1. What’s “normal” sex? Shrinks seek definition
2. Jurors in Tampa to decide: What is obscene?
3. Obscenity case in court Wednesday
4. Virginia’s attempts to regulate sex and obscenity
5. The Leather Archives and Museum: To protect and serve
6. Duncanville officials bolster sex club ban adopted in response to Cherry Pit case
1. What’s “normal” sex? Shrinks seek definition
2. Jurors in Tampa to decide: What is obscene?
3. Obscenity case in court Wednesday
4. Virginia’s attempts to regulate sex and obscenity
5. The Leather Archives and Museum: To protect and serve
6. Duncanville officials bolster sex club ban adopted in response to Cherry Pit case
NCSF Media Updates represent a sampling of recent stories printed in US newspapers, magazines, and selected websites containing significant mention of SM-leather-fetish, polyamory, or swing issues and topics.
These stories may be positive, negative, accurate, inaccurate – or anywhere in between.
NCSF publishes the Updates to provide readers a comprehensive look at what media outlets are writing about these topics. NCSF permits and encourages readers to forward these Updates where appropriate.
#
What’s “normal” sex? Shrinks seek definition: Controversy erupts over creation of psychiatric rule book’s new edition
By Brian Alexander
MSNBC
May 22, 2008
This month the American Psychiatric Association announced the names of “working group” members who will guide the development of the new Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, or DSM, the codex of American psychiatry.
Not surprisingly, given the DSM’s colorful history, particularly when it comes to sex, controversy erupted within days of the announcement, especially over membership of the Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders working group, which will wrestle with questions such as: Are sadomasochism or pedophilia mental disorders? Are dysfunctions like female hypoactive sexual desire disorder (low sex drive) psychiatric issues, or hormonal issues? Perhaps the most important question is whether, when it comes to many sexual interests and issues, it’s even possible or desirable to create diagnostic criteria.
At least one petition, spearheaded by transgender activists, is being circulated to oppose the appointment of some members to the Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders work group and its chair, Kenneth Zucker, head of the Gender Identity Service at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health in Toronto, Canada. The petition accuses Zucker of having engaged in “junk science” and promoting “hurtful theories” during his career, especially advocating the idea that children who are unambiguously male or female anatomically, but seem confused about their gender identity, can be treated by encouraging gender expression in line with their anatomy.
Zucker rejects the junk-science charge, saying that there “has to be an empirical basis to modify anything” in the DSM. As for hurting people, “in my own career, my primary motivation in working with children, adolescents and families is to help them with the distress and suffering they are experiencing, whatever the reasons they are having these struggles. I want to help people feel better about themselves, not hurt them.”
That sex is controversial comes as no surprise to Dr. Darrel Regier, the vice-chair of the APA’s DSM-V Task Force, based in Arlington, Va.
Sex, he says, in an understatement, “is an area that obviously has lots of emotion attached to it.” But the APA, he says, is doing its best to put science and evidence first, both in who it appoints to working groups and in the process it will use to create the DSM-V (so called because it is the fifth complete version). Each working group will accept input from many experts with varying views, reach a consensus on DSM content, and then put that work group’s product before the board of trustees of the APA and the APA assembly.
Carol Queen, a sexologist, sexual rights activist and co-founder of San Francisco’s Center for Sex and Culture, believes the new DSM should stress that sexual variances are only a problem “if they are problems in the life of the person showing up” in a psychiatrist’s office “so that when somebody is eroticizing something, or doing something in a consensual way, that’s not a problem” even if it may seem odd to most of us.
She also proposes an addition, a diagnosis of “absexual” (“ab” meaning “away from”). This would include those who appear to be “turned on by fulminating against it.” Examples could include state governors who crusade against prostitution even while paying hookers for sex, and religious leaders who wind up trying to explain engaging in the sex acts they preach against.
Moser, who is affiliated with the Institute for Advanced Study of Human Sexuality in San Francisco, and Kleinplatz, from the University of Ottawa, argue that all paraphilias, like sexual sadism, sexual masochism, transvestism, should be removed from the DSM, insisting that “the DSM criteria for diagnosis of unusual sexual interests as pathological rests on a series of unproven and more importantly, untested assumptions.”
This does not mean, as opponents of this idea have suggested, that they somehow approve of sex between adults and children. “We would argue that the removal of pedophilia from the DSM would focus attention on the criminal aspect of these acts, and not allow the perpetrators to claim mental illness as a defense or use it to mitigate responsibility for their crimes,” they wrote. “Individuals convicted of these crimes should be punished as provided by the laws in the jurisdiction in which the crime occurred.”
Most of these suggestions are inherently political, as much as the APA and most psychiatrists would wish to avoid politics. Sex exists as part of the culture, and it cannot be separated from it.
The DSM has reflected cultural shifts through its revisions and new editions. The most famous example is homosexuality. When the first DSM was created in 1952, homosexuality was declared a mental illness. By 1973, and after much heated debate and over objections from religious conservatives, the DSM-II excluded homosexuality as a disorder with the exception of one variant, and that was soon dropped in an interim revision.
[continued]
To read this entire article, go to:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24664654/
To respond, write to: the editors at letters@msnbc.com or comment at
the bottom of the article
Jurors in Tampa to decide: What is obscene?
by Kevin Graham
St. Petersburg Times
May 28, 2008
A federal jury will soon have the unusual task of deciding what Tampa Bay residents consider obscene, and whether a Hollywood producer’s violent pornographic films are unacceptable to the local community.
They may spend an entire day watching porn to do it.
A judge will rule today on just how much pornography will be displayed in the courtroom as prosecutors present evidence against Paul F. Little of Altadena, Calif., and his company, MaxWorld Entertainment Inc.
Little, also known as Max Hardcore, and MaxWorld are charged with five counts of using a computer server to sell obscene matter and five counts of delivering obscene matter through the U.S. mail.
Little, well-known in the pornography world, has acted in more than 130 movies, directed more than 100 and produced about 30, according to the Internet Movie Database. His films show men inflicting pain or humiliation on women. The movies have scenes that include urinating, vomiting and defecating. Adult actresses in the films are often made up to look like young girls.
Defense attorneys say that what Little and MaxWorld produce and distribute is legal and protected in the marketplace by the First Amendment.
While adult pornography isn’t illegal, it can be prosecuted as obscene under the Miller test, named for the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court case Miller vs. California.
The court developed a three-part test to determine obscenity: It must appeal to prurient interests, be patently offensive by community standards and have no literary, scientific, political or artistic value.
Jurors get to decide whether, by the contemporary standards of their community, the material in question would be deemed obscene.
[continued]
To read this entire article, go to:
http://www.tampabay.com/news/courts/criminal/article528112.ece
To respond, write to: the editors at http://www.sptimes.com/letters/ or comment at the bottom of the article
Obscenity case in court Wednesday
by Brad Zinn
The News Leader (Shenandoah Valley, VA)
May 27, 2008
Several motions will be heard Wednesday in the city’s obscenity case against After Hours Video, its owner Rick Krial and an employee, including motions to dismiss.
The obscenity case — scheduled for a four-day trial in August — was set in motion in October when undercover agents from the Staunton and Waynesboro police departments, along with plainclothes officers from the Virginia State Police, posed as customers and purchased a number of DVDs from the Springhill Road adult business, which opened in August. Weeks later, a special Staunton grand jury convened and charged Krial and his company with 16 felonies and eight misdemeanor charges of obscenity.
In January, an employee at After Hours Video also was charged with six felony counts of obscenity.
In late March defense attorneys filed a number of motions, including one to dismiss based on grounds that the charges violate “constitutional due process guarantee.” Attorneys argued that the courts have recognized a right to sexual privacy under substantive due process, and that the “fundamental right to sexual privacy should encompass the right not only to possess allegedly obscene materials” but a right to sell them as well.
Court records show Staunton Prosecutor Raymond C. Robertson countered that the same arguments were unsuccessfully used in the Third Judicial Circuit (Penn., Delaware and New Jersey) and the United States Supreme Court.
Robertson also argued that users of pornography become “addicted to this kind of thing” and said the social ramifications are evident.
In citing some of the 12 DVDs that were purchased from After Hours Video that depicted sex scenes with multiple partners, Robertson wrote, “There is no pregnancy in pornography and there is no venereal disease. However, those who attempt to model what they see in these films will surely experience, to some degree, unwanted pregnancies and venereal diseases, including AIDS. The core of our social fabric, which revolves around monogamy and family life, becomes shattered by the advocacy of sex with multiple partners…”
[continued]
To read this entire article, go to:
http://www.newsleader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080527/NEWS05/80527012
To respond, write to: the editors at http://www.newsleader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?Category=CUSTOMERSERVICE03 or comment at the bottom of the article
Virginia’s attempts to regulate sex and obscenity
by Lindsay Barnes and Amy Biegelsen
Style Weekly (Richmond, Virginia)
May 28, 2008
Across Virginia, a woman hangs around government buildings brazenly baring her breast. In libraries, assembly halls, even inside the Department of Motor Vehicles, the naked bosom is downright unavoidable. The nudity can even be found in schools, out in the open, in front of children as young as 5 years old.
She’s known simply as Virtue, the triumphant female figure on Virginia’s state flag, her left foot atop a king’s dead body, her left hand clutching a sword, her left breast fully exposed.
Much of the state’s recent sex-related policy debate, in all the courtrooms and classrooms under Virtue’s watchful eye, has focused on bright-line issues: gay marriage, abortion, child pornography. They’re issues that stir up strong feelings, but there’s at least consensus on their definitions.
When it comes to mundane sex-related crimes, on the other hand — obscenity, indecency, adultery — things get a little muddy. The level of public attention and state prosecution is dependent on individual personalities, geography and arcane statutes. As a result, the way government handles such issues is uneven and sometimes perplexing.
Consider: The state seal proudly bears Virtue’s left breast, but Janet Jackson’s “wardrobe malfunction” during the 2004 Super Bowl halftime show cost CBS $550,000 — the largest fine in the history of the Federal Communications Commission. There are, of course, crucial contextual differences, but the raw configuration of the images themselves are strikingly similar. Nevertheless, one’ the state banner, while the other is simply banned.
In October, an adult video store called After Hours Video opened in a largely residential, but nevertheless out-of-the-way location about 100 miles northwest of Richmond in Staunton. Displeased with its arrival, the local commonwealth’ attorney, Ray Robertson, sent in undercover police officers who purchased a total of 12 X-rated DVDs on four different visits.
Less than a month later, Robertson hit After Hours’ owner, Rick Krial, with 12 counts of obscenity, eight of which were felonies. In January, Robertson filed 10 more obscenity counts against store cashier Tinsley Embrey for being the person who actually sold porn to the officers.
On March 6 Staunton found out the bust was no joke. Circuit Court Judge Thomas Wood set Krial and Embrey’s trial date for June 17. But this saga could have multiple sequels. The trial focuses only on the first four of the combined 22 charges facing the store owner and his employee, leaving open the possibility of three or more additional trials — all based on the purchase of a dozen DVDs. Why so many trials?
“You’re dealing with 24 hours’ worth of porn,” Robertson answers. “If you require a jury to watch all that, they could become bored or desensitized to these acts.”
Paul Cambria, Krial’s attorney, calls the strategy unfair.
“They decided how many movies to purchase,” says the Buffalo, N.Y.-based obscenity lawyer made famous by 30-plus years of courthouse arguments on behalf of Hustler publisher Larry Flynt. “We’re the ones disadvantaged by multiple trials because of the incredible expense to my client.”
While Judge Wood agreed that multiple trials were cumbersome, he informed the out-of-town defense attorney, “The Commonwealth is normally entitled to a great deal of discretion, and I’m not in a position to order them otherwise.”
Robertson eventually decided to throw out the other two videos from the first purchase for now, and instead focus this initial misdemeanor trial on two titles: “Sugar Britches” and “City Girls: Extreme Gang Bangs.”
Robertson says he’s watched all 24 hours of porn the police purchased, and has not been shy about offering explicit description (sensitive readers stop here). In December he told the Charlottesville weekly The Hook, “I’m going after things like double penetrating women … multiple strangers ejaculating on the faces of women.” In January he added that in each of the movies, similar action happens “again, and again and again.”
Asked why he speaks of the case in such graphic detail, Robertson says: “Why not? You need to know what you’re dealing with. Nobody’s attempting to gross anybody out. The jury is going to be required to look at it, and people need to know what this is.”
As for what will happen to the 18 other obscenity counts if Krial and Tinsley are acquitted in the first trial, Robertson says, “I’m not going to give up after one,” and he’ll have some help from the federal government.
Matthew Buzzelli is a member of the federal Obscenity Prosecution Task Force whose services are on loan to Robertson from the Justice Department. While the federal government has no jurisdiction, the Justice Department volunteered Buzzelli, he says, because of small-town Staunton’s relative proximity to Washington, D.C.
“If this were in Alaska, I probably wouldn’t be doing this,” Buzzelli says, “but we have the resources in terms of what kinds of briefs to file, arguments, motions, instead of Mr. Robertson having to reinvent the wheel.”
Louis Sirkin, who is defending cashier Embrey, says he’s seen a federal prosecutor involved in a state-level obscenity case only “once or twice in my career” and wonders if the Justice Department doesn’t have better things to do.
[continued]
To read this entire article, go to:
http://www.styleweekly.com/article.asp?idarticle=17079
To respond, write to: the editors at letters@styleweekly.com or comment at the bottom of the article
The Leather Archives and Museum: To protect and serve
by Owen Keehnen
Windy City Times (Illinois)
May 21, 2008
Two black boot banners hang from the yellow brick facade of the building. The large black letters “LA&M” stand above the doorway at the top of the stairs. The building used to be a synagogue and then was an arts center for a while. There’s a buzzer beside the door that assures me someone will be with me shortly. I read the posted hours of operation—Thurs.-Fri., 12-8; Sat.-Sun., 12-5. A friendly man in racing gear named Jeff ushered me into the pristine lobby and assumed his position at the box office. The ticket is five dollars, and you must be 18 to enter. I’m relieved to see that photos are allowed.
The Leather Archives and Museum has been serving and preserving the fetish community since 1991, when it was formed by Chuck Renslow and Tony DeBlase. At its inception, Renslow’s primary motivation was to store, maintain and share with the public the extensive artwork of his late lover, Etienne (Domingo Orejudos), which was then valued at over one million dollars. At the time, Renslow also donated boxes of memorabilia from his years in the leather community—running the famous Kris Studios that published physique photographs in the 1950s; as owner of the world-renowned Gold Coast leather bar as well as other businesses; and as the originator of the International Mr. Leather contest. His contribution proved a dynamic start to an ever expanding collection.
In 1991, The Leather Archives and Museum was officially incorporated in the state of Illinois and remains to this day the only institution in the United States dedicated to “…the compilation, preservation and maintenance of leather lifestyle and related lifestyles (including but not limited to the gay and lesbian community), history, archives, and memorabilia for historical, educational, and research purposes.”
Moving from the uniforms room, I crossed the lobby into the 164-seat Etienne Auditorium. Walking inside, I was immediately taken by the 20 or so stunning murals that adorn the walls. Many of these large, lush, colorful and—did I mention sexy?—murals once hung in the legendary Gold Coast. I read the curator’s note in The Exhibit Guide: “The murals painted in the original Gold Coast were painted directly on the walls. When they changed locations the artist had to paint over the erotic masterpieces with plain black paint. Ouch! At the next location, Dom painted the murals on wooden planks that could (and were) taken down when the bar moved again.” It’s fitting that these amazing art pieces are finally hung and protected in a museum. I assumed the erotic content had made them too controversial for mainstream galleries and venues. Maybe that lack of acceptance is changing? One of Etienne’s pieces is currently on loan to The Chicago Historical Society.
The auditorium seats are handsome and very comfortable. (Yes, I had to sit and try one out.) On the side of each end seat is a molded adornment. This space is used for lectures and for films like the museum’s weekly Saturday movie shorts or The Kinky Film Festival, which the LA&M hosted (in conjunction with CineKink) in late 2007. However, this auditorium was also donated to Chicago leather and LGBT organizations for meetings and special presentations, like the recent Equality Illinois Education Project and Leather Archives and Museum seminar on the Illinois civil-unions bill. The auditorium has even been the site of a couple weddings, including the union of Leather Archives and Museum Executive Director Rick Storer and Operations Manager Jeff Storer.
[continued]
To read this entire article, go to:
http://www.windycitymediagroup.com/gay/lesbian/news/ARTICLE.php?AID=18368
To respond, write to: the editors at editor@windycitymediagroup.com or comment at the bottom of the article
Duncanville officials bolster sex club ban adopted in response to Cherry Pit case
by Elizabeth Langton
The Dallas Morning News
May 8, 2008
The Duncanville City Council this week approved changes meant to strengthen an ordinance banning sex clubs.
The city adopted the ordinance in November to close down the Cherry Pit, a swingers club where guests can mingle, dance and have sex. Residents Jim Trulock, 59, and Julie M. Norris, 30, operate the club in their home.
City officials call the club a public nuisance. Mr. Trulock says the ordinance violates his privacy rights.
Mr. Trulock sued the city over the ordinance, and the lawsuit is pending.
The changes make the definition of a sex club more general and add a local appeal process for sex clubs that the city orders to close. City Attorney Bob Hager said allowing appeals to the city’s Board of Adjustment might prevent future lawsuits.
[continued]
To read this entire article, go to:
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/050908dnmetcherrypit.defcb241.html
To respond, write to: the editors at elangton@dallasnews.com or feedback@dallasnews.com or comment at the bottom of the article
HOW TO WRITE A LETTER TO THE EDITOR
Feedback letters are an effective way to convey a positive image of alternate sexual practices such as SM, swinging, or polyamory. You can help to correct negative social myths and misconceptions about these types of practices. These letters help achieve the advocacy goals of the NCSF.
Generally, for a letter to be published, it’s important to include your name (or first initial, last name), city and daytime phone (for verification only). For more information, see:
https://ncsfreedom.org/media/writelettertoeditor.htm
Please alert us to positive, negative or neutral stories about SM, swinging and polyamory at media@ncsfreedom.org . Comments to the editor of this Update may be sent to susanw@ncsfreedom.org .
###
A project of NCSF and the Foundation of NCSF
National Coalition for Sexual Freedom
822 Guilford Avenue, Box 127
Baltimore, MD 21202-3707
410-539-4824
media@ncsfreedom.org
www.ncsfreedom.org