Jail-sex video case `could affect future films'
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.An appeal against the refusal to grant a video viewing certificate to a film which features whippings and nude aerobics intended to send up female prison life could have widespread implications for other films, lawyers claimed yesterday.
Michael Grieve, a lawyer representing Redemption Films Limited, which was refused permission to distribute Bare Behind Bars last autumn, says the British Board of Film Classification's decision to refuse the film a certificate partly because teenage boys might be corrupted by it could lead to adult films being certificated or not according to whether they are likely to be seen by teenagers at home.
Last September James Ferman, director of the BBFC, argued that the film which shows female convicts, warders and a prison governor in a succession of sexual couplings, depicted an unacceptable level of enforced nudity and coercive sex.
He said: "The prison setting and coercive sex are designed to appeal to male fantasies of sexual power over women which, if acted out, could lead to behaviour of a socially reprehensible or criminal kind.
"To compound the problem, since this film could only be marketed as sexual titillation, it is more than likely to be drawn to the attention of teenage boys ... who may thus at an impressionable age pick up the link between forcible exposure and sexual excitation."
Before an appeal panel in London yesterday, Mr Grieve argued that Bare Behind Bars was an unexceptional video containing some soft-core sexual material marked more by spoof, humour and inept acting than the "morally corrosive" fare characteristic of the concentration camp/women's prison films which seek to create an erotic charge by "sexualising humiliation, degradation and the coercion of women".
Mr Grieve argued that the board had toughened its criteria in the wake of an amendment to the Video Recordings Act 1984 in November last year. This required the board to give particular thought to whether films of a sexual or violent nature might be seen at home by children or young adults irrespective of its adult classification.
He said that the film was intended for adult viewers and should be classified as such.
The case continues today.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments