The UK 'extreme' p*rn law

Much of their argument focuses upon men using pornography, and that women use and enjoy pornography seems to be as radical a suggestion as lesbianism to Queen Victoria.

The fact that some people, even feminists, are arguing “... if you need ‘violent pornography’ to get you through the night, you have serious problems and should get help … If you ‘get off’ on watching any of the things listed as ‘extreme porn’, you are a sick individual …” is a worry, a big worry. It is both denying and repressing women’s sexuality in the name of “feminism” whereas in fact feminism ought to strive for women’s sexual freedom and autonomy.

Now, I’ve been “kicked out” of the feminist movement many times by radical feminists for this point of view, and so too have other “sex positive” feminists. I do not deny that violence against women is a problem; it is a problem I do address in my writing. But by claiming “men use pornography to kill” and “pornography killed Jane Longhurst” is not addressing the real issues that may be responsible for this violence.

Why has no one asked why Coutts treatment was so inadequate that he was able to live out his fantasy? Blaming pornography is not protecting women. Furthermore, making illegal pornography that does not actually depict but “appears” to depict violence is a suppression of some women’s sexuality as it criminalises BDSM fantasy that many women enjoy.

This kind of censorship benefits no one and represses sexuality, however extreme, deviant or “distasteful” some find its expression. Meanwhile, murderers will still murder women and rapists will still rape women. Attributing it to pornography is not addressing the issue - it is distracting from it.