Bondage+insertion=patently obscene
 

I always understood that BDSM could not be legally combined with real sex, so I was a bit surprised to find this gallery:

http://adultsextop.com/gallery/zoya/index.html

1) there isnt any bondage in that picture, besides the hair pulling.

2) I understand the canadian laws against violence in porn, but has there ever actually been an obscenity prosecution and conviction against BDSM and sex?

Is there a list somewhere of all the obscenity convictions of the last, oh, 20-50 years?

What an absurdly inappropriate use of that content. I wonder how Dove would feel about their product packaging being used in porn pics lol.

She's handcuffed to the shower rail.

Not true, she is handcuffed to something. Technically, that's bondage. She is "bound" to the plumbing and plenty of bondage photography uses handcuffs.

Some guys get to have all the fun...

Okay, i saw the handcuffs after looking at the pictures. They arent in the thumbnails! Guess im really not into the girl, that I didnt click on the pictures.

Show me the case that has been prosecuted against penetration with bondage.

Is that your standard: You'll break any law they haven't prosecuted yet? Just from an ethical standpoint, bondage + sex can be construed as a rape image (and those images certainly LOOK like rape images).

Im with you unseen, they might as well be rape pics for all intents and purposes. She doesnt look happy and she is bound.

God knows why people film this shit, its only asking for trouble.

Becasue child killers have credit cards too. :(

I am not even going to get into a "this is right" or "this is wrong" discussion.

I do propose that they make pics like this because they make, or at least think they will make, money.

Have you ever seen what they do at Extreme Associates?

I personally try to stay with, in the words of Larry Flynt, "Plain old vanilla sex", and leave all of the extreme shit to others. The last place I want to find myself is in jail. If other people want to push the limits then it only make my shit look tame and then the heat is off my ass . . .

The obscenity laws are written to the point that anything that I do can be considered "obscene" at least in the state where I reside. However, half the things at the adult video store down the road are far worse than anything that I do.

You arent guilty of obscenity until the jury says that you are. That can range from spread shots to fucking to BDSM to almost anything that they want to get you for. Its a risk.

I might think that Max Hardcore or Seymore Butts are obscene. but, they werent convicted. So, are they obscene? Maybe. Are they prosecutable? Not at the moment, for now. Should we worry about more prosecutions? Sure. But, im not going to let the fear of being prosecuted stop me from running my site.

BTW, I didnt click on the pictures simply because the model looked like she wasnt enjoying it. Call it my fetish if you will, the girl has to look like shes enjoying it for me to get off. :)

Funny tho' how our standards have changed...because at one time flynt just filming or photographing 'Plain old vanilla sex," was extreme.

I'm not an attorney (I have to say that because the law is starting to get deep here), but let me introduce you to the concept of "patently obscene." What this means is that no jury's opinion is necessary. If you did it, then it's obscene and you're in deep doo-doo.

Scat, child porn, and bondage+sex are among the patently obscene categories.

Not to mention that the last time I looked, anal sex and golden showers were pretty standard fare in good ole Hustler Magazine.

I do not believe there is such a thing as a legal concept of "patently obscene" in most US jurisdictions. Child porn is per se illegal whether it's obscene or not, but everything else requires a jury to determine whether it violates community standards. (Murky & dangerous part is the who/what/where questions surrounding that test.)

All the received rules of thumb (no bondage plus sex, no scat, no animals, etc.) are somewhat stale distillations of good legal guesswork regarding what was likely to trigger successful obscenity prosecutions during the Reagan administration. Except in LA and a couple of bible belt states, there haven't been many non-kiddie obscenity cases in quite a while, although Asshahahahaha threatens periodically to bring them back.

The gallery in question looks a lot like the content in Hustler's Taboo Magazine, and Larry has good lawyers these days. It's edgy, it's far from safe, but it's a ways from sure-thing illegal.

Plus of course the webmaster may not even be subject to the jurisdiction of courts in the US. Sometimes globalization is your friend!

Damn You!

Now I visited a gallery that is being monitored by the government for suspected terrorist activity.

Thanks.:mad: :ak47:

I'm no lawyer (are you?) so I'm awaiting a judgment from one of our resident attorneys on the fine technical points.

As to Hustler and Taboo, if you have seen any layouts with a bound person being penetrated or clearly engaging in a sex act, I'd like to see that.

As it happens, I am a lawyer, but obviously off-the-cuff BBS remarks are no substitute for a paid-for opinion backed up by a legal malpractice insurance policy. (Nor does the fact that I'm a lawyer add much credibility to the opinions I spout for free, which is why I never mention the fact unless asked directly.) However, I do have a pretty keen interest in obscenity law, and I've never come across the "patently obscene" idea in an obscenity statute or judicial opinion. (The idea may be a corruption of the fact that material must be "patently offensive" in order to even raise the community standards issue that lies at the heart of modern obscenity law.)

If you get more of a "judgement" (or even an firm opinion) without paying some fairly major bucks for it, I'll be pretty surprised. But I'm damn confident the law is not so open-and-shut as the first post in this thread suggests. I'm not saying that shit's not obscene -- I'm betting it wouldn't be too hard to find a jurisdiction where it is -- I'm just saying the rule of thumb doesn't get you there.

And you must not have looked at Taboo lately -- there's a handcuffed blowjob, at least, in just about every issue.