Crush fetish: Difference between revisions
Stupidly unnecessary advertisement. |
Mittgenstein (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
===United States=== |
===United States=== |
||
In 1999, the United States Congress enacted a statute affecting the legality of crush films which criminalized the creation, sale, or possession with the intent to sell of depictions of animal cruelty, though with an exception for "any depiction that has serious religious, political, scientific, educational, journalistic, historical, or artistic value."<ref>[http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sec_18_00000048----000-.html § 48. Depiction of animal cruelty]. United States Code: Title 18, Part I, Chapter 3, § 48. Cornell University Law School</ref> In 2008, the [[United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit]] invalidated the ban on the sale and possession of such films (if not otherwise obscene) as a violation of the Constitution's guarantee for [[Freedom of speech in the United States|freedom of speech]].<ref>[http://randazza.wordpress.com/2008/07/20/united-states-v-stevens-protecting-animals-is-not-a-reason-to-amputate-part-of-the-first-amendment/ United States v. Stevens - Protecting Animals no Justification for First Amendment Amputation], ''The Legal Satyricon'', 20-07-2008</ref> The [[United States Supreme Court]] affirmed the Third Circuit's decision in ''[[United States v. Stevens]]'', finding the law unconstitutional because the law was so broad and vague that it included any portrayal of an animal in or being harmed such as by hunting or disease.<ref>{{citation |title=Justices Reject Ban on Videos of Animal Cruelty |author=Adam Liptak |publisher=[[New York Times]] |date=April 20, 2010 |url=http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/21/us/21scotus.html }}</ref> As of November 28, 2010, bill H.R. 5566, which prohibits interstate commerce in animal crush films, has been passed by the House of Representatives and the Senate. On December 9, President Obama signed the Animal Crush Video Prohibition Act of 2010 into law to re-criminalize the creation, sale, distribution, advertising, marketing and exchange of animal crush videos.<ref>[http:// |
In 1999, the United States Congress enacted a statute affecting the legality of crush films which criminalized the creation, sale, or possession with the intent to sell of depictions of animal cruelty, though with an exception for "any depiction that has serious religious, political, scientific, educational, journalistic, historical, or artistic value."<ref>[http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sec_18_00000048----000-.html § 48. Depiction of animal cruelty]. United States Code: Title 18, Part I, Chapter 3, § 48. Cornell University Law School</ref> In 2008, the [[United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit]] invalidated the ban on the sale and possession of such films (if not otherwise obscene) as a violation of the Constitution's guarantee for [[Freedom of speech in the United States|freedom of speech]].<ref>[http://randazza.wordpress.com/2008/07/20/united-states-v-stevens-protecting-animals-is-not-a-reason-to-amputate-part-of-the-first-amendment/ United States v. Stevens - Protecting Animals no Justification for First Amendment Amputation], ''The Legal Satyricon'', 20-07-2008</ref> The [[United States Supreme Court]] affirmed the Third Circuit's decision in ''[[United States v. Stevens]]'', finding the law unconstitutional because the law was so broad and vague that it included any portrayal of an animal in or being harmed such as by hunting or disease.<ref>{{citation |title=Justices Reject Ban on Videos of Animal Cruelty |author=Adam Liptak |publisher=[[New York Times]] |date=April 20, 2010 |url=http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/21/us/21scotus.html }}</ref> As of November 28, 2010, bill H.R. 5566, which prohibits interstate commerce in animal crush films, has been passed by the House of Representatives and the Senate. On December 9, President Obama signed the Animal Crush Video Prohibition Act of 2010 into law to re-criminalize the creation, sale, distribution, advertising, marketing and exchange of animal crush videos.<ref>[http://blog.aspca.org/content/victory-president-signs-new-crush-act-law]</ref> |
||
==References== |
==References== |
||
Revision as of 20:39, 8 October 2012
 | It has been suggested that Crush film be merged into this article. (Discuss) Proposed since May 2011. |
A crush fetish is a paraphilia in which one is sexually aroused when usually someone of the opposite sex crushes objects, food and sometimes small animals or insects with their body, usually under their foot.[1] The term soft crush refers to the more common fetish surrounding videos involving invertebrates (e.g. insects, worms, spiders) being crushed, while the term hard crush refers to such videos involving larger animals, (e.g. reptiles, birds, mammals). The preference could be barefoot, high-heels, flip flops, and so on, depending on the fetishist.
Crush films
Jeff Vilencia is one known director of crush films, such as Smush![2] Vilencia, along with many other fetishists, has loved to see invertebrates crushed since a young age; he claims that when he was 2–3 years old, he repeatedly attempted to get people to step on him.[3] The legality of crush erotica and the actual practice of crushing varies by region; however, many have been posted on web sites and are available for download via the Internet, making the control of their distribution difficult. Popular video-sharing websites such as YouTube make it possible for some to view crush videos for free.
United States
In 1999, the United States Congress enacted a statute affecting the legality of crush films which criminalized the creation, sale, or possession with the intent to sell of depictions of animal cruelty, though with an exception for "any depiction that has serious religious, political, scientific, educational, journalistic, historical, or artistic value."[4] In 2008, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit invalidated the ban on the sale and possession of such films (if not otherwise obscene) as a violation of the Constitution's guarantee for freedom of speech.[5] The United States Supreme Court affirmed the Third Circuit's decision in United States v. Stevens, finding the law unconstitutional because the law was so broad and vague that it included any portrayal of an animal in or being harmed such as by hunting or disease.[6] As of November 28, 2010, bill H.R. 5566, which prohibits interstate commerce in animal crush films, has been passed by the House of Representatives and the Senate. On December 9, President Obama signed the Animal Crush Video Prohibition Act of 2010 into law to re-criminalize the creation, sale, distribution, advertising, marketing and exchange of animal crush videos.[7]
References
- ^ G.A. Pearson. (1997). Digest Cultural Entomology. Fourth issue. Crush Fetishists
- ^ IMDB. Smush. (accessed 2006-05-04)
- ^ Lex Appeal Animal Cruelty, Crush Videos and the First Amendment.
- ^ § 48. Depiction of animal cruelty. United States Code: Title 18, Part I, Chapter 3, § 48. Cornell University Law School
- ^ United States v. Stevens - Protecting Animals no Justification for First Amendment Amputation, The Legal Satyricon, 20-07-2008
- ^ Adam Liptak (April 20, 2010), Justices Reject Ban on Videos of Animal Cruelty, New York Times
- ^ [1]