Thersites Writes

So, violent porn is getting banned in the UK and we'll all now sleep safely in our beds. Hurrah!

Actually not. First of all, a pervert is a pervert, so if we somehow stop his supply of filth, that in itself is not going to stop him carrying out crimes. Vigilance may, though, and so could everyone looking out for everyone else a bit more.

But the thrill we get by symbolically purging ourselves of the latest scapegoat, be it guns, dangerous dogs or tacky Italian video nasties in the 80s, has always vetoed common sense, so there you go. And in that vein, the proposed law makes a sweeping assertion that all violent porn is immoral. True, if it features unwilling parties or encourages genuinely depraved behaviour like child abuse or bestiality, then throw the book at 'em.

But while violent porn involving willing parties isn't your cup of tea, and is certainly not mine, why shouldn't consenting adults watch what other consulting adults do? It's as if the notion that DIRTY PICTURES are a terrible thing in and of themselves, irrespective of whether a person is or isn't being preyed upon in them.

And that's the point: the crack down is just another symptom of the UK's dysfunctional relationship with sex. We're still wrestling with sex education while teen pregnancies and VD infection rates go through the roof. We get into a fix over violent porn, but magazines, media and society splash semi and fully nude images everywhere.

Our hypocrisy in this regard is equal to that of prisons where you get treated like one of the lads if you run over and kill a toddler, but get lynched if you molested him or her first.

And it's ironic too on the one hand that we can no longer look at bondage vids, but the BBC is still happy to show footage of a biker nearly crushing a WPC beneath his wheels. Ah, but you see, that's just violence. No one got an erection or anything...