Essay on Pornography and Feminist Fight for Women’s Rights

Margaret Atwood begins her essay by explaining the distinction between mild pornorgraphy, which portrays the nude form and sexual activities, and violent pornography, which depicts extremely violent activities in a sexual manner. When discussing pornography, people often assume Atwood is referring to mild pornography; however, even though this pornography is considered “mild” by Atwood, the reactions and perspectives from people are rarely mild. The passionate accusations declaring opposing sides “prudish” or “perverted” lead to the question of what is the meaning of pornography, if there is any? Whether it

Professor’s Comment: This powerful essay contrasts the views of two feminist, Catherine MacKinnon and Sallie Tisdale, each of which perceives pornography in widely divergent ways. While MacKinnon's 'Not A Moral Issue' explains the adverse impacts of pornography to women and society as a whole, Tisdale's 'Talk Dirty to Me: An Intimate Philosophy of Sex' is receptive to pornography despite these adverse impacts, suggesting in fact that the solution to the problems associated with pornography is a greater role of women in production of that pornography.

Supporters may be varied and polarized but most believe that there is a real problem and

Jacoby states that the people who most support the censorship of pornography are women. These women are often self-proclaimed feminists who ironically support the First Amendment. While criticizing the production of pornography, these feminists attempt to argue that “mainstream” pornography is no different than child porn.

What is pornography? According to the dictionary pornography means “Obscene writings, drawings, photographs”. Yet, many people disagree with what is consider to be pornography in society today. Susan Brownmiller is a feminist activist who wrote an essay “ Lets Put Pornography Back in the Closet” argues that pornography should be not be protect by the 1st Amendment or be allowed into society. Meanwhile, Susan Jacoby a writer of “ A First Amendment Junkie” disagrees with Brownmiller because she believes that it’s everyone’s right and that society should not be able to censor pornography. Should society let the government censor pornography just because we may not approve this type of act. I agree with both of the writer’s that pornography should

Susan Brownmiller's essay voices her feminist view towards pornographic material. Her claim is that without restriction, the first amendment has allowed women to be publicly perceived as objects.

Good sex is considered to be legal and healthy, whereas bad sex is criminalized and dangerous. In contrast to MacKinnon’s view on pornography, Rubin argues that pornography is a means of sexual exploration and can be liberating. Sexual activities are a means through which sexuality can be explored. Rubin argues that anti-pornography movements exaggerate the dangers of pornography as destructive and negative. Anti-pornography movements depict pornography as harmful and degrading to women, but this in itself is harmful for it does not account for consensual and desired sexual activities. Through classifying sexual activities, such as BDSM and sex work, as good and bad, the state effectively limits sexual exploration to certain acceptable societal norms. This is further illustrated through R v. Price, in which the judge ruled that there was no evidence that BDSM videos cause harm (Lecture Slides: February 9). Conforming to cultural norms subsequently ensures that the patriarchal system of sexual value, in which MacKinnon argued is male dominated, is adhered to. Even though pornography can perpetuate sexual objectification, the oppression of sexual desire by the state limits any form of positive sexual exploration. The state and law should not penalize possibilities for positive sexual experiences because of social stigmas. The disapproval of society and the state of particular sexual

Sally Mann’s child photography should not be censored due to other people’s views or distaste for her child photography. She has the right to express her love for her children and herself through the arts. As a mother, she experienced a significant amount of backlash which is a common narrative in current society. By censoring her form of expression of her kids, we are restricting the mother’s right over her children. As a matter of fact, a large negative criticism of Sally Mann’s photos is that many consider her child photography to be obscene when in fact it is not obscene. According to a court case called Miller vs. California, art is only considered obscene if it meets all of the following criteria: 1) the average person finds the art lustful with prurient interest, 2) the art is offensive and displays any sexual conduct that is defined by the state law, and 3) the art lacks artistic, literary, political, or scientific value. Sally Mann’s child photography does not meet the criteria since the average person does not find her work to be salacious, the art displays no sexual conduct or penetration in any form, and her work lacks no artistic value. In fact, her art displayed a significant amount of artistic value due to the controversy and her way of challenging the hegemonic ideals of society. Thus, her work should not be censored because it is not considered obscene in the state law.

In her essay, "The Venus Hip Hop and the Pink Ghetto", Imani Perry addresses the prevalent phenomenon of the pornification of women in mainstream culture and cites numerous voices with various perspective concerning this rising issue. Her purpose is to inform and consider the social implications revolving around this stigmatizing norm in popular culture and raise awareness regarding this explicit nature. As a law professor with a Ph.D. in the History of American Civilization from Harvard University and a J.D. from Harvard Law School, her transdisciplinary focus on African-American legal and cultural studies brings a strong and powerful perspective in her compare and contrast essay. She analyzes the depiction of black women in pop culture from an audience and feminist point of view and discerns the implications and factors that outline the effects of objectification in mainstream culture.

Anti-porn feminist like Catherine MacKinnon believe that pornography ruins the image of women’ society. Pro-sex feminist Wendy McElroy believes in the principle” a woman’s body, a woman’s right.” Pornography is the printed or visual material containing the explicit description or display of sexual organs or activity, intended to stimulate sexual excitement. MacKinnon thinks that this is violence against women while McElroy believes is of importance to women

She comments that the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms provides not only formative but substantial protection from inequalities. Unlike the U.S., Mackinnon comments that the Canadian system seeks to alter the poor treatment of disadvantaged groups and amend their status.[6] The Court utilized this approach in the case of R v. Butler where it recognized that the “humiliation, degradation, and subordination of women – was harm to society as a whole” as it led to an inequality.[7] In other words, the court recognized the social and communal harm imposed by pornography, that is to say it recognized the “context” under which the pornography occurred. Recognizing not only the harm from pornography but more importantly the inequality that it perpetuates, the Canadian courts ruled in an opposite manner to their U.S counterparts.

For many years there has been a lot of arguments about the ethical and morality of pornography. pornography is defined as the depiction of erotic behavior intended to cause sexual excitement. When it coms down to pornography, people have different opinions about it. Some people might find it moral because it gives them pleasure and it satisfies them physically. some individuals see it as a form of art that describes the figure of a human body in an artistic form. Others see it as immoral because it harms and degrades an individual. Personally I believe that it all depends how pornography is conducted and how we respond to it. It can be morally healthy that we like it because it makes us happy, such as it helps with your marriage relationship in intimacy, and it can be immoral when it is used in an unhealthy that we do not like it because hurts an innocent person.

One issue that feminists should bring to the open and question is the definition of pornography. Often times anti-porn feminists argue that we can tell what is and isn’t porn easily. Yet the definition these feminists use to decide what counts as porn and whether it should be censored from the public applies to many things as Lumby points out in paragraphs nine and twelve. She draws up the movie Siren as an example of how Elle Macpherson’s nudity in the movie was widely accepted and went uncontested, but then Lumby points out how Macpherson’s shoot for Playboy was more modest than some of the shots in the film yet the photo shoot receives more flack because it’s categorized as porn (par 9).

Catharine MacKinnon, in her book Feminism Unmodified, takes a unique approach to the problem of gender inequality in America. She claims that pornography defines the way in which America’s patriarchal society perpetuates male dominance, and attacks traditional liberal methods that defend pornography on the basis of the first amendment’s right to free speech. According to MacKinnon, pornography is not an example of speech but rather an act. She proposes that this act discriminates against women as a class, and therefore violates their civil rights and should be outlawed. MacKinnon’s critics may think her argument is excessively radical, and contemporary society may not embrace the

“Never before in history of telecommunications media in the United States has so much indecent (and obscene material been so easily accessible by so many minors in so many American homes with so few restrictions” (qtd in “Pornography and Child Sexual Abuse”). The problem addressed in the quote by the U.S. Department of Justice is pornography, a 10 billion dollar industry, has made its way from discreet taboo to something that is today considered acceptable and even common. With the internet being such a common tool, it is no surprise that there is easy access to sexually explicit material. The widespread accessibility and usage of pornography has changed people’s outlook on the normality of watching such sexually explicit material, and