Talk:Zoosexuality and the law

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Pornography, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to pornography-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Disclaimer message

Why do we need it? Shouldn't we just remove it? Skinnyweed 20:16, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

No, it's an article that is claiming to list laws in an obscure area of the law where people might reasonably and foreseeably rely upon it. Even though thers a general disclaimer if they look at the "about" page, it's appropriate for this article to have a disclaimer. if an article on "laws about X activity" shouldn't have a disclaimer, what article should. It doesn't hurt, and legal obligation isn't the issue, informing others clearly on information is. The material in the disclaimer is information for readers. FT2 (Talk) 20:47, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tone of article

The article doesn't read currently like an encyclopedia article. It sometimes has a conversational tone, for example. Some parts lack citations. Andjam 12:17, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] World map

I've made a world map showing, to the best of my knowledge, where it is and isn't legal. Might add to the article? Green indicating legal, blue indicating the act is legal however pornography featuring bestiality is not, yellow indicating that the appropriate laws in this country vary at state or regional level and finally red indicating that bestiality is illegal both in practice and pornography. I stress that I can and will not garuantee its accuracy nor will it ever be complete. It should only serve as an indication.

Sources for countries not listed in the article yet:

  • South Africa: illegal (source: [1], "Bestiality is a criminal offence. Charges can be laid under the Criminal Procedure Act and also in terms of the Animals Protection Act.")
  • India: Homosexuality in India article, India seems to have a sort of crime against nature law (confirmed it seems: "Sec 377 remains ambiguous about which sexual acts it seeks to prescribe. For some reason, sodomy between males and male and female and bestiality has been considered 'carnal intercourse' against the order of nature." [2])
  • Switzerland: bestiality seems legal (source: [3]. Listed blue as I'm not entirely sure if pornography is as well)

The following found on interpol website: ( [4] , search term bestiality)

  • Trinidad and Tobago: illegal (source: Sexual Offences Act N° 27 of 1986 as amended by Sexual Offences Act N° 31 of 2000)
  • Latvia: pornography illegal (source: Latvian law Article 166, section 1 and 2. Seems to apply only to import, distribution and production and advertising, possesion could be legal)
  • Finland: pornography illegal (source: Finnish law, article 18 section 17)

Note that Greenland uses the Danish legal system. Because of this, bestiality should be legal as well there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BabyNuke (talkcontribs)

What about this link?
"In Mexico, Colombia, Brazil and many other Latin American countries, scandalous sex "education" programs which parallel those of the U.S. and even surpass them, are unabashedly teaching children that sexual aberrations such as homosexual activity and even bestiality are viable, normal options of sexual expression. In fact, masturbation and bestiality are being proposed as "safe sex" alternatives."
Published at least recently (1998 onwards) from the dates on citations. (but comes from an extremist text, may not be a representation of the law)
Its also legal in Cambodia, there was a case there [5] FT2, partly legal in lebanon, oman, iran and thailand [6] (accurate or dubious?)
Note that in Canada and the UK, the act is illegal but the pornography is *legal*. So all 4 combinations are needed. Maybe a color for legality of the act, and some kind of hatching or such to indicate illegality of porn? Or is it better to have 2 separate maps -- for the act, and for the pornography -- and use a color on the former to mean "legal with restrictions" (eg legal for men, not women, or some castes or circumstances not others)?
(Talk) 02:02, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Map updated. To my knowledge, a law was recently passed in the UK which bans several kinds of pornography, including bestiality. BabyNuke 19:26, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Incorrect. A law is being examined. They haven't even published the responses to the initial proposal yet, let alone drafted a law. FT2 (Talk) 21:27, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
The Sexual Offences Act 2003 bans sex with animals but it doesn't mention pornography. Skinnyweed 21:53, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Actually, can we have 2 maps? One for the act (which may be legal / illegal / legal in some circumstances / varies by state), and one for the pornography (which may be legal / illegal to distribute / illegal). That way the porn map can be used separately on the porn article, and on this one you have one map in each section. Plus it stops it being confusing as there are more combinations when porn + act are on one map. I've copied your work (which is excellent) to try and do this:

legality of the act - legal, illegal, varies by state, legal in some circumstances
legality of the act - legal, illegal, varies by state, legal in some circumstances
legality of the porn - legal, illegal, may be illegal to distribute
legality of the porn - legal, illegal, may be illegal to distribute

I hope you don't mind me having a go -- I thought a map was a good idea, but the actual laws are maybe best shown on 2 maps, not one. And maybe you can see why they aren't thumbnailing too!

FT2 (Talk) 21:31, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps it can't resize the .png file format automatically? .gif is probably better for maps anyway since it produces smaller files with no loss in quality. And I thought the law had already been passed in the UK, but if not my bad. BabyNuke 09:23, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
Known new bug - appears on bugzilla and reported by other users here.
Hopefully fixed shortly due to importance. FT2 (Talk) 14:56, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Possible Stylistic Approaches

Just to improve, th article, I daresay it reads more like a law textbook than an encyclopædia article.--Whytecypress 22:29, 5 March 2007 (UTC)