Controversial Pornography

Controversial Pornography


     by: Nicole Lamberson

     English 102-060

     December 12, 1996


Show a number of different people a simple piece of paper consisting of nothing

more than a red blotch of paint and ask them what they see.  The responses will

vary from objects such as a cherry, to more simply, just plain red paint. This

is an indication of the individuality, or sum of qualities that characterize and

distinguish an individual from all others, instilled in every human being.  Just

as facial features and hair color differ among individuals, similar

distinctiveness is found among  personalities and opinions. Because of prominent

variance in belief among many individuals, a number of topics and issues have

become controversial in society today.


Similar to the varied responses to the red splotch of paint, photographs, video

tapes and paintings portraying nudity and sexual content receive a number of

clashing opinions. There are artists who paint and photograph nudity and

pornography who find the human body and sex portrayed in many forms to be

beautiful.  However, there are also many extremely conservative individuals who

take offense to such "artwork" and find its contents appalling.  And those who

enjoy the nudity and sexual content exhibited in pornographic materials should

marvel and delight in its details. Those who do not should simply look away.  In

the words of Justice William O. Douglas, "no one is compelled to look"

(Brownmiller 663). There is no concrete manner to define materials that are

"obscene" or "offensive" because various images come to mind among  individuals

when words similar to these are used to describe pornography. To classify a

distasteful picture from a beautiful one comes down to a matter of opinion and

taste. In previous instances, such as the Miller

 Case of

1973, the Court attempted to  define which materials could be judged as lewd or

indecent:


The materials are obscene if they depict patently offensive, hard-core sexual

conduct; lack serious scientific, literary, artistic, or political value; and

appeal to the prurient interests of an average person—as measured by

contemporary community standards (Brownmiller 662).


In accordance with the opinions of Susan Brownmiller in her essay, "Let's Put

Pornography Back in the Closet," most would agree that description such as

"patently offensive," "prurient interest," and "hard-core" are "indeed words to

conjure with" (662).


Elimination of pornography is not the key to social equality, partly since no

one can define what porn is and because censorship is never a simple matter.

First, the offense must be described.  "And how does one define something so

infinitely variable, so deeply personal, so uniquely individualized as the image,

the word, and the fantasy that cause sexual arousal" (Strossen 4)? Pornography

cannot be recognized as easily as the Court involved with the Miller Case

implied.  "Contemporary community standards" do not exist in that individuals

and families alike have strongly different ideals and ethics on issues such as

sexual content, nudity and pornography.  While some parents allow their children

to view rated R movies containing sexual content and nudity, others restrict

their children from attending sexual education classes in high school.  Finding

a median between two strongly differing standards similar to these would be rare.

Thus, to accept or reject, like or dislike pornography is a personal opinionthat

is often too divided to differentiate.


Besides the difficulties of definition, there are varying degrees of intensity

in the porn images themselves.  One of the more prominent arguments against

pornography is that "it represents the hatred of women, that pornography's

intent is to humiliate, degrade and dehumanize the female body for the purpose

of erotic stimulation and pleasure" (Brownmiller 663). Although in some

instances women are portrayed as being stripped, bound, raped and tortured in

pornographic scenes, not all pornography is this explicit and
This is ONLY a preview of the article. If you would like to view the entire document, you must subscribe to Academic Library. Please register below now!









Subscribe to Academic Library
When you subscribe to the Academic Library, you get 24-hour access to the online database containing full-text articles written by thousands of scholarly students. For only $8.95 per month, you receive unlimited monthly access to view and download all of our 40,000 articles available online. That is less than the price of one textbook!
This price includes:

24-hours-a-day, 7 days a week unlimited access on any computer with Internet access
Complete access to all 40,000 articles, essays, and research papers
Ability to view and download virtually unlimited number of documents
Ability to browse through perfectly arranged catalog of articles
Superior search and relevancy ranking techniques using Google SiteSearch and our local search engine
Instant access to the online database after registration


You can pay by credit card, checking account. You get instant access after registration:


You will be billed $ 8.95 every 30 days (recurring billing) starting on the day you subscribe.

Your credit card will automatically be renewed for your convenience until you cancel.




If you are already registered, please click here to login.