Posted: 2007-12-19 01:00:00 Author: Social Kink Team Views: 850

In the last few weeks we have looked at some of the differences and similarities between extreme sexual behavior and obscene sexual behavior. All along we have been trying to come up with a working definition that better satisfies both areas. In this final piece (but most definitely not the final say) on this issue, a comprehensive review should be called to order. This review is going to be accompanied with some quotes from some pretty trusty readers/bloggers out here on Social Kink.

In Extreme vs. Obscene pt.2 we looked at a fetish genre called death-play, where we found some people who like to take the aspect of death, something everyone has to deal with at some point, and turn it into a sort of pleasurable fantasy. For the sake of labels I placed it in conjuncture to the extreme portion of my article series. I considered death-play an extreme fetish because mortality is something that is closely linked with our very humanity. From the time we are born into this world, we begin to die. Death is also something very permanent, from which there is no coming back. So the fact that people would play dead, or fake death in anyway, would totally be seen as taboo in many so called "civilized" societies, making it somewhat extreme. In England, extreme sexual behavior has been considered somewhat dangerous and has been considered against the law.

With both sides of the argument duly noted, I decided to play devil's advocate and take the stance that supposes that if we live in civilized society, isn't it the responsibility of the leaders of our so called civilization to provide security and protection from harm to ourselves, even if it's from ourselves? SK member, Xaq Fixx doesn't seem to think so.
He wrote,

"I don't think society has the right to protect people from themselves in general. It is a slippery slope that the state uses to justify things like victimless crimes and vice laws. Drug prohibition, smoking bans, prostitution and gambling bans, even the Alabama sex toy ban are all based on that concept."

Slippery slope it is. When people's personal rights are infringed upon in any way, problems usually arise. Ultimately it all depends on what you personally think extreme and obscene mean. SK Admin/member, Mandy said,

"Extreme is where you cross that line between my freedom and yours. If you are doing something I don't like, I can walk away or stop watching. However, you cannot chase me down and make me continue watching what you are doing."

That is a rather interesting view. She only enforces the point, however, that the boundaries between extreme and obscene are set by an individual first and foremost.
Obscenity on the other hand gets the law involved a little bit more than extremity. Reason being, obscenity usually involves someone being offended by an action or actions taking place. Extreme sexual behavior can go on behind closed doors and no one has to know the better. If someone finds out, however, it can be labeled obscene and the state can bring charges against you. Obscenity, much like extremity, starts with an individual's limits first. This is the case even if the limits are the limits of someone who isn't necessarily participating in whatever act is going on. As Mandy sees it,

"Obscene to me would be something a shocking or lewd, but not ‘bad'. Things you wouldn't want your grandmother to see, or see your grandmother doing."

Again, an individual limit has been set.
Should there be a definitive line set between what is thought to be Extreme vs. Obscene? Some people, myself included, see it as a blurred line that moves between the two for the most part. Pet believes,

"There is such a fine line between obscene and extreme because it is jaded by a person's perceptions and their background; what may be obscene to one may be a quiet night for another."

I feel that is an excellent assessment considering what's been pointed out throughout this article. And Chemicals! attests that

"...in Germany, the line between what is merely extreme and obscene fades away, the two become one and what you have left is ‘extremely obscene.'

Interesting. Others feel that things should be more defined.

Veronica: "Considering the legal implications, drawing a line between obscene and extreme is very, very important. It is my constitutional right to be extreme. It is not, however, my right to be obscene. According to the Supreme Court decision issued in Miller v. California, the only litmus test for obscenity, issued by Justice Stewartis, ‘I know it when I see it.'

Well yes Veronica, it is your right, but don't go to England with that view because they don't play that.

It seems like this debate will continue to drive us for years to come yet. Whichever side of the coin you fall under, extremity and obscenity will always be linked together in one way or another. I truly don't know if a "happy medium" can be found either. So where does this all leave us? Unfortunately it leaves us where we started. The definitions of extreme and obscene for the most part are subjective, and can usually lead to some pretty interesting conclusions. My advice? Make sure whatever you do is legal first. Go from there with your own judgments and all will be fine. Ta ta!