them think its 'smutty'. In 1991 the World Wildlife Fund threatened legal action over an Australian-based sex magazine called Ecstasy. The WWF claimed that because the explicit magazine had given them a free full-page ad with a photo of two lions mating next to their logo, that somehow the magazine had besmirched the good name of the WWF. Sure, the magazine should have asked for permission to use their logo but the magazine's intentions were purely honourable. The WWF just resented the explicit animal mating photo alongside their name and also having it published in an adult magazine.
I think that protecting some of the space in the Coral Sea where the fish have sex is a worthwhile Sex Party policy? What do you think?
On return to dry land I read that our male sailors are embarrassing themselves by keeping ledgers of their sexual conquests while at sea. I can’t help think that if there was a greater gender balance in the defense forces we would see less of this childish and degrading activity. It is sort of counter-intuitive, but equal numbers of female sailors would create a more mature workplace and one where women would not be seen as the 'outsider' or the 'loner'. With equal numbers of men and women and a few transsexuals as well, a ship would not have these problems. They would be far more likely to turn into larrikan games where both (all) genders were targeted for some light hearted fun.
I would like to hear your thoughts or experiences, Fiona.
|
|
Written by ASP Staff
|
|
Saturday, 04 July 2009 10:50 |
|
Australian journalism is the poorer today after the death of long time News Ltd journalist, Frank Devine. Frank was a natural conservative and a strong advocate of the Catholic faith but he wrote quite a few sensible and witty columns about the sex industry. In discussions with the Eros Association he was always the devil’s advocate on the surface but underneath his conservative exterior - pragmatism, public health and his own natural ease with sexuality made him a reluctant ally.
Fiona
|
|
K Rudd and the Pope |
PDF |
| Print | |
E-mail |
|
Written by ASP Staff
|
|
Friday, 03 July 2009 11:47 |
|
So K Rudd is going to use his time with the Pope to push for the canonisation of Sister Mary McKillop. I’m sure that Ms McKillop was a dedicated nun and probably had a very high level of awareness. But if she were around today I reckon she’d be telling the PM to use the time with the Pope to talk about the terms and conditions of a Royal Commission into child sex abuse in the church. The thought of two world leaders spending time and valuable resources debating whether 19th century nun should be given the equivalent of a secular knighthood, when there are still thousands of people suffering as a result of sexual abuse by this women’s colleagues, shows how far out of touch they both are. The first Christian Brothers arrived in Australia in 1843, the year after Mary MacKillop was born. History now records that even in those very early days these Irish Catholic priests were planning the systematic abuse of young Australian children and that they laid the blueprint for over a century of ingrained and diabolical abuse. Almost every month over the past decade we have seen a Catholic priest in the courts for this heinous crime and there is no evidence that the church’s silly efforts to stop it are being effective. Or is there? Well….no one knows. Neither John Howard nor Kevin Rudd want to promote any debate about this situation let alone any kind of enquiry or research project to determine what it was in church life that caused all this abuse and whether or not it is stopping. The Australian Sex Party and the Broken Rites group are the only two organisations that are calling for an official enquiry. We believe that only a Royal Commission with its sweeping powers will be effective in finding out the truth about these issues. Any enquiry of a lesser nature has the potential to be got at by the powerful allies that the churches have in both Labor and the Coalition parties.
Fiona
|
|
|
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next > End >>
|
|
Page 7 of 7 |
