Great article, weez.

Thanks Terry, and thanks for posting links to this and the previous mgk post on Geoff Holland’s op-ed bit on newmatilda.

Holland writes:

The consequences of this decision, particularly the expanded range of the types of materials that will fall within the scope of child pornography laws, are numerous.

The most obvious is the effect that this decision will have on the life of Alan McEwan. Aside from the restrictions placed on the types of employment and voluntary activities that he can participate in and even on his contact with children, he is now a convicted child sex offender, and will carry that label for the rest of his life.

While the Helen Lovejoys out there will argue that McEwan got what he deserved for looking at any images where “children” are sexualised — whether they be cartoons or not — there are potentially wider repercussions from this case for the battle against child pornography as a whole.

Research in criminology suggests that the criminal law is effective only as a device to reinforce existing community values, and that the legitimacy of a law is threatened when criminal prohibitions and sanctions on specific forms of conduct are not aligned with community norms, or lack common support. This is particularly so where the community views either the prohibition unreasonable or the penalties as disproportionate to the offence, or otherwise unreasonable.

If respect for child pornography laws is lost, their legitimacy is diminished and the fight against child abuse becomes that much more difficult. The absurdity of this decision risks trivialising the very real problem of child abuse.

The images at the centre of this case, and others like them, are freely available and widely distributed over the internet. The scope of the law needs clarifying, whether by the parliament or by the courts, before more are caught in its trap.

oh- and a great big ‘hello’ to the fine folks at the Queensland Police Service, who visited mgk yesterday.

12th December 2008 09:08:40
proxy3.police.qld.gov.au (164.112.249.13)

I have donuts and a pot of coffee ready, pop on in, mates. 😕

oops. I eated all the donuts. 😆

Good on you Weez!

Let us know if the Cartoon Thought-Police Stormtroopers pay you a visit.

I just hope you don’t end up in front of the same magistrate with a distorted sense of reality that poor Mr. McEwan had to suffer.

thanks, dg. I don’t expect to hear from the police, simply because they’d have to arrest everyone at Channel Ten along with me. As Geoff Holland said, the laws are overbroad and undefined.

This is a can o’ worms that the US Supreme Court has opened several times, only to decide not to decide or specifically class such smutty spoofs as satire.

‘Child abuse’ is about abuse of children. Bart Simpson isn’t a child. He’s not even a physical being one could possibly abuse. Bart Simpson certainly wasn’t harmed by the porntoons, although Fox’s copyright lawyers may like to have a word with the creator of them.

The judges in this matter are not punishing the man for what he has done per se, but for what his acts MAY cause other people to do. This is known as ‘prior restraint‘ and is unconstitutional in the USA.

Let’s face it, all parents are child abusers. The mother showing her breasts and touching the genitals of her children. (‘Just cleaning’, she says, but can we really be sure?). Fathers bathing or dressing (any excuse will do) their children. What if they’re peeking and do we really know what’s in their mind? The perverse curiosity of children for each other genitals. The production of pornographic material by minors, eg drawing of genitals, bums. Let’s stop the rot at the source and jail the whole goddamn population.

Absofuckinglutely.

We can save buckets of dough on building prisons, though. We just put 24/7/365 CCTV in all homes with children, all monitored from Stephen Conroy’s loungeroom. Ankle bracelets on the dogs, too. You just never know what Poochie’s up to.

hmmmm crime rate must be down.

Is Absofuckinglutely a word?

Yes, you’d think that the cops would have something else to do, wouldn’t you? 😀

‘Absofuckinglutely’ IS absofuckinglutely a word. 😆

Ok. Child Abuse… among cartoons? What the hell? Are you guys tryin to ban everything in entertainment… I can understandthe Real Child Abuse part, but cartoons? Get a freakin’ life. goddam!

Yeah, I know, it’s completely over-the-top-stupid. There’s people doing jail time over here right now for having porny Simpsons spoofs on their computers. It’s called MORAL PANIC and has no place in a liberal democracy.