In short, producers of a pornographic video are being charged with obscenity. There is no charge that the video depicts minors or anything similar, it is merely alleged that the content steps across the nebulous boundary between “pornography” and “obscenity.”
I may be a Relative Moralist Asshole™, but I believe that one should be allowed to do whatever the fuck one wants as long as one is not harming someone else. In this case, Zicari has produced a video of consensual sexual activities that, while most would find distasteful, no one, aside from the jurors at his trial, have been forced to watch. WHAT THE FUCK IS THE PROBLEM HERE? If you don’t like it, DON’T WATCH IT. Why is this illegal? If you are of legal age, you should be allowed to view or create whatever sick, disgusting, or perverted shit you want without fear of arrest, so long as all involved are consenting adults, as in this case.
Aside from my rant on the very concept of obscenity law, why is THIS obscene? Manos: Hands of Fate lacked “serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value,” and it was probably more unpleasant to watch, also. The vast majority of porn movies are also devoid of value except as masturbation aides, does this mean they should be similarly illegal? I don’t fucking think so. I haven’t actually watched the video in question (now I find myself drawn to it…), but I think I could probably come up with SOME justification for it having value. Besides, if it had no value, no one would watch it, right?
In conclusion, what goes wrong with a human being that makes them think “If I don’t like it, it should be illegal!”
Well, I am surprised that a film with a title like “Ass Clowns 3” was even reviewed for obscentiy.
To provide objective commentary on your rant I would need to know just what “lines were crossed” in “Ass Clowns 3” that were not crossed in “Ass Clowns 1” and “Ass Clowns 2.”
Also, do you beleive the legal struggle will delay the long awaited “Ass Clowns 4.”
Well, free speech isn’t quite dead yet. The couple is charged at this time. They haven’t been convicted of anything. And if you’re wanting to moan about the death of free speech, moan about the Miller decision which put the definition of obscenity in the hands of any twelve people too dumb to get out of jury duty.
God, I hope not. Ass Clowns 3 left so many unanswered questions…
I think the most telling thing in the article linked to in the OP is the following: “(as Zicari told Nightline, the jurors who decide his fate will be the only people ever to watch his movies against their will)”
(bolding mine)
Why is there a dime of tax money being spent on this, when the only people who have to watch this do so voluntarily? Shouldn’t conservatives be against this type of thing? Less government, spend less money, etc?
Well, you can see this film with impunity as it contains no actual “clowns.” You see, when the producers titled the film they used “artistic license” in naming it “Ass Clowns” - the film does, however contain “Asses,” so I guess the “artistic license” stuff only goes so far.
The section on pornography in Eric Schlosser’s Reefer Madness should be essential reading for anyone interested in this. The way the porn industry has been attacked by the government bears no relation to rational concerns about protecting children or the rights of actresses in the movies, and everything to do with personal moral crusades. The agents involved pick out targets based not on public interest but on the chance of getting a prosecution (which often depends on things like if they can get them to deliver to a particularly prudish county), and then hound them for years until they go out of business; often firms are driven out of business by these moral crusaders without any court judgments against the pornographers. It’s clear that American obscenity laws do not work because their enforcement is such a travesty.
