Appendix: Stallman on necrophilia
This is the complete list of published opinions Richard Stallman has expressed regarding sex with corpses or pornography featuring sex with corpses.
After reading about that case, I was curious about which kinds of pornography the state is prepared to imprison people for. Here’s what the statue says to define “extreme pornography”: (…)
An act involving sexual interference with a human corpse, (…)
The concept of “sexual interference with a human corpse” is curious. All a corpse can do on its own is decay, so the only possible “interference” is to prevent its decay. Thus, “sexual interference” rationally would mean some sexual activity while injecting embalming fluid, or while putting the corpse into a refrigerator. However, I doubt that the censors interpret this term rationally. They will have cooked up an excuse for some twisted interpretation that enables them to punish more people.
This censorship cannot be justified by protecting corpses from suffering. Whatever you do to a corpse, it can’t suffer, not even emotionally. (…)
Since the law doesn’t care whether a real human was really threatened with harm, it is not really concerned about our safety from violence, any more than it is concerned with avoiding suffering for corpses or animals. It is only prejudice, taking a form that can ruin people’s lives.
– stallman.org, 19 February 2010 “Extreme Pornography Law in the UK”, updated 2013
The Clown regime is planning to prohibit the mere possession of “extreme pornography”. The excuse is that one man who liked violent pornography committed crime.
It is true that victims of real violence suffer. (Never mind that in making movies of violence, typically nobody is actually hurt.) The true oppressive spirit of this law starts to show in the prohibition of images of sex with corpses. Are we supposed to believe that corpses can suffer? Or are some cruel prudes trying to impose their prejudices by force?
– 30 April 2008 (Possession of “extreme pornography”)
The nominee is quoted as saying that if the choice of a sexual partner were protected by the Constitution, “prostitution, adultery, necrophilia, bestiality, possession of child pornography, and even incest and pedophilia” also would be. He is probably mistaken, legally–but that is unfortunate. All of these acts should be legal as long as no one is coerced. They are illegal only because of prejudice and narrowmindedness. (…)
For necrophilia, it might be necessary to ask the next of kin for permission if the decedent’s will did not authorize it. Necrophilia would be my second choice for what should be done with my corpse, the first being scientific or medical use. Once my dead body is no longer of any use to me, it may as well be of some use to someone. Besides, I often enjoy rhinophytonecrophilia (nasal sex with dead plants).