Obscenity Case Monday, August 2nd, 2010 at 2:01 am
Written by: leprakhauns

How do you define obscene? Is it something that someone should never see? Is it anything that is illegal and is scene? Is it just a matter of opinion and obscenity and varies from person to person? Now how do you define obscenity in a case where it’s talking about pornography? When it comes to porn, should obscenity be defined as something that is legal, where if it is legal to do then it should be legal to film and distribute? Is there some line that shouldn’t be crossed? How do you define something like that?

John Stagliano, a male porn star and producer, also known as Buttman, recently was brought to court regarding obscenity. How do you define obscenity though? Some people would say that porn itself is obscene, some would say anything legal should be able to be recorded and distributed. Personally I lean toward the latter.

A couple of years ago there was a website that featured something pretty extreme that went viral. Two Girls One Cup was seen by millions of people and that was never deemed obscene, at least not to the point where the creator was brought to court. For those of you unfamiliar with the video, it featured two girls who defecated into a cup, taking turns eating the excrement, and vomiting it into each other’s mouths. One could argue that the reason it was never brought to court was because it wasn’t made in America, but even if it has been made in America, there are no laws against doing anything in that video, no matter how disgusting it may be, so why wouldn’t you be allowed to film and distribute it?

So what exactly is the definition of obscenity? Well the US law defined obscenity in 1971 in the case of Miller vs. California. Ever since then in order for something to be obscene, the following three conditions:

1. The average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interests.

2. The work depicts, or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state (or federal) law

3. The work, taken as a whole, lacks serious, artistic, political or scientific value.

The US law also states that obscenity is not protected by the First Amendment. The biggest issue I have with this whole thing is that the US Government thinks that we are all morons and don’t know how to not watch something. It’s essentially them regulating stuff that we as free Americans should be able to regulate ourselves. The government goes after the makers of these “obscene” materials, but not the people who star in the movies, or even the people who buy these movies.

Let’s think about this for a minute, say I wanted to watch 2 Girls 1 Cup, I’d go to the website and watch it and I have every right to watch it as a free citizen. If I wanted to, I’d have every right to partake in the acts in that video as well since nothing in it is illegal. If I wanted to record it and distribute it, I can’t do it because certain people think it may be too obscene. No one is forcing anyone to watch the video though. If you do not want to watch it, then simply don’t, but instead our Government has decided that you can’t do something because other people who would have no interest watching it would find it obscene.

Does anyone else feel like their liberties are being taken away more and more as time goes by?

Let Others Know!

About the Author

Hey, I am the creator of LepsLair and we have a lot of great things coming up. I am hoping to have a huge new section that will show a peak of where we are going live soon.

4 Comments to “Obscenity Case”

  1. Jason Palpatine says:

    Recently, a man who was found to posses 20 Japanese cartoons, called anime, illustrating young girls was sentenced to 20 years in Federal Prison. The cartoons were designated child pornography under the law! Not photographs — cartoons! Drawings — illustrations — FICTION! The law now criminalizes fiction as well as real pornography. The law now makes it a crime to use your imagination. If cartoons and fiction becomes a crime in one niche — what will come next?

    This is so sick. The only thing that is OBSCENE is the concept of OBSCENITY itself!

    leprakhauns Reply:

    Hmm, if that is the case then Google should be shut down for showing pictures of Bart Simpson having sex with his mother and other females and fake pictures of celebrity kids.

  2. KAIZER_SOSA says:

    First off – great article, glad to see the implementations of these here.

    Second, Obscenity (or at least what I thought it was) is honestly a matter of opinion. In which now has been exercised by the Government for a more controlling factor…

    If Tom, Dick, and Harry wanted to watch two people eating feces then thats there choice, it might be disgusting but if I find it as such then… I just simply don’t partake in the viewing and/or event. I don’t need the Government telling me that I find it disgusting, its just a matter of opinionated choice.

  3. Shelly says:

    Love this article, although I won’t argue semantics about what is obscene or not obscene since that’s a little too much debating for my liking. I think I personally define obscene as something that something that is explicit – I’d count gory films as obscene too. But then again, I wholeheartedly agree with your statement that if I find something obscene — then simply done watch it. It’s a bit unreasonable for someone to take someone to court for something like that. It could easily be solved by just NOT watching it. =/ Then again, there are people out there who lack the independence to take care of themselves and rely on other people to solve and “get rid” of things for them. I’m getting a little off-topic though. =/

Leave a Reply

Check here if you wish to receive the Lep's Lair newsletter


Twitter








Link Directory | link directory | GeekySpeaky: Submit Your Site! | Blog Matter

Copyright © 2004-2017 Sean Noble, All rights reserved
Read our Disclosure Policy