Katana VentraIP

Obscenity

An obscenity is any utterance or act that strongly offends the prevalent morality of the time.[1] It is derived from the Latin obscēnus, obscaenus, "boding ill; disgusting; indecent", of uncertain etymology.[2] Generally, the term can be used to indicate strong moral repugnance and outrage in expressions such as "obscene profits" and "the obscenity of war". As a legal term, it usually refers to descriptions and depictions of people engaged in sexual and excretory activity.

In 1957, two associates of acclaimed poet Allen Ginsberg were arrested and jailed for selling his book "" to undercover police officers at a beatnik bookstore in San Francisco. Eventually the California Supreme Court declared the literature to be of "redeeming social value" and therefore not classifiable as "obscene". Because the poem "Howl" contains pornographic slang and overt references to drugs and homosexuality, the poem was (and is) frequently censored and confiscated; however, it remains a landmark case.

Howl and Other Poems

(1978) (external link) better known as the landmark "seven dirty words" case. In that ruling, the Court found that only "repetitive and frequent" use of the words in a time or place when a minor could hear, can be punished.

FCC v. Pacifica

In (1987), the Oregon Supreme Court ruled that the Oregon state law that criminalized obscenity was an unconstitutional restriction of free speech under the free speech provision of the Oregon Constitution, with the ruling making Oregon the "first state in the nation to abolish the offense of obscenity".[11]

State v. Henry

New Zealand[edit]

In New Zealand, screening of Deep Throat (1972) was only cleared in 1986. However, the film has not been screened because the only cinema that has tried to organize a screening was thwarted by the city council that owned the building's lease.[28]

China[edit]

Section 9 of the Criminal Law provide provisions against pornography, including creation, distribution and organizing public viewing.[39]


In 2016, the Ministry of Culture in China censored 23 companies for hosting obscene content online. The take-down included over 20,000 live feeds from 26 different websites that were hosting a variety of content involving pornography and violence.[40]

They do not attack anyone's sexual dignity, instead causing outrage at best, but generally just slight discomfort or embarrassment, that can be easily avoided through not looking to such a scene.

The Art. 234 is aside obsolete, unconstitutional, for the 1988 post-military dictatorship Constitution having in its Fifth Chapter: "[the people] are free to the expression of intellectual, artistic, scientific and communicative activity, independently of censorship and license", reason to which, instead of making it suffer penal restriction, gives any distribution of media the right to be fully exerted.

The flourishing internet culture of Brazil, where such media is freely shared, as well as its pornographic industry and shops catered to the interests of enhancing apparatus to masturbatory and sexual activity.

Ever since 1940, in the Title VI of the Penal Code, naming crimes against sexual dignity (until 2009 crimes against social conventions), the fourth chapter is dedicated to a crime named "public outrage related to modesty" (Portuguese: ultraje público ao pudor, pronounced [uwˈtɾaʒi ˈpublikwaw puˈdoʁ]).


It is composed of two articles, Art. 233 "Obscene Act", "to practice an obscene act in a public place, or open or exposed to the public", punished with arrest of 3 months to 1 year or a fine; and Art. 234 "Obscene Written Piece or Object", to do, import, export, purchase or have in one's property, to ends of trade, distribution or public display, any written, drew, painted, stamped or object piece of obscenity, punished with arrest of 6 months to 1 year or a fine.[48]


Criticism to the legislation have included:[49]


It is often used against people who expose their nude bodies in public environments that were not warranted a license to cater to the demographic interested in such practice (the first such place was the Praia do Abricó in Rio de Janeiro, in 1994), even if no sexual action took place, and it may include, for example, a double standard for the chest area of women and men in which only women are penalized. Such a thing took place in the 2012 FEMEN protests in São Paulo.[50]

South Korea[edit]

In 2017 the Supreme Court in South Korea ruled that an image of unclothed male genitalia is obscene if not contextualized in a cultural, artistic, medical or educational setting.[51]

Other countries[edit]

Various countries have different standings on the types of materials that they as legal bodies permit their citizens to have access to and disseminate among their local populations. The set of these countries' permissible content vary widely accordingly with some having extreme punishment up to and including execution for members who violate their restrictions, as in the case of Iran where the current laws against pornography now include death sentences for those convicted of producing pornography.[52]

India[edit]

In India the Obscenity law is the same as had been framed by the British Government. Charges of obscenity have been levelled against various writers and poets till date; the law has not yet been revised. The famous trials relate to the Hungryalists who were arrested and prosecuted in the 1960s.

Henderson, Jeffrey 1991 Oxford University Press ISBN 0-19-506685-5

The Maculate Muse: Obscene Language in Attic Comedy

The Melon Farmers (UK)

O'Toole, L. (1998) Pornocopia: Porn, Sex, Technology and Desire. London: Serpent's Tail  1-85242-395-1

ISBN

Silver, Judith, of Coollawyer.com, "Movie Day at the Supreme Court or 'I Know It When I See It': A History of the Definition of Obscenity", on

findlaw.com

Slater, W. J., review of by Jeffrey Henderson. Phoenix, Vol. 30, No. 3 (Autumn, 1976), pp. 291–293. doi:10.2307/1087300

"The Maculate Muse: Obscene Language in Attic Comedy"

FEPP

Regina v. Hicklin, 3 Queens Bench 360, 362 (1868).

, 5 F. Supp. 182, 183–185 (S.D.N.Y. 1933) affirmed, United States v. One Book Entitled Ulysses by James Joyce, 72 F.2d 705, 706–707 (2d Cir. 1934)

United States v. One Book Called Ulysses

American Civil Liberties Union report

Cho, Christina, Commerato, Kim & Heins, Marjorie (2003) Free Expression in Arts and Funding: a public policy report. New York: FEPP; pp. 38–39

Sex and violence in crime films

, 413 U.S. 15, 24 (1973)

Miller v. California

Bachman, Erik M. 2018 Pennsylvania State University Press ISBN 0271080051

Literary Obscenities: U.S. Case Law and Naturalism after Modernism

of Part I of Title 18 of the United States Code, relating to obscenity. Hosted by the Legal Information Institute.

Chapter 71

"A resource for educating the public and reporting violations of internet obscenity laws"

archive at C-Span

2005, Senate Commerce, Science & Transportation Cmte. Hearing on Decency in the Media

article on problems with definition of obscenity

Ethical Spectacle

Nexus Journal (Chapman University Law School) article on problems with definition of obscenity.

"Under Color of Law: Obscenity vs. First Amendment"