Rape is not *just* about sex.

I returned home from a short break in Ireland to find that our Prime Minister David Cameron has made a monumental balls-up. Later this year (he plans), a filter will be placed over UK internet preventing people from searching for or accessing pornographic sites. People can sign up to have the filter removed, but that is hardly the point- it’s the kind of censorship that can escalate and I worry about where that escalation will end.
His reason for this filter is “online pornography is corroding childhood”. (Will somebody pleeeease think of the children!) He also claims that the murderers of April Jones and Tia Sharp accessed child pornography before committing the crimes. The thing is, child pornography is generally not something you’d search for… unless you’re already a paedophile, and child pornography is, of course, illegal in the first place. So in order to be seen doing something, he has decided that rape pornography must also be banned, even if the actors are consenting adults.

Of course real rape is vile and if there’s even the slightest doubt about the consent of the performers, it should be removed, but performers of this kind of work sign release forms and disclaimers to say that they’re happy and safe. In addition to this, many are interviewed before I should know- while I am not an adult performer, I am a bondage model and sign these forms all the time.
It isn’t a secret that pornography depicts an unrealistic view of sex, but then spy films depict unrealistic versions of spies and after Casino Royale aired, MI6 did not see an increase in applicants (I checked!). There is no evidence or study that shows that watching violent pornography encourages people to commit violent acts.

I’m not surprised… as pornography is about sex and rape is about control While the physical act is sexual, in most circumstances the motive is control- dominance. There is an unusually high correlation between rape and arson convictions; in both crimes, the object is to control the victim, either by violating their body or destroying their property.
If rape was a crime caused purely by sexual desire, victims would conform to a type: mostly young and attractive. However, people of all ages and types are raped. Many serial rapists attack the elderly. Why? Because these people are vulnerable. I saw this myself in the company of sex offender/photographer Shaun Colclough. The sentence he repeated was “you are vulnerable… you look vulnerable.”

This is why putting such a misguided law into place will have little to no effect on rape statistics, and particularly child- centred sex crimes. In fact, the idea that viewers of extreme pornography must also be paedophiles is dangerously like suggesting that BDSM fans and gay people are also that way inclined. It is why I worry about where this will lead- will bondage websites be considered pornography? Even mild damsel-in-distress scenarios? This affects my job and I do not even consider myself an adult worker.
What about television? Films? The Last House On The Left has a brutal rape scene in it. In Kill Bill, the part involving Buck-who’s-here-to-fuck and his friend is very, very disturbing. Will both be banned too? I agree that more could be done to prevent sex crimes but censoring what the public watch and do not watch is NOT the answer.

I’m sure anyone reading this knows that rape is drastically under reported compared to most crimes. This is due to a combination of things- namely shame, fear of repercussions, fear of not being believed and a ‘what good will it do?’ attitude perpetuated by the fact that in many cases the answer is ‘none’.
What Cameron could do is lengthen the prison sentence for rapists (currently averaging eight years, not including early release and parole etc). He could look at changing sex education in schools which currently sends out a ‘don’t get raped’ message to girls while neglecting to tell boys ‘don’t rape’. He could insist on lessons about consent (which is a huge grey area) and not getting drunk or drugged enough to a) be unable to consent and b) be unable to tell if someone consents or not, as this is an issue too.

He could address the lingering idea that clothing affects rape statistics. Reports on reports on reports have indicated that clothing does nothing and that targets are chosen due to perceived vulnerability, not ‘slut factor’. Perhaps this would help assure victims that the only person that should be ashamed is the rapist.
Rape pornography has little to do with child sex crimes or, in fact, real rape. The problem is that it’s easier to scapegoat and ban extreme pornography than it is to prevent crimes. Cameron, you are a coward.