Ban On Depictions Of Fetish Sex In Film Should Be Lifted: Australia Government Report Recommends

A recent report commissioned by the Australian government has recommended that the country should ease its strict censorship of legal sex fetishes and some acts of violence in films.

Australia has a national classification system for films and games that has remained largely unchanged since 1995, which is outdated given the advent of the internet, smartphones, and streaming services. Additionally, each state in Australia has its own classification system.

Although the report, compiled by Neville Stevens in 2020, was released by the federal government this week, it had been unpublished for over two years.

Federal Communications Minister Michelle Rowland stated that the government would suggest to the states that video games featuring simulated gambling should have an R18+ rating and certain types of video games should have an M classification, due to Australia’s problem with gambling addiction. However, she has not provided any comment on the other recommendations in the report.

Australia is known for its strict censorship policies, which have resulted in outright bans, also known as “refused classification” or “RC,” for films that contain both sex and violence, even if the two are unrelated. This definition has led to the banning of several well-known art films, such as Larry Clark’s “Ken Park,” Greg Araki’s “Mysterious Skin,” John Waters’ “Pink Flamingos,” and Bruce LaBruce’s “LA Zombie.”

In addition, Australia has banned films like “Pirates,” a 2005 parody of “Pirates of the Caribbean,” for the same reasons.

Furthermore, Australia considers films that depict the use of “school uniforms or other indicators of youth” as well as many forms of fetish activity as pornographic and therefore refuses classification.

The country defines fetish activity as involving “an object, an action, or a non-sexual part of the body which gives sexual gratification.” Mild fetishes, such as stylized domination and rubberwear, are allowed, but stronger fetishes like bondage and discipline, as well as activities like body piercing, the application of substances such as candle wax, “golden showers,” spanking, or fisting, are considered pornographic and would result in the film being refused classification.

According to the Stevens report, it is recommended that the absolute prohibitions on fetishes that are not illegal and violence unrelated to sex should be removed for X 18+ films.

Additionally, it is suggested that the scope of classification for sexually explicit films should be reduced to only include those that are professionally produced, directed at an Australian audience, and distributed for commercial purposes. This could potentially result in many amateur forms of pornography no longer needing to be classified.

The review found that community attitudes towards refused classification content indicate that most fetishes are not concerning to the public as long as consent is present and no serious harm is inflicted. Similarly, violence that is not directly linked to sexual activity is also not a significant concern.

Stevens believes that his proposed amendments reflect the evolution of classification from its origins in censorship and concerns for public morals to a more objective, harms-based system that aims to inform consumers, especially parents, and protect children.

He also added that adults should have the freedom to access the content they want, with limited exceptions, while minors should be protected from content that could be harmful or disturbing to them, and everyone should be shielded from exposure to content that could have severe repercussions on the wellbeing of the community.

According to the Sydney Criminal Lawyers law firm, if the recommended amendments are adopted, it would not put an end to state-based prohibitions on the sale of pornography, but it could result in less material being classified as “RC” and therefore legally accessible to Australians if behind a restricted access system.

However, any changes to Australia’s classification guidelines would necessitate cooperation and agreement from each state and territory, and the process is anticipated to be gradual.