Page 1225 - Week 05 - Tuesday, 24 April 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
who wish to view a sexually explicit video or film to do so privately; or, put another way, that proportion of the population who reject the bulk of the video hard-core pornography but who reserve the right to view a sexually explicit erotic film with, for example, a romantic and/or fantasy element. Consequently, I oppose the sweeping ban, proposed albeit out of legitimate distaste for the bulk of the X-rated video output.
On the question of freedom of speech let me say at the outset that even civil libertarians concede that some censorship is desirable, hence the non-classified and consequently unlawful films on bestiality and the like. But it is now being argued that this censorship should extend to a blanket ban on X-rated videos. By failing to provide a further classification to remove hard-core perverse pornography, the Commonwealth's chief censor is pushing otherwise reasonable men and women into supporting a sweeping ban when they might otherwise concede that a small percentage of the X-rated video market could be available to the public under strict classification, distribution and access controls. What those reasonable men and women are saying is that, in the absence of a proper response by the Commonwealth chief censor, we in the ACT should suppress the minority in favour of some so-called majority.
Censorship was a recurring theme in the struggle for justice for many minorities who came to this country to escape persecution. When a popularly elected government starts to act - or through pressure is forced to act - as an Orwellian regime, then Big Brother is here. Individual rights and freedoms are wiped out. While law-makers must allow for changes in public attitudes and tastes over time, debate as to what constitutes the public good is - and throughout history has always been - highly contentious.
For example, in 1960 the D.H. Lawrence novel Lady Chatterley's Lover was put on trial in Britain for obscenity. The prosecution took the publishers to court for legal obscenity, claiming that the book tended to deprave and corrupt under the terms of the then new Obscene Publications Act. The defence claimed the book for literature, classifying it within the canon of great literary works and hence for the public good. As history shows, Lady Chatterley's Lover now stands with Hamlet, Ulysses and the Tolstoy works. The author, D.H. Lawrence, is considered with Virginia Woolf, James Joyce and E.M. Forster as among the major novelists of this century.
Let me state very clearly that I reject the degrading role portrayal of women and men in X-rated videos. Indeed, I share the community's concerns over these and related matters. I am strongly of the view, however, that substance is more important than symbolism. Were I to support a ban, I would, as Attorney, enforce it. You would have to be prepared for the sight, so reminiscent of the 1960s, of our constables raiding and picking through the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .