#I’m not $100k in law school debt to argue with Google law experts on tumblr ffs

[peachdues]

Laughing at the “I rlly hope you aren’t a lawyer ://“ thing. I am! And guess what! Statutory interpretation is my specialty.

You know, I have to give you credit — I didn’t think it was possible for someone to so clearly misunderstand the post. But, thank you for making it clear that you have no idea how to read a law and its proposed amendments. Because my post was meant to draw the connections between the law as is and the amendments written in a high level, generalized format. And WOW, could you not manage to even follow that! Honestly, I would be impressed by that level of non-comprehension if you hadn’t been such a fucking amoeba about it.

The law very clearly is not limited to CSAM. That’s what “or” means. And my point still stands: the amendments will affect fiction. Any plain reading of the statute as it stands in conjunction with the amendments proposed would make that clear — then again, you don’t seem to have that degree of comprehension or critical thinking.

“Including but not limited to” does include written media. Point to where “visual” depictions is limited strictly to photographs? Screens? You can’t because it isn’t limited. And that’s intentional.

Do not quote the fucking Miller test to me. That language, when broken down, requires assessment not only of national standards but also community standards — so what happens when a local community decides trans representation is “obscene?” They get to restrict it. And, language added into subsection (E) makes that clear. Oklahoma’s standards will be used to determine what is and is not obscene.

Now, as I made clear in the comments, this bill likely won’t pass — it’s not meant to, and even if it does, it will be immediately challenged as unconstitutional. That is the goal. The quoted Miller language, however, is meant to be a trigger into the federal courts to review the law for overbreadth and or/vagueness. This current Supreme Court has no respect for stare decisis — if they have an opportunity to redefine “obscenity” or even punt it back to the states, they will.

I sincerely hope you’re not too tired expending your last few brain cells typing such an asinine, offensive, and poorly argued reply. The point of my post is to call attention to the fact that this law is written vaguely enough to be stretched to written materials — something that apparently went right over your head because you do not possess the level of discernment necessary to understand that. This bill is the beginning, not the end. They are testing the waters, but the goal is very much to restrict ALL forms of adult content in ALL media. If you cannot understand that, then you are willfully ignorant and you are blinded by your own hubris.

For all those who complain about explicit “smutty” books or smut in fic in general:

Just be aware that a bill has been introduced in Oklahoma’s state senate (SB 593) that would make writing/publishing/owning an explicit romance book a felony.

So, when you come on here to espouse your “anti pro-ship” nonsense, or moan about how hard it is to find fics/art/books that aren’t “smutty” — know that this is the effect. You are being used as mouthpieces to help feed and perpetuate censorship. There is no room for censorship in fiction because it will never stop at what you deem morally “right”. It is about control and the restriction of speech. Your discomfort with sex in media does not make it wrong, and it certainly doesn’t mean you get to advocate for its restriction.

Do not be pawns in the far-right’s game. Do not call yourselves allys of any kind if you are willingly feeding into a pillar of far right extremism. It will not stop where you think it “should.”