Pornography, Censorship and Classification: time for change

The recent series of arrests across Australia on child pornography charges should prompt a broader reflection on issues relating to pornography, censorship and classification.

It is significant that just weeks before these arrests the Classification Review Board determined that a scene in Catherine Breillat's film Anatomie de Venfer (Anatomy of Hell) depicting the sexual abuse of a naked 8-10 year old girl could be accommodated in the R18+ classification.

The Classification Review Board's Reasons for Decision states:

"At 26 minutes a 'flash back' scene of children playing is depicted. A young girl - approximately 8 to 10 years of age - is shown removing her underpants and then lying down under a bush. A medium shot of what appears to be the naked girl is shown. A group of boys watch her and laugh. One boy removes the glasses of another and implicitly inserts the arm of the glasses into the girl's vagina. The boy then looks at a mucous-like fluid on the arm of the glasses. The impact of the scene is high.

"In the minority view, this scene is an offensive depiction of a person who is or looks like a child under 16 years particularly when given its juxtaposition to the adult scene that follows and repeats some of the actions involved in the flash back. [At 30 minutes a man's hand is explicitly inserted into a vagina (actual sex). He removes his hand with a mucous-like substance on it and rubs the substance into his hair.]

"In the majority view this scene is of high impact but interpreted the actions of the children as exploratory play and the intention of the filmmaker as not attempting to titillate viewers, but to provide a context for future scenes. The impact was also moderated by the fleeting nature of the explicit scene and the somewhat positive interactions between the children. "

This latter comment should send a shiver down the spine of every concerned parent. Sex with children is justifiable if it involves "positive interactions".

The Classification Review Board is the second-tier decision making body which can overturn a decision of the Classification Board. Its reasoning is usually followed in subsequent decisions by the Classification Board. So for example, after the Classification Review Board opined in February 2000 in its decision on Catherine Breillat's earlier film Romance that it had "a discretion in certain limited instances to permit explicit depictions of sexual activity within an educational or artistic context within the R 18+ classification" the result was that the Classification Board began to routinely to tolerate actual sex scenes in R18+ films.

Sex with children is OK

The same effect is evident with the Classification Review Board's expressed view - shared by advocates of child sex - that sex with children is OK as long as everyone is having fun. The Classification Board on September 29, 2004 unanimously classified the film Birth starring Nicole Kidman and 11 year old child actor Cameron Bright as MA15+ despite the following scenes as noted by the Board:

'Minutes 51-52 Anna and the 10 year old boy are seen in a diner where she asks him "How will you fill my needs? Ever made love to a girl? " To which he responds "You'd be the first".

'Minutes 56-57 Anna is seen from the rear, naked in the bath. The boy undresses. Anna looks at him as he is implicitly naked, the boy then steps into the bath with her. As they stare at each other, he says "I'm looking at my wife. "

'Minutes 62 Sean pulls Anna towards him and kisses her on the lips.

'Minutes 81-82 As the boy sits in the bath, Anna outlines her plan for them to run away together. She says 'In 11 years you turn 21, then we'll get married". She rubs her hand over his face and tells him that she loves him.'

The National Classification Code requires that "Films that... depict in a way that is likely to cause offence to a reasonable adult, a person who is, or who looks like, a child under 16 (whether the person is engaged in sexual activity or not)" are to be classified RC (Refused Classification).

The scenes described above depict a "person who is, or who looks like a child under 16". The character - the boy Sean - is said to be 10 yeas old. The actor, Cameron Bright, was born on January 26, 1993 and would therefore have been under 12 when acting in these scenes.

Reasonable adults are likely to be caused offence by a depiction of a 10 year old boy naked in the bath with an unrelated naked woman, especially if the depiction includes kissing on the lips and discussion of marriage and sexual relations between the woman and the boy.

In the context of the national scandal involving widespread distribution and consumption of child pornography, it is extremely disturbing to Australian families that the Classification Board, which has the responsibility of classifying the images seized by police in the recent raids, has seen fit to approve as MA15+ a film which contains scenes of child pornography. Will some of those charged in the raids escape justice because the Classification Board decides the children featured in the pornographic items seized are involved in 'somewhat positive interactions'?

Classification of Films and Computer Games

New classification guidelines approved by the Standing Committee of Censorship Ministers and implemented in March 2003 used a new sliding scale focused on the overall "impact" of a film or computer game. Those with a "very mild" impact are to be classified G; those with a "very high" impact to be classified R18+. These guidelines give fewer explicit directions concerning the specific classifiable elements of sex, nudity, sexual violence, coarse language, adult themes, drug use and violence. Drug use and nudity were permitted in the G classification for the first time.

Material which is classified X or RC, should be prohibited. Material which is classified, or which would be classified, MA15+ or R18+ should be restricted so that children under 15 or 18 respectively are unable to easily gain access to such material.

Streaming audiovisual and chat room services are difficult to classify because the content is created and delivered in real time. Therefore there need to be enforceable rules for such services with sufficient penalties for breaches to deter creators and transmitters of such real time content from violating the rules.

To prevent such offences from occurring there should be a registration scheme and limited number range for any services offering audiovisual, audio or visual sex services. This scheme should parallel that currently operating for telephone sex services, which requires age verification by application for a personal identification number or payment by credit card.

Mandatory filtering by Internet Service Providers

There is no doubt that there is a major problem with pornography on the Internet, in particular the ease and frequency with which children are exposed to pornographic images.

In early 2003 the Australia Institute released a paper demonstrating that 38% of 16 and 17 year old boys were deliberately using the Internet to see sexually explicit material, while 84% of boys and 60% of girls had experienced unwanted exposure to sexual material. The Australia Institute called for more regulation of Internet content.

In November 2003 staff from the Child at Risk Assessment Unit, Canberra Hospital reported that exposure to pornography on the Internet is one significant factor in children younger than 10 years old sexually abusing other children.

In the first six months of 2003 the Unit had identified as many as 48 children under 10 years of age that had engaged in sexualised, sexually abusive behaviour. There has been a dramatic escalation in the reported incidence of this type of behaviour since the mid- 1990s when staff recall an average of 3 children per year coming to their attention with this problem.

Most children in this category had accessed pornography on the Internet. For 25% of these children, deliberate viewing of pornography was their main use of the Internet. While several children first came across pornography on the Internet accidentally, 25% of the children had been shown how to access pornographic images by another person.

Former Minister for Communications, Daryl Williams said "The review of the Online Content Co-regulatory Scheme found that, while some types of server level filtering are technically possible, mandating them would be excessively onerous and limit filter performance. It also found that Internet safety would be improved by more active promotion of filtering technologies by Australian Internet service providers (ISPs). "

Unfortunately the new Minister for Communications, Senator Helen Coonan has endorsed this position. Australian parents, and anyone concerned for the wellbeing of Australian children, should urge Senator Coonan and the Howard Government to reconsider this position.

Mandatory filtering at an ISP server level would cost just $10 per user set up costs and $7.33 annual fees. The simplest and fairest scheme would be for the Government to invest the initial $45 million in the interests of Australia's children and then to administer a levy scheme to ensure that the annual maintenance cost of $33 million are shared equitably between end users. It may be, as the report itself admits, that these prices could be brought down through competitive tendering between vendors of filtering software.

Deputy Prime Minister, John Anderson was quoted in the Australian (October II, 2004) saying: "Violence and 'obscene material' in videos and the internet was leading to child pornography and harming indigenous communities. We lifted too many taboos in the 1960s. We need to draw some lines about what our kids can be exposed to"

All those who are concerned for our children and our future should work actively to persuade the other members of the Howard Government - especially the Attorney- General Phillip Ruddock and Communications Minister, Helen Coonan - to take urgent and decisive action to protect children and society from the irreparable harm that can be done by the current flood of pornography and violence.