I don’t blame adult movies, neither erotic. But I think we don’t need pornography in feature movies. Do you know that this movie is classified as drama, romantic and even comedy? Almost no one classified as erotic (ok, Q is anti-erotic) or soft porno. What that means?

Do you really think that real sex in “Q” is necessary? And what about other feature movies? Do we need sharing with others intimacy? Do they need to sell their intimacy?

Where we are going?

I’m targetting a specific audience and yes, they would know the story. The posts are reaching the intended audience because many of them have responded. I’m also in contact with some key people via email – slowly building a network.

When I read what I’ve just wrote, it sounds like it might have been meant facetiously. Not so. I think you have important things to say, and hope that they’re heard.

The particular significance is the now-notorious Robert Crumb pastiche cartoon of Rupert Bear in an explicitly sexual situation the head of Rupert the Bear was pasted on to the male in Crumb’s cartoon. This was the longest lasting obscenity case in English Jurisprudence and through the skills of their Barrister the famous John Mortimer they were only found guilty of two minor charges relating to sending subscription copies of Oz through the Royal Mail.

Never during this case was a legal precedent set concerning the photographs or art work of naked children not being obscene as these were never an issue that were included in the case i.e. to set a legal precedent there needs to be a relevant subject in the case.

I would suggest you do your homework a bit more thoroughly by checking out issue 28 you will find no naked children the image by Thomas Weir was in issue 27 that the case never contained any reference to naked children the only child that posed was one of the schoolkid editors who was fully clothed parodying another Robert Crumb character, Honeybunch Kaminski, The charges read out in the central criminal court stated that the defendants conspiring with certain other young persons to produce a magazine, Oz 28, containing obscene, lewd, indecent and sexually perverted articles, cartoons and drawings with intent to debauch and corrupt the morals of children and other young persons and to arouse and implant in their minds lustful and perverted ideas. According to Mr Brian Leary prosecuting, It dealt with homosexuality, lesbianism, sadism, perverted sexual practices and drug taking.

There was never a charge pertaining to images of naked children as no images existed in issue 28 for those that are interested in Oz check out http://www.ozenity.com and follow the links