It takes a lot to silence me. I’m very rarely lost for words. But at the beginning of December, I declared myself officially gobsmacked. That’s British slang for astounded. And many other British gobs have been likewise smacked. Although not on camera. Not in the UK anyway. Not since the ludicrous and utterly illogical ATVOD legislation came into being, governing what legal adults can and can’t view on VOD. Now, I wouldn’t say that the UK is a den of vice and iniquity, although ISIS and the Taliban might beg to differ. But I had thought that, in spite of our reputation for prudishness, now that we’re in the 21st century the UK had finally grown up and acknowledged that grown adults like doing grown adult things to each other – and that there’s not a damn thing wrong with that. Alas, I was wrong.

As of December 1, 2014, the traditional British ineptness in the face of all things sexual has now decreed that faces must not be sat on in front of a camera. Yes folks, no chapess may sit upon the face of a chap. Not even fully clothed. Not even if she wore a suit of armour. Because the powers that be have deemed queening to be risky on-screen behavior. You see, the poor dear being sat upon might not be able to breathe properly. I suppose having the place of death on your death certificate as some chick’s girly bits might be a bit embarrassing, especially if your descendants decide to research the family tree (‘Grandad died WHERE?!!!’). Not that you’d be around to suffer embarrassment if you’d expired this way. Which, to the best of my knowledge, nobody has.

But talking of family – won’t somebody think of the children! Yes, Nanny UK has decided that we aren’t allowed to do a lot of things if they’re being filmed. Because the children might see. Leaving aside the issue of parents rightfully being the ones who should be responsible for policing their children’s access to dodgier corners of the internet, there are so many inconsistencies in this legislation that I hardly know where to begin. It’s ridiculous. It’s so Victorian in its attitude that I half expect Queen Vic to pop up herself – the stern sex-deprived black-clad widowed version, not the younger one who actually rather enjoyed a good dose of bedroom action herself. But it’s now well known that behind the veneer of respectability and disapproval, there was plenty of porn and prostitution going on in the Victorian age. Indeed the new technology (photography) allowed it to flourish. Thankfully we’re not likely to return to the bad old days of pimping out Victorian children, but ATVOD seems like VATOD – Victorian Attitude On Demand.

It’s not just face-sitting that’s been banned. So here are some of the things you may no longer do on camera in the UK. You cannot merrily introduce your fist or other large objects into an anus, even if the owner of the anus is perfectly happy for you to do so. Nor can you pee on someone. And ladies, you may not express your delight at enjoying an orgasm by ejaculating, because someone might confuse it with urine. The horror! And you may not whip the bejeezus out of someone, or turn their ass 50 shades of red with a darn good spanking. ‘Gentle’ spanking or caning is ok, apparently, but since it’s near impossible to define where the line is (no, not the one on the spankee’s ass), these practices may as well have been outlawed.  But curiously, there appears to be no concern whatsoever that a man (or several) ejaculating over a woman could be confused with him (or them) peeing on her.

The issue is not that legislation exists. Even the most liberal smut merchant would agree with there being a degree of control over what is allowed on cam sites or VOD. Underage roleplay and bestiality are frowned upon on every cam site that I’m aware of. But as far as I know, these topics are already covered by existing legislation. So why this new law, and why now? What is wrong with spanking – an activity that many people enjoy as part of their sex life? Indeed, the Brits are famed for their interest in whacking each other on the butt. Watersports and fisting may not be my thing, but some people are turned on by them. And who is anyone else to say that it’s wrong?

The ATVOD legislation caught people by surprise. Anyone who relies on spanking sites to make a living is pretty well screwed. It’s also hit producers of femdom material particularly hard, putting a lot of producers out of business, or forcing them to relocate outside the UK. What’s more, many creators of such material are women working for themselves, who are suddenly deprived of one of their income streams. It’s tough enough to make a living when you’re self-employed as it is, without this ludicrous law decreeing that what was acceptable on November 30th was out of the question once the clock struck midnight. The ATVOD law is not going to stop people viewing these proscribed activities; it’ll drive traffic overseas or to smaller sites that stand more chance of staying under the radar.

Admittedly this doesn’t purport to be specifically about prohibiting femdom activity. The legislation simply forbids face-sitting for being ‘life-endangering’; it just so happens that this is a popular form of femdom fun. I’ve never heard of men face-sitting women. Maybe it happens. So what’s the MtF equivalent? Presumably face-fucking. And is that out for the risk to female lives? No way, Jose. It’s perfectly fine as far as the Government is concerned for a man to shove his penis into a woman’s mouth on video. Of course, most of them are men. So go ahead, because she can still breathe through her nose. Maybe we could give those poor face-sat men a straw to breathe through. One of those bendy ones, so they can still enjoy being stifled without any risk of oxygen deprivation, though I’ve not yet heard of any Death By Vagina. Ah, I’ve got it. Maybe the Government Committee for Regulating Naughty Stuff saw this movie called Teeth and thought it was a documentary.

Tying up and gagging models is included in the prohibition because of consent issues – they can’t indicate if they withdraw their consent, either verbally or with a signal. But why worry about models who are being watched over by a film crew, rather than an individual gagged and tied up by their partner who has no-one to protect them if they get into trouble? If it’s about the inability to withdraw consent, then why is spanking/fisting/pissing included? Models in these videos could be anywhere but in front of the camera. They could indicate verbally at any moment that they do not wish to continue the scene. It’s a real dog’s dinner of a law (watch out if you enjoy pet play – that’ll probably be next).

I’ll emphasise something at this point. These activities aren’t forbidden in themselves. It’s not against the law to plant your sturdy thighs either side of a man’s face and lower your foo foo onto his face. And you can piss on your lover without fear of reprisals, should that be part of your sexual repertoire. You see, it’s filming these acts that’s wrong. But only in the UK. Which brings me to another point: the sheer illogical idiocy of this rule. Because in this digital age, it’s impossible to keep people away from this type of material. If people want to access face-sitting, spanking or caning videos, they only have to access any site that’s not hosted in the UK. So the new law is not protecting anyone at all. Is it just British prudishness, or simply a case of legislation that hasn’t been properly thought through? I’m flummoxed, frankly (is that OK with you, Mr Cameron?). Although I do have a theory as to why they’ve banned humiliation. SCH (small cock humiliation) is an incredibly popular fetish. It’s one that I love, and mistresses are frequently asked for. Was an MP among one of our SCH clients, and did we humiliate him just a bit too well for his tiny todger? Or have Parliament (80% male) heard about the fetish, and decided on a pre-emptive strike in case we find out the truth about how little they’re packing in their pants?

You might not care about certain BDSM practises being outlawed on video, especially if you’re not in the UK. But you should be worried. The next step could be to ban something that you enjoy watching or doing. Some people think that ATVOD is anti-women because it targets many femdom activities, while permitting traditionally male-oriented porn to continue. I think it’s even more concerning than that. It’s an attack on our sexual freedom and autonomy to decide what’s right for us. These things may not be banned outright, and as I’ve pointed out you can still access them on non-UK sites. But making it illegal to produce this kind of material in the UK is reducing access and promoting a hostile attitude towards alternative sexuality. And that could be the start of a slippery slope. Once it’s become okay to ban one thing, they then move on to something else. Or they use the ‘negotiation’ tactic of backtracking, and reduce the impact of the legislation to what they actually wanted all along, so we think we’ve won because it isn’t as bad as it could have been.

For all the advances of recent years, such as gay marriage, I feel like we’re heading back to the UK of the 1950s, when Elvis’ pelvis could cause a riot and even that nice Christian boy Cliff seemed like a rebel against good honest British values. And it’s ironic that this legislation comes during a Tory government. Back in the 1980s and 90s, Tory MPs were famed for their sexual shenanigans. One of them even ended his days due to an overenthusiastic game of autoerotic asphyxiation, proving that it’s much riskier to play alone than with a camera crew present to assist if you get into distress.

Alas, it seems that my fellow Brits and I must resign ourselves to once more being the butt of the world’s jokes about our out-of-date attitude towards sexual matters. If we can’t fist each other, the world will do it to us. Ah, but you’re not allowed to humiliate anyone either – though I suppose they’ll get away with it as long as they don’t film themselves. And those of you in more enlightened zones of the world may think yourself lucky that you haven’t been subjected to Government interference in your love life … yet. Anyway, I leave you with my updated version of the Monty Python tune ‘Sit on my face‘ …

Sit on a face, oh that is now illegal

When filming it for your femdom site, o Mistress

MPs love to moralise

I bet they fantasise

About something like this

So six of the best, for all our legislators

For dragging us back into the 1950s

Squirting is fine, so let us spend our time

With whips and with chains, with gags and with ropes

And play, while the camera rolls …