![]() That might mean many amateur forms of pornography would no longer need to be classified. It also recommends the reduction of the scope of classification of sexually explicit films to only those films which are professionally-produced, directed at an Australian audience and distributed for commercial purposes. The Stevens report says: “For X 18+ films, I recommend that the absolute prohibitions on fetishes, which are not illegal, and violence (where it is unrelated to sex) should be removed.” Stronger fetishes include bondage and discipline.”įetish activities including “body piercing, application of substances such as candle wax, ‘golden showers’, bondage, spanking or fisting” are currently considered as pornographic and would result in the film being refused classification. Mild fetishes include stylized domination and rubberwear. These it defines as involving: “n object, an action, or a non-sexual part of the body which gives sexual gratification. Several well-known art films have been banned due to this definition, including: Larry Clark’s “Ken Park,” Greg Araki’s “Mysterious Skin,” John Waters’ Pink Flamingos” and Bruce LaBruce’s “LA Zombie.” Australia also banned “Pirates,” a 2005 parody of “Pirates of the Caribbean,” on the same grounds.Īustralia currently also considers as pornographic and refuses classification to films that include use of “school uniforms or other indicators of youth” and many forms of fetish activity. Australia has famously given outright bans (“refused classification” or “RC”) to films that include both sex and violence, even if the violence is not related to the sex.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |