Re:Porn depicting sex between step-relatives set to be banne...
by oldandboring on Tuesday March 03, 2026 @09:14AM
(#47232646)
The article addresses this, but doesn't really clear it up. First it says:
> But justice minister Baroness Levitt warned that cracking down on pornography depicting sex between step-relatives was complicated, because not all > relationships between step-relatives are illegal.
and then later:
> Lady Bertin said she was "mystified why it does not include step-incest", as she moved her proposal, which peers backed 144 votes to 143.
> She added: "Nearly all step-relations between step-parents and step-siblings is illegal.
> "This is because Parliament recognised the clear power imbalance in step family relationships within households, and also Parliament acted because step-relations are the most likely relationships in which child sexual abuse takes place.
I guess there must be some limited definition of these interactions which are legal.
> But justice minister Baroness Levitt warned that cracking down on pornography depicting sex between step-relatives was complicated, because not all > relationships between step-relatives are illegal.
and then later:
> Lady Bertin said she was "mystified why it does not include step-incest", as she moved her proposal, which peers backed 144 votes to 143.
> She added: "Nearly all step-relations between step-parents and step-siblings is illegal.
> "This is because Parliament recognised the clear power imbalance in step family relationships within households, and also Parliament acted because step-relations are the most likely relationships in which child sexual abuse takes place.
I guess there must be some limited definition of these interactions which are legal.