Tuesday, October 2, 2012

Pornography, Censorship & Other Dirty Things [The Constitution: The People v. Larry Flynt (1996)]





Does pornography subordinate women? Or desensitize men to rape and domestic violence? What should be censored? 

Since the release of Deep Throat (1972), all throughout the "Golden Age of Porn," and even up until recently with E.L. James' 50 Shades of Grey, people debate whether porn is merely tolerable, beneficial or absolutely disgusting.

In The People v. Larry Flynt (1996), actor Woody Harrelson depicts the life of Larry Flynt from his childhood in Ohio, to the success of Hustler magazine, and later downfall as drugs and legal conflicts corrupt Flynt's seemingly glamorous lifestyle complete with mansion and orgies. Although graphic, the film touches upon significant political issues. Charles Keating, the first to announce distress from the pornographic images, insists that community standards must be met with censorship. Keating and Flynt are not the only characters who disagree! My political science class entered a heated discussion when trying to sort through the fluff and find the logic in this mess.

Now, to address the original questions posed: 
Does pornography subordinate women?
No!! As clearly established in Melinda Vadas' "A First Look at Pornography/ Civil Rights Ordinance: Could Pornography be the Subordination of Women?" and as discussed in The People v. Larry Flynt, pornography may depict women as being subordinated, but the women are not actually subordinated.

If you are sitting and shaking your head, you might be asking, where does morality come into play? Tom Minnery, author of article "Pornography: The Human Tragedy," pleas a similar case, asserting that regardless of what government regulations step in, censorship of porn prevents excessive sexual violence, domestic violence, death by asphyxiation, and even child molestation. Although psychological research has argued for/against this claim, no conclusive evidence supports either side. Not to be too cynical but ...with or without laws of censorship, and with or without pornography, criminals will commit sexual abuse and so forth.

Does pornography ACTUALLY desensitize men to rape and domestic violence?  
Maybe. All media, including pornography, but also movies, television and music expose viewers to rape, violence, and all sorts of obscenities. Perhaps, people relieve built up angst and sexual fantasies when watching described images. Arguably, by releasing this unaccepted behavior in an imaginary way, media prevents rape and violence.

What should be censored? Nothing. As stated by Thelma McCormack in "Feminism and the First Amendment", censorship "...creates mindless, conforming citizens..." As further discussed in the report, even self-censorship promotes closed-mindedness in some instances. When the individuals within a society window shop the market of ideas, each can analyze the options with perspective, and select whatever opinion he/she feels is best. For example, while cuddled up in my dorm room with a tray of Chinese food, I decided to peep through 50 Shades of Grey. I have never been too big a fan for romantic novels, or into sadomasochism, but all the women at work are raving about it. The spicy novel educated me on the functions of a sadomasochist relationship and perhaps provided an explanation for this taboo. As feminist Alison Lee states in "A (Very) Intimate Journey", pornography allows both genders to explore and embrace their sexuality.

To sum this up in a nutshell, if you don't like it, don't watch it! Generally, people need to mind their own business and protect our First Amendment rights. 




No comments:

Post a Comment