Dominant State, Submissive Populace: Spanking. Consensual physical or verbal abuse. Physical restraint. Female ejaculation. Strangulation. Facesitting.

Spanking. Consensual physical or verbal abuse. Physical restraint. Female ejaculation. Strangulation. Facesitting.

No, it’s not an anarchist’s Christmas wishlist. The above is a selection of the #ThingsBannedInUKPorn in December last year. The AudiovisualMedia Services Regulations 2014 forces content creators in the United Kingdom to stop including these acts (as well as many others) in their video-on-demand content. (It won’t be illegal to view online content portraying these practices however, as long as the content is produced abroad.)

There are many angles commentators have taken when criticising these recent restrictions on pornography production: all of which can be thought of as anarchist in some sense. As market anarchists are inherently sceptical of power structures, it may seem surprising for us to adopt an unashamedly accepting stance on extreme power imbalances in the bedroom. In fact, it is this top-down imposition of limits on sexual behaviour between consenting adults that is objectionable and oppressive.

As the Everyday Analysis collective write in their excellent column on the subject, “it is … important to bear in mind the fact that the regulation of pornography is not a simply repressive act”. Calls for repression may be cause for alarm, but in order to properly evaluate the restrictions we must examine the consequences of such repression. Treating an adult like a child – infantilising them by curtailing their pornographic choices – labels the affected community (in this case, BDSM practitioners) an outgroup and legitimises the disgust and derision directed at them by outsiders.

A growing body of research suggests that those who engage in BDSM do not fulfil the pernicious stereotype of being psychologically damaged, and are in fact no different from the general population in this manner. Though we should not ignore the marginal cases, one influential 2013 study found that BDSM practitioners are less neurotic, more open to experience and possess higher levels of subjective well being.

Also of primary importance is the flagrantly sexist aspect of the restrictions. This legislation expresses opposition to female pleasure by banning the depiction of female ejaculation, whilst leaving the male equivalent untouched. It rails against the possibility of female dominance by preventing the portrayal of facesitting. These choices fit into a wider narrative, and the Everyday Analysis collective further draws our attention to this in the aforementioned article:

“…a major problem with the current regulations is that they disproportionately restrict pornography that allows something else, whilst leaving intact that material that reinforces the unequal status quo.”

Whilst the title of this pieces uses BDSM vocabulary, it is worth highlighting the significance of the difference between power in S&M and that wielded by the state: whilst the former places a heightened emphasis on consent and is quite possibly beneficial, the latter prioritises violence and is demonstrably harmful.

Thanks to DANIEL PRYOR LINK

WEB: www.sinfulandwicked.co.uk MOB: 07426 490 214 TWITTER: @sinfulandwicked