“How-to Guide to Drug Rapists” to Chief Censor
Society Submits “How-to Guide to Drug Rapists” to Chief Censor
The Society today submitted a hard copy of CRITIC (Issue 23 published by the Otago University Student Association) containing “the how-to-guide for drug rapists” to the Chief Censor’s Office for classification. It argues that the publisher and distributor of the magazine have breached s. 3 (2) and s. 3(3) of the Films, Videos and Publications Classification Act 1993 in disseminating “objectionable” content matter that promotes and supports sexual violence against women and is deliberately designed (as the publisher concedes) to cause maximum offence to all readers. These include all victims of sexual abuse, their partners and loved ones and all those seeking to relieve the suffering of victims. (Rape Crisis, Dunedin, has publicly condemned the publication as grossly offensive).
The article on “Maximum Hardcore …” promotes the sexual degradation, demeaning and dehumanising of women in hard core pornography. It promotes the exploitation and sodomising of women in the most offensive manner. The editor of CRITIC, Ms Holly Walker, states in her editorial that the content of the magazine is “so offensive” it made her “feel physically sick”. And yet she has defended her actions to media throughout the day, even saying that she would republish the same material again if given half the chance.
She ‘apologised’ to a rape victim on the Susan Wood programme (TV One) last night, and claimed that she had no intention to offend any readers in publishing the date rape article and other material. Her hypocrisy is self-evident: the magazine is deliberately designed to achieve maximum offence, and clearly states this as its aim. Why ‘apologise’ to a victim, then say to the media the next day that she defends all her actions?
The publisher has breached s. 121(1) of the FVPC Act 1993 in its use of a look-a-like R18 (red sticker) classification label on the front cover of CRITIC. Censorship Compliance (Wellington) has confirmed to the Society that this is a serious offence carrying a maximum fine under s. 121(2) of the Act of $10,000 for a body corporate (see ref. below). CRITIC is owned by Planet Media Dunedin Ltd a wholly owned subsidiary of the Otago University Student Association.
The Society will be referring the magazine’s diatribe against Jews to the Race Relations Concilliator, pointing out its denigration of Jews as “Cun*y” etc. in the context of an offensive discussion of the Nazis’ failed “Final Solution” and attempted extermination of Jews. It will also point out the blasphemous content vilifying the Blessed Virgin Mary and the Lord Jesus Christ that would make any sincere Christian feel physically sick.
The Society expects the Chief Censor to rule this publication “objectionable” and believes that the vast majority of New Zealanders will support this classification as being in line with the intentions of parliament as embodied in censorship law. The dissemination of “objectionable” content is a serious criminal offence under ss. 123-124 of the FVPC Act 1993 and carries a large fine for a corporate body and individual.
Sadly, all Otago University students were forced to fund this breach of the law, including those who have been victims of date rape and those will inevitably soon be victims (little thanks to CRITIC). The funding of the CRITIC magazine comes out of the compulsory fees paid for by all Otago University students.
S. 121(1) “Unlawful Issue of Labels”
“Every person commits an offence against this Act who, not being the labelling body, issues or purports to issue any label that is intended or is likely, by reason of its wording or appearance, or in any other manner, to cause any person to believe, contrary to the fact, that the label was issued under this Act.”
(2) Every person who commits an offence against this section is liable to a fine not exceeding,—
a)In the case of an individual, $3,000:
(b)In the case of a body corporate, $10,000.