The only line of defense, I see the short and medium term, is the persistent insistence on the distinction between pornography and art.
prerequisite is that the "dominant" definition of pornography (emphasis added, incitement ... you know the whole tripe yes)
- has been in other contexts, developed for other purposes,
- because of age of a modern view of art does not comply.
Both conditions can be detected. The only need expert opinions obtained. They are clearly indicates that redefined for such a drastic legal measure, as it represents the youth pornography law, the definition * pornography versus art must be .
What does this mean for the now detected approaching judicial practice?
first
we try to anticipate the testimony of the witness. We know the situation in the disciplines involved and to estimate roughly what is the prevailing view.
a rule will apply: The work of art portrayed w ä re, when it actually completed would not be punishable. For photo and film: It has not been punished. This condition is not mandatory, but makes the argument much.
I must continue to present two examples from the literature, where our defensive line is problematic:
a.
There is a kind of bogus-autobiographical novel, which I would disrespect estimate as "skillful Wichsvorlage" the so-called " Stefan text . This is very suggestive portrayed as a child (or the progress of the action then a teenager) forfeit a sadistic "childhood friend" and from this psychologically trained, until he tolerate the sadism of adults "with relish".
The first instance (T rier), had the text - how do I manage my - as a (child) classified pornographic, finally managed a smart lawyer to reach a last resort for an acquittal. As usual was legally complicate matters somewhat, I simplified it now.
the Stefan-text that I purposely do not link back here, you can google on the net. It is in my estimation a *** highly dangerous, abysmally bad, in form and content are children and young people anschmusende Guide for young people to ruin and depravity .
b.
There are Anglo-Saxon countries, partly in Germany, a venerable, harmless tradition Flagellants-literary texts. Also German authors write there from time to time.
middle of the cane and Paw idyll suddenly appeared difficult sadistic, cynical, derogatory, truly outrageous texts a (to me by the last name her famous) German author in the pages of the sully, extortion, stealing from and enslaving of hustlers Berlin calling , they also suggestive of abysmal evil and wickedness.
What to do with texts of this kind, which, although quite high literary and artistic standing, in their tendency and dangerous statement, however, suggestive, potentially harmful?
My answer is: We need a very good, a more accurate J ugendschutz on the Internet, in book and CD sales. If enforced this, the present scheme is completely sufficient, then there no, absolutely no reason to advocate the muzzling of the literature in the sense of the unspeakable new youth-pornography law.
For there is no distinction possible between everyday material and artistic poetry. If I bewu ß t write texts trivial slip, as a poet in the role of Jane Smith wants, because the "my" art form - if you want me to prove the opposite?
second
This also applies to photography, film and painting. Whether already the body, especially the naked , a work of art is like to be left aside.
His illumination but in any case always be a work of art when he filmed through my lens, photographed, drawn with my pen.
a.
Furthermore, the condition that the sitter is legal in itself. Difficulties arise, as in the literature, in certain border areas.
If I "pleasurable Kindersexerlebnisse" or whatever else may be the abundant degenerate vocabulary of the unfortunate boy and girl lovers else as an avatar in the form of artificially constructed "Poser Art" - images performing, then I suggest something illegal or not, mislead I am also a "child sex".
b.
Whether in the U.S. so popular, immensely-popular "Dolcett 'representations, the pleasurable eating of women after first roasting on a spit, etc . not in individual cases may lead to imitation, to get used to, I do not know. But what I know for sure: There has been a further limiting case, must be given to the.
c.
I have the origin of zoomed children nude photos observed and their appearance in the 90's sharply criticized, even in those days printed letters from readers on this very nudist magazines.
This type of child pornography on the nudist area went to two very irresponsible, in my estimation is limited sane manic "nudist film" Back to the Lake Balaton with their video equipment, which made Slovakia and New Zealand beaches unsafe. you have to much to the demise of the nude photos Press contributed.
Apart from this, but once the entire youth of the nude and nude photography art and not pornography.
Here it is now to build a defense line of the miserable remnants of the nudist movement forth.
d.
I understand if the actual sexual union is no longer young in photo and film to be disclosed - under the following conditions:
- The boundaries of what is "sexual union " should be drawn very narrowly. It is unthinkable when the "pulling of the labia," or simple adolescent masturbation is forbidden in the presentation,
- The witch hunt against former owner must be avoided. Mature, "patina" material should be allowed to be possessed in youth erotic,
- What is created in literature and in the field of visual arts in the narrow sense (drawing, painting, sculpture) is always art, and never just pornography,
- nude photography and filming of the naked young body without sexual union can always be art. It must therefore remain unpunished .
I stop here once again, with regret. Perhaps you now see something more clearly where the line of defense is what may be their weak points and what will it in essence is: Is it just pornography or it might not be art?
The photo is not directly related to the text. I thank the Image Author Daniel Schaller (onlinegui.de) and removed the photo after informal request immediately .
0 comments:
Post a Comment