It's hardcore at 18 rated again

[Jacques]

More 'artcore'

[Mysteryman]

Typical bloody double standards for the benefit of the posers who will go to see it because "it's art don't you know".

Ben Dover, or better yet Jim Slip - because he wears a suit and does it with his shirt on (!), should ask the Tate to show a compilation of his films alongsde to show British "sexual art" at its best, in comparison.. I can just imagine the reaction

[Steve R]

I wonder if one will be permitted a mackintosh across one's lap at these screenings?

[Jacques]

As long as it's Charles Renne Mackintosh

[Mysteryman]

Very clever Jacques!!

[Arginald Valleywater]

You have to understand it is for intelligent Guardina readers who understand that a man smacking away is not porn but mere titilation to their arse shagging, labour voting, high-brow readers. No openly gay man will buy this because it is porn under an assumed label........haha hardcore gay porn by the backdoor. Ahem, more scones Vicar?

I propose Ken Loach or Mike Leigh make Anal Dildo Fest and try to get that passed at 18 cert for sale in Virgin or HMV. The Arts Council would pay for the funding and show it at The Odeon Leicester Square!

[Steve R]

Jacques wrote:

> As long as it's Charles Rennie Mackintosh


!grin!

[Guilbert]

Perhaps Ben Dover could make a film under another fancy name, and call it art.

Maybe somethinhg like Benjamin Douvier

It could work.

[alicia_fan_uk]

Quote from the Torygraph article - "The board had considered granting a Restricted 18 DVD classification, reserved for work intended to be arousing. "

Proof(?) - from the BBFC no-less! - that, by default, the 18/censored crap that pollutes "adult" stations on the Sky TV platform has no intention or ability to arouse.

alicia_fan_uk

[Jacques]

Not necessarily - it is all about context and the "taken as a whole" test.

The "taken as a whole" test, takes into account the overall effect and intention of the work (i.e. is it there just to arouse or does it have some other purpose). So the fact that it has some artistic merit will influence how it is "taken as a whole" and in this case an 18 rating. However even if it were considered obscene, it may still be given an 18 rating if it has merit under the "public good" defence of Section 4 of the Obscene Publications Act.

It's complete arse and entirely subjective and not objective and therein lies the problem.