So is the game illegal in Europe/UK?

[xebedy]

https://www.jdspicer.co.uk/site/blog/crime-fraud/guide-to-uk-pornography-laws#Is%20bestiality%20legal%20in%20the%20UK?

Is bestiality legal in the UK?
No. Bestiality porn (often incorrectly spelt as beastiality porn) falls under extreme pornography law.

The law makes it illegal to possess images of people performing sexual acts on an animal, whether dead or alive. It is the task of the judge or jury to decide whether an image is pornographic.

Bestiality pornography can also fall within the Obscene Publications Act 1959. Guidance from the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) states that where an act shown in a publication is illegal, it is likely to be obscene.

[Swans]

Автор сообщения: xebedy

Автор сообщения: Swans

When they say 'real', they mean actual, real, physical manifestations of animals. So I could create the most realistic looking possible bestiality scene, but provided I presented it in a way that the 'reasonable person' does not think it's real, then I am OK. If I tried to pass it off as real, and it was sufficiently well rendered and realised that the notional 'reasonable person' could think it was real, I may be on shaky ground.

But in this game, the reasonable person knows this is not a real animal, not just because of the unrealistic graphics, but because they are playing a game. So the reasonable person test (a staple of UK law), would not be passed.

You say unrealistic, it is not an artistic impression that would could be deemed unrealistic, it is a reasonably realistic representation of their physical forms.

It will never pass the reasonable person test, because the reasonable person knows they are playing a game. Even if this was rendered to perfection, the reasonable person would never deem the bear 'real', even if they said, 'it looks realistic'.

And, we know this to be true, because BG3 has been given a rating in the UK and that means it's passed our censor. Our censor is fairly lenient compared to, say, the USA, but they do obey the law to the letter and, if there was any question over BG3 it would have been banned as happened with Manhunt 2.

[Sonic Titan]

Автор сообщения: xebedy

Have you considered what real means?

Maybe the dictionary definition would help.

[Runic Tunic]

I'll be honest guys. After seeing this as an argument:

Автор сообщения: xebedy

Автор сообщения: Quillithe

You think you're going to convince a judge that video games are real?

Have you considered what real means? It is a lot more complex than you seem to think; real is not a legal term by itself, it is often a philosophical term and so you can use your imagination there... ask a theoretical world leading physicist what real mean, and they'll tell you it doesn't exist (yes I actually follow theoretical physicists like Donald Hoffman).

Idk what to even think. Dude is legit trying to argue we should make something illegal, a system based on our understanding of objective reality....by ignoring objective reality because of a philosophical premise.

I could literally say I have the right to ban anything I want because "what is reality though?" according to this logic.

[xebedy]

Автор сообщения: Swans

Автор сообщения: xebedy

Have you considered what real means? It is a lot more complex than you seem to think; real is not a legal term, it is often a philosophical term and so you can use your imagination there... ask a theoretical world leading physicist what real mean, and they'll tell you it doesn't exist (yes I actually follow theoretical physicists like Donald Hoffman).

Well, we could indeed get into that, but I can assure you that our courts don't bother themselves with such a thing, or their already monumental workload would be over-bearing if they had a metaphysical discussion at the start of every case! They are simply interested in, "is/was this animal a living, breathing, organism?"

Indeed, I know that in court the 'laugh test' is often applied, the law is mostly a guide and such a case would likely be laughed out of court... unless the public narrative or the like swayed in such a direction thus pressuring the courts to make a certain decision, e.g. if the overton window swung to the far-right and something akin to extremely conservative religion rules culture and society... but I digress.

[[Heretic]Rivga]

Автор сообщения: xebedy

Автор сообщения: Dαятн Wαfflεmαncεя

Well he is obviously part of some religion, and doesn't say the bible something to the like of "he who thinks about another woman has comitted adultery"?
So much for thought police....

To question something legality purports religiosity... perhaps you should check your own immoral bias, perhaps if someone that does express their dislike for something isn't religious.

The game has gone through classification in the UK and all is good, So legally you are wrong. So now we have to question why you are separating yourself from reality - do you think the reality is fake, your going to wake up and find it has actually been banned just as you insist it will be?

[xebedy]

Автор сообщения: Swans

Автор сообщения: xebedy

You say unrealistic, it is not an artistic impression that would could be deemed unrealistic, it is a reasonably realistic representation of their physical forms.

It will never pass the reasonable person test, because the reasonable person knows they are playing a game. Even if this was rendered to perfection, the reasonable person would never deem the bear 'real', even if they said, 'it looks realistic'.

And, we know this to be true, because BG3 has been given a rating in the UK and that means it's passed our censor. Our censor is fairly lenient compared to, say, the USA, but they do obey the law to the letter and, if there was any question over BG3 it would have been banned as happened with Manhunt 2.

Indeed, but mistakes have been made, and the rating system has in the past been revisited in the light of new information etc etc

[xebedy]

Автор сообщения: HereticRivga

Автор сообщения: xebedy

To question something legality purports religiosity... perhaps you should check your own immoral bias, perhaps if someone that does express their dislike for something isn't religious.

The game has gone through classification in the UK and all is good, So legally you are wrong. So now we have to question why you are separating yourself from reality - do you think the reality is fake, your going to wake up and find it has actually been banned just as you insist it will be?

Try to understand that I asked the question if it is illegal... check the OP title.

[Kyutaru]

Move along people, the OP has already been checkmated and owned in his own illogicality. You don't have to go home but you can't stay here. Move along please, you're obstructing traffic.

[DreadMuse]

Автор сообщения: xebedy

Автор сообщения: DreadMuse

Trying to debate if pixels are living beings are is borderline desperate at this point. The pixels are talking to me, i smell colors and see music too.

People usually need to get high for that first.

You're odd... Please find for me the legal definition of the term 'real', not a philosophical, nor a scientific one pertaining to forms of existence.... and you thought you knew what real was LMFAO

Takes one to know one.
I think you're not real because the post is too ridiculous to be true.

[Alealexi]

Автор сообщения: xebedy

https://www.jdspicer.co.uk/site/blog/crime-fraud/guide-to-uk-pornography-laws#Is%20bestiality%20legal%20in%20the%20UK?

Is bestiality legal in the UK?
No. Bestiality porn (often incorrectly spelt as beastiality porn) falls under extreme pornography law.

The law makes it illegal to possess images of people performing sexual acts on an animal, whether dead or alive. It is the task of the judge or jury to decide whether an image is pornographic.

Bestiality pornography can also fall within the Obscene Publications Act 1959. Guidance from the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) states that where an act shown in a publication is illegal, it is likely to be obscene.

There is no beastiality in game. The closest thing we to is a furry kink with a druid.

[Leon S Kennedy]

Bunch of nerds in this joint!! Go home NERDSSSS!

[xebedy]

Автор сообщения: Runic Tunic

I'll be honest guys. After seeing this as an argument:

Автор сообщения: xebedy

Have you considered what real means? It is a lot more complex than you seem to think; real is not a legal term by itself, it is often a philosophical term and so you can use your imagination there... ask a theoretical world leading physicist what real mean, and they'll tell you it doesn't exist (yes I actually follow theoretical physicists like Donald Hoffman).

Idk what to even think. Dude is legit trying to argue we should make something illegal, a system based on our understanding of objective reality....by ignoring objective reality because of a philosophical premise.

I could literally say I have the right to ban anything I want because "what is reality though?" according to this logic.

Uh... its called debating a matter... considering different angles... arguing for something? You missunderstand.

[Smoosh]

Автор сообщения: xebedy

https://www.jdspicer.co.uk/site/blog/crime-fraud/guide-to-uk-pornography-laws#Is%20bestiality%20legal%20in%20the%20UK?

Is bestiality legal in the UK?
No. Bestiality porn (often incorrectly spelt as beastiality porn) falls under extreme pornography law.

The law makes it illegal to possess images of people performing sexual acts on an animal, whether dead or alive. It is the task of the judge or jury to decide whether an image is pornographic.

Bestiality pornography can also fall within the Obscene Publications Act 1959. Guidance from the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) states that where an act shown in a publication is illegal, it is likely to be obscene.

Here's the kicker... you know the part that makes your whole agenda and points fall apart.

The actual cutscene does not show anything happening only suggesting. And Since nothing is shown only suggested it has broken no laws. The scene is there as a shocker, a joke in a sense. Evidently a joke you cant seem to fathom.

So TLDR, no laws have been broken.


EDIT: Evidently the account posting this on the forums is a rat account designed to troll and get a kick out of reactions.

[CloudKira]

Its only a polymorphed druid.

Would it be incest if Shadowheart called the player character "big bro" during sex as a kink?

[echoes222]

while I still question devs why the feck they would even consider this in their game, it has nothing to do with actual bestiality p0rn. So chill.