erinlefey: (Angry Shadowed)
erinlefey ([personal profile] erinlefey) wrote2010-04-20 08:31 pm

Supreme Court in the modern age

[Public]

They just had to deal with "crush videos".

If you don't know what they are...I envy you. I now know. (I'll define it in the comments if you really want to know.) And I have never come across a concept that literally made my stomach spasm and attempt to vomit based on the IDEA. I initially said that I hate to be a member of the human race now. I've rethought that. People into that are not human. Y'all know that I'm a live-and-let-live, your-kink-is-OK kind of girl. But if I find someone who thinks such things are nifty, I'm rebooting them into the next reincarnation.

Comment away. But don't joke. My sense of humor is absent on this subject.

[identity profile] willful-zephyr.livejournal.com 2010-04-21 01:41 pm (UTC)(link)
It is the exceptions that get it in trouble, as legislation goes.

This dog fighting guy - there wasn't any actual dog fighting, it was all fake - it was a depiction. Why isn't it art? What if it had some random quotes under the images?

The courts really, really don't want to get into, "What is Art?" Hopefully, they'll come up with something a little more concrete and enforceable.

[identity profile] macgeezel.livejournal.com 2010-04-21 03:30 pm (UTC)(link)
I haven't seen anything that says it was fake. Everything (several articles, Wikipedia) just says there were two dogfighting compilations, narrated by Stevens, and a third boar-hunting video, and actual footage is mentioned. According to Stevens, the dogfighting videos were meant to provide a historical perspective on the practice. If you can point me in the direction of anything that says no authentic footage was contained in the videos, I'd love to see it.

[identity profile] willful-zephyr.livejournal.com 2010-04-21 03:58 pm (UTC)(link)
Hmph, I cannot find the article anymore, so I will not stand by it veracity. But, it had said specifically that the "Boar Hunt" was staged.