Pornographic films are no different than prostitution, it is sex for money. The fact that it is legal is a contradiction. The fact that an eighteen-year-old who is not even allowed to drink legally can partake in pornographic films is even more baffling. Cable is one of the main providers of pornographic films and broadcast television has been pushing the limits further and further without much intervention from the FCC . In a documentary entitled, “American Porn”, a producer for Hustler Magazine shares how his marketing tactic of using 18-year-old girls in his video series entitled, “Barely Legal” catapulted his business into a huge success[1]. Since that time the industry has grown exponentially, and child pornography is becoming more of a problem with children as early as the age of infancy being raped and tortured and even being sold by parents to try to appease a Guttman like progression of depravity that comes with pornographic addiction[2]. Child pornography, of course is an illegal underground business, but it started with someone having the mindset of, “The younger, the better”, as is the concept of “Barely Legal”!
In America prostitution is a moral issue and has not been known to be an acceptable means of income for women, or a legal service for men. However, when America started allowing pornographic films, which are a form of prostitution, to become a part of everyday life for many addicted consumers, and also allowed rap artists to glamorize pimping out women under the guise of free speech, we crossed over the boundaries of the obscenity clause in our constitution and started the snowball effect that is coming down hard, with violence against women and children increasing dramatically.
“There has been a 774% increase in the number of child pornography images and videos reviewed through the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children’s Child Victim Identification Program”[3].
“With this growth in the pornography industry, the demand for fresh merchandise has outstripped the supply, leading pornographers to turn to sex trafficking in order to have an ample supply of women and girls for their online and video materials”[4].
This demand for child pornography is being manifested in the most grotesque ways imaginable and children are being groomed and targeted for sex trafficking. We can turn a blind eye to the recent headlines or we can stand up and say, “Enough is enough”. We may not have the answers, but we cannot deny that the evil has increased and part of it is due to an unfettered use of obscenity.
“A Texas man was sentenced to four consecutive life sentences for raping a 3-month-old baby girl and filming it… Police say Akins filmed himself raping the 3-month-old and took photos of himself sexually assaulting her for her entire first year of life”[5].
“A Pasco County assistant principal was charged with possession, production and distribution of child pornography, amid allegations that he took sexually explicit photos of a 14-year-old boy and sent them to another man”[6].
“Ten (twenty-two) years ago, before we had public access to the Internet so readily, parents were sexually abusing their children, but they weren’t taking videotapes and making pictures and putting them on the Internet. Now that’s what we’re beginning to see, which means that they see their children not only as their victims, but as a commodity for money, to the public, those who are like-minded and would like to have access to their children, in that sense. So I see the commodification of children as a bigger problem in our society and the fact that we fail to see them as individuals who will be highly harmed by knowing that their images are on the Internet”[7].
Freedom Youth Project, an organization that fights against child sex trafficking through research, believes that “pornography is a leading cause of human trafficking for minors in the United States”[8].
A recent study in San Diego schools found astounding evidence of gangs targeting and recruiting students for sex trafficking in middle and high school.
“There is almost a disbelief that this is really happening in our high schools,” Stephan said. “These are kids, and they are trying to keep it a secret. It is upon us adults to recognize it and stop it because this is really happening.”
A three-year study by the University of San Diego and Point Loma Nazarene University released in 2015 found that 8,830 to 11,773 victims — mostly underage girls — are trafficked in San Diego County each year. Some of the girls are from the region, others are brought here from other parts of the state. Largely operated by gangs, the industry is estimated to have generated $810 million in 2013, researchers found.
In 20 San Diego County high schools that participated in the study, all confirmed that recruitment was happening with their students. Of those schools, 18 of them reported documented cases of sex trafficking victimization. About 140 staff members from the 20 high schools identified 81 reported victims along with an additional 54 suspected victims over five years. They also identified 17 recruiters targeting their campuses”[9].
These abusers may be victims themselves to the power of pornography or the horror of child sexual abuse. Their minds have been altered, their hearts have grown cold and their actions are brought on by addiction that feeds on progressive perversity. On the other hand, they may just be capitalists trying to make money on the latest illegal trend of activity. Either way our country’s children are at risk.
I believe that the heartbeat of America is love, family, and community; and sex is a sacred part of that mix, meant to be treated with respect and dignity, not as a commodity and not to be used as a coercive tool for self-gratification. I think most Americans would agree that our children need to be protected, nurtured and given the chance for meaningful and fulfilling relationships and careers. We cannot allow our nation to bow down to the god of consumerism while sacrificing the very fiber of our being.
Predatory Webs
Sex Factor, a reality show that plays off the ideas of shows like American Idol and X-Factor tried to sell its’ wares to cable networks. It has not yet been accepted by any but was available as a series on the internet. Judges on the show place themselves on a pedestal and imitate the likes of other reality star judges. Mostly former porn stars, they know their business and feel they are offering the contestants a privilege to be mentored by them. Auditioning for this show means performing sex acts. Becoming a contestant means continuing to perform more sex acts with various people with no compensation. One contestant shares her narrative about how she is supporting family members through her work, making it seem like a viable job option while emphasizing her charitable deeds. She says it’s easy and lucrative[10].
The judges and the contestant on the Sex Factor who claimed she needed a way to pay back her student loans, along with the Duke University student who made headlines for being vocal about her participation in the industry for the same reason and had a movie produced about her story[11], are all creating a predatory web by offering a so called “easy” solution to solve financial problems and enticing naïve and uniformed young women to do something that will affect them the rest of their lives. It is the responsibility of the government to protect children and young adults from being pulled into these webs of deception. When they fail to act, society suffers.
Pornography has become a predatory web that has been weaved into American society, against the will of many adults and children. It would probably be impossible to eradicate, but it can at the very least be put back in a more discrete place. The internet needs more filters, social media needs to be responsible, so called “adult entertainment” needs to be out of harm’s reach and parents need to pay attention to what their children are doing. Finally, the business community should lead in an effort to educate and end (PMP) aimed at children and adolescents.
“The predatory web is formed of five essential structural components: 1) a predator; 2) a prey; 3) a tool; 4) a loss or some form of harm to the prey, and 5) an unpleasant surprise. It is activated through five chronological strategic steps: 1) identifying the prey’s weaknesses; 2) baiting; 3) forcing decision; 4) trapping; and 5) rendering the prey completely inoffensive… Predators and preys each address fear in a different way. Predators take a step back, analyze, devise their Five-step plan of attack, and proceed. Prey are impulsive, naive, and quite willing to remain blind for as long as this feeds their dreams of wealth”[12].
I am writing this book after hitting a roadblock with my dissertation committee while trying to obtain a Doctorate in Business Administration. The head of the department does not see this as a business issue, but more of a sociological, psychological, or public health issue, which it is too. However, although I understand his reluctance, we have already seen that this is an economic and marketing issue as well. I feel this can be used to educate future business leaders.
As we will see in further chapters there is plenty of opportunity for business ethics educators to use the pornography industry as an example of human rights violations due to the violence and unfair treatment in the industry, and product safety violations because they have made people a product to be used like a machine which is unnatural and unhealthy and is causing a public health crisis. Corporate Social Responsibility is another aspect of business that is important to explore. I will cover more of these areas in later chapters.
The Marketing of Pornography
“Pornography, created by novices and without scripts, in homes, was typically sold for $250-$2,000 to any of 100 U.S. companies providing minor editing, packaging and distribution services. Female victims spoke about coercion, abuse, rape, torture and battering in the production, along with fear and humiliation about the knowledge that people were buying videos of their abuse for pleasure and entertainment. These victims had no legal redress. Many women and children were photographed or videotaped by husbands, boyfriends or others without their consent or knowledge”[13] .
As I have stated, marketing, including, but not limited (PMP) could be a great topic of study and conversation. Marketing is about ideas. Ideas can become behaviors and cultural norms. If left unfiltered, unhealthy and harmful ideas can affect many generations. It is the responsibility of adults to protect the minds of children, and businesses to protect consumers. Marketing cannot be separated from ethical standards.
Preamble: The American Marketing Association commits itself to promoting the highest standard of professional ethical norms and values for its members (practitioners, academics and students). Norms are established standards of conduct that are expected and maintained by society and/or professional organizations. Values represent the collective conception of what communities find desirable, important and morally proper. Values also serve as the criteria for evaluating our own personal actions and the actions of others. As marketers, we recognize that we not only serve our organizations but also act as stewards of society in creating, facilitating and executing the transactions that are part of the greater economy. In this role, marketers are expected to embrace the highest professional ethical norms and the ethical values implied by our responsibility toward multiple stakeholders (e.g., customers, employees, investors, peers, channel members, regulators and the host community)[14].
Americans could bring hope to less developed countries if we held a higher ethical standard, but sadly we have become known as one of the top producers in the pornography industry and our youth are beginning to believe the lies that have been planted in their minds through PMP.
“Making ethical decisions about pornography means knowing where your porn comes from and the labor conditions under which it is made. If we are willing to be concerned about those issues when it comes to sneakers or food, then we need to transfer those concerns to the adult industry as well”[15].
The pornography industry and legalization of prostitution is a step backwards for America and if we don’t turn the tide, it will only further desensitize the hearts of our youth and lead them to desperation, callousness, hopelessness and despair. Predatory Marketing Practices and the unbridled use of obscenity have infiltrated America, luring young adults, and causing a boldness from corrupt business owners determined to change our country’s norms. Is this what we really want? Maybe we can learn something from other countries.
On a Global level: Comparing Cultural Ideologies
While youth in Thailand and India feel obligated to perform sex work in order to help their families survive financially, Japanese teenagers sell themselves in order to buy the most fashionable clothing in an effort to keep up with latest wave of commercialism[16]. Mindsets that are passed down through the generations become norms and children suffer.
Thailand Sex Tourism
Thailand boasts a strong sex tourism economy, using a disenfranchised group of poor citizens to fill the increase in demand that was catapulted by the American military, “Rest and Recreation policies”[17]. Adding to a robust local trade, the American military initiated a practice for soldiers away from home, “U.S Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara negotiated an agreement with the government of Thailand that allowed American servicemen to enjoy “rest and recreation” in that country..the brothel industry that was built near the base at Pattaya Beach grew into and remains one of the East Asian sex industry’s main centers”[18]. Interestingly, McNamara is the same man who covered up the study he did on the Vietnam war and allowed the conflict to go on for way too long, allowing many of our men to be killed and maimed in battle.
Two governments coming together in what “they” decided was good for their country’s economic and social welfare affected generations of men and women alike and became part of what changed the moral compass of America. Sex became a commodity and people became pawns. In an academic paper entitled, “Sex Workers and Cultural Policy: Mapping the Issues and Actors in Thailand”, the author quotes several sources that explain the plight of Thailand’s women:[19]
“It is essential to look more carefully at sex workers (Thailand) themselves and why they enter the industry. Most of the women engaged in sex work are motivated by money and the concept of duty. Not all of these women face extreme economic hardship, but sex work can help increase the standard of living for themselves and their families. “Money was the motive, but workers saw it as their responsibility to provide that money to their families[20]. Parents have spent money bringing up the daughter, and it is often seen as her duty to repay the debt. Bishop and Robinson (1998) explain that the earnings of one daughter in Bangkok can support an entire family in the countryside, and many rural villages are made up of such families. As noted earlier, the impact of sex work on the Thai economy is significant and many Thais are economically dependent on the commercial sex industry”[21].
Japan
“In Japan sex and sexual relations are not always viewed as moral issues. Japanese have traditionally viewed sexual relations as a natural phenomenon, like eating, to be enjoyed in its’ proper place. Thus prostitution is widely accepted as a natural component and even a necessity in society…With very relaxed laws regarding children, it is legal for men to have sex with children as young as the age of twelve”[22].. However, in 1997 when the Japanese government became embarrassed by the teenage schoolgirls lining the streets prostituting themselves in order to earn money to buy Gucci purses and the latest fashions, they finally decided to make some changes and curb the obscenity. Although the legal age of consent was 13, prostitution among this age group was increasing and causing concern.
The latest craze in Japan, sex dolls, shows just how deceived and depraved a society can become when sex becomes a commodity. One man, a physiotherapist named Masayuki Ozaki who describes Japanese women as cold hearted and selfish, tells his story[23], “My wife was furious when I bought “Mayu” home. These days she puts up with it, reluctantly..When my daughter realized it wasn’t a big barbie doll she freaked out and said, gross, but now she is old enough to share clothes with Mayu..I want to be buried with her and take her to heaven”. Another man 62 year old married father of two, Senji Nakajima, says, “People always want something from you, like money or commitment, but my heart flutters when I come home to Saori..She never betrays me, she makes my heart melt away”[24]. Mr. Nakajimi swares he would never cheat on his “doll” and says he has no need for a prostitute anymore. We could call that good news, the bad news is, these men have lost their minds enough to not understand that dolls are not shes’, they are its! The cost for this twisted pleasure, approximately $6000. US dollars.
Less developed countries such as India have passed similar mindsets as in Thailand through the generations, allowing young girls to be pushed into prostitution by their own families. Intergenerational prostitution in Calicut, India is so ingrained in the culture that mothers prepare their daughters as if it is an undeniable fate. Some even hold their daughters back from getting out, because they do not want to be abandoned themselves…It is a harsh environment for children growing up as they are forced to hide under the bed while mothers of sex work take 20 to 30 clients per day. Fortunately, there are agencies there trying to pull children out and give them a chance for restoration through education[25]. The widespread use of pornography in this country will only make things worse for them. “In India today, 1 in 5 teenagers watch porn before the age of 13. Violent 3-D animation sex video games are especially created for this young market. They start with a pop-up site in which a woman prompts the user to undress her. That act then leads to violent sex games[26].
I will conclude this section with a brief look at some other countries and how policies and cultural mindsets harm children, then return to America’s roots and consider the direction we should take.
“In December 2004, an Edmonton man who had sex with a 13-year-old autistic girl was sentenced to seven years in prison. Brian Scott Deck pleaded guilty to six counts, including sexual interference and luring a child on the internet[27]”.
“Canadian children were considered especially vulnerable to cross-border pedophiles because the age of consent for sexual activity in Canada is only 14 years of age, one of the lowest ages in the Western Hemisphere. There were more than 10 million Internet users in Canada, and 99 percent of children in Canada had access to the Internet. According to Microsoft Canada, 25 percent of the children with access to a computer had been approached by a stranger online. Fifteen percent of the children had actually met an Internet stranger without their parents’ knowledge; some of these children never returned to the homes again”[28].
The following excerpts are from the “Trafficking in Persons Report: Country Narratives[29]
In Afghanistan customs allow families to force men, women, and children to work as a means to pay off debt or to settle grievances, sometimes for multiple generations with children forced to work to pay off their parents’ debt. Some Afghan families knowingly sell their children into sex trafficking, including for bacha baazi—where men, including some government officials and security forces, use young boys for social and sexual entertainment (p.66)
In Antigua and Barbuda…There are anecdotal reports that children are subjected to sex trafficking, including by parents and caregivers. (p.74)
In China…Women and girls are kidnapped or recruited through marriage brokers and transported to China, where some are subjected to prostitution or forced labor (p.129-130).
In Columbia…Authorities reported high rates of children exploited in prostitution in areas with tourism and large extractive industries. Sex trafficking in mining areas sometimes involves organized criminal groups. Transgender Colombians and Colombian men in prostitution are vulnerable to sex trafficking within Colombia and in Europe. ..Colombian children and adults are exploited in forced begging in urban areas. Illegal armed groups forcibly recruit children to serve as combatants and informants, to cultivate illegal narcotics, or exploit them in sex trafficking. Colombia is a destination for foreign child sex tourists, primarily from North America and Europe (p. 132-133).
In Guatamela, women, girls, and boys are exploited in sex trafficking within the country and in Mexico, the United States, Belize, and other foreign countries. Foreign child sex tourists—predominantly from Canada, the United States, and Western Europe—and Guatemalan men exploit child sex trafficking victims. (p. 184)
In Hungary, vulnerable groups include Hungarians in extreme poverty, Roma, unaccompanied asylum-seekers, and homeless men. Hungarian women and children are subjected to sex trafficking within the country and abroad, mostly within Europe—with particularly high numbers in the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, Austria, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom. Hungarians, particularly Romani women and girls from eastern Hungary and from state care institutions, are exploited in sex trafficking in large numbers in Belgium by Hungarians also of Romani origin. A large number of Hungarian child sex trafficking victims exploited within the country and abroad come from state-provided childcare institutions and correctional facilities, and traffickers recruit them upon leaving these institutes. Hungarian women lured into sham marriages to third-country nationals within Europe are reportedly subjected to forced prostitution[30].
In Iran, girls between the ages of 13 and 17 are targeted by traffickers for sale abroad; younger girls may be forced into domestic service until their traffickers consider them old enough to be subjected to child sex trafficking. An increase in the transport of girls from and through Iran en route to other Gulf States for sexual exploitation has been reported from 2009-2015; during the reporting period, Iranian trafficking networks subjected Iranian girls to sex trafficking in brothels in the Iraqi Kurdistan Region. The media reported Kurdistan Regional Government officials were among the clients of these brothels. In Tehran, Tabriz, and Astara, the number of teenage girls exploited in sex trafficking continues to increase. Organized criminal groups kidnap or purchase and force Iranian and immigrant children to work as beggars and street vendors in cities, including Tehran. These children, who may be as young as 3, are coerced through physical and sexual abuse and drug addiction; reportedly many are purchased for as little as $150[31].
Families in some countries fear extreme poverty or other consequences because they were trained to do so through the generations, therefore they see no other option but to sell their children. They form tight webs of codependency in an effort to protect their children, when sadly they are harming them. American young adults are beginning to believe the lie that there is no way to pay their debts or find work that will sustain them, so they think a little pornography will make their lives easier. As Luke ford, gossip columnist for the adult entertainment industry callously puts it, “They come into this industry, because this is the single easiest way that they can earn $1,000 in a day, in two hours,” says Ford. “It’s not like we’re losing people from going to medical school or business school or becoming lawyers… Most girls who enter this industry do one video and quit. The experience is so painful, horrifying, embarrassing, humiliating for them that they never do it again[32]”
America is a young country. Maybe it is time we make known what we stand for. Surely, we can all agree that all this deception is harming children, increasing demand, and priming the next generation to continue or begin a worst cycle.
The first time I heard a 22-year-old single mother of two contemplate doing a porn film, “like Kim Kardashian”, she said; she was trying to figure out how she could get to Fiji for a vacation. I was shocked and perplexed. This girl was raised by two parents, her a father was a successful doctor and she seemed to have an entitlement personality. Her parents were trying to help her become more responsible by not supporting her financially, although they helped with her children. I was sitting at a table with her at lunch at a temporary job and she began to ask other’s opinions on the subject. To my surprise, the woman who was our manager said, “Under the right circumstances I might”. I was appalled at her answer, especially in light of the fact that she was about fifteen years older than the young mother and was in a supervisory position over her.
After that, I worked in the public-school system for three years as a substitute teacher. I began to talk to the middle school and college girls about the subject and they too seemed intrigued by the prospects. All of this is and some personal issues with loved ones is what began my quest to help change the direction that America is headed and help “Make America Pure Again”!
Part 2: Finding solutions: Tearing Down the web, clearing the vision
“Prostitutes have been seen by commentators from St. Augustine to Parent-Duˆchatelet (physician and hygienist) as a seminal drain, carrying away men’s excess libido, so the femmes galantes (loose women), the mangeardes (women who ‘eat up’ men’s money), the female parasites’, the vamps who prey on men’s capital, are a drain on the economy of saving and productive investment”[33].
While defenders of prostitution such as philosopher Herbert Marcuse, and author of, “One-Dimensional Man: Studies in the Ideology of Advanced Industrial Society”(1964) portrays the prostitute in a much different light:
“A marginal figure who challenges the instrumental rationality of advanced industrial society, apparently by cheating its rules of investment and return, its imperatives of alienated labor, time, and sexuality. For Marcuse, the prostitute’s ‘avoidance’ of ‘work’, her refusal to support herself with wage-slavery, renders her a heroic figure with the same ‘power of negation’ as the work of art has in a ‘two-dimensional culture’’[34].
Philosophies help shape societies and there are always opposing views. Pornography has been paving the way in America to making prostitution a norm. Is that what we really want? If so, how will it affect our country’s future? Prostitution and obscenity have always been social, moral and economic issues.
“The currency of monetary tropes in medical explanations of sexual psychology can be traced back at least to the eighteenth century, when economic arguments increasingly competed with religious morality in stigmatizing practices such as masturbation and fornication, not just as vice or sin, but as the wasted expenditure of a precious energy-resource, vital to the economy of both the working body and the wealth of nations[35].”.
I had never really thought about this economic philosophy until I started studying pornography, but I think it is worth revisiting some of these ideas. We saw earlier how fashion played a part in Japan for young girls seeking a certain lifestyle and willing to sell their bodies for it. Remarkably, this same phenomenon was happening in Paris in the 1800’s, As Parent- Duchatelet explained:
“Vanity and the desire of dress, together with idleness, is a very active cause of prostitution, particularly at Paris; when the simplicity and a fortiori the shabbiness of clothing is considered truly as a reproach, is it astonishing that so many young girls are seduced, by a desire for dress which will elevate them from the position in which they are born, and which permits them to mingle with that class who have looked on them with contempt? Those who know to what extent the love of dress is carried among women, can easily appreciate the influence of this cause of prostitution at Paris”[36].
In the early 1990’s in America there was a fashion trend known as porno-chic or the happy hooker look which incorporated icons from pornographic films and magazines into clothing lines. Celebrities like Christine Aguilera and Brittany Spears then promoted the look in their videos and stage performances[37]. That trend may be gone, but celebrities are dressing more and more scantily and acting more and more sexual, influencing young girls with low self-esteem who look up to them as role models. The pornographers know this as testified in this quote by Paul Fishbein, founder of Adult Video News, ”Lots of girls in this business — and guys, too — are dysfunctional. The girls get here at 18 and aren’t mature. They do it because they’re rebels or exhibitionists or need money. They think they’re making real movies and get really upset when they don’t win awards or get good reviews”[38].
On the other side of the coin is “the wasted expenditure of a precious energy-resource, vital to the economy of both the working body and the wealth of nations”. We saw earlier in Chapter one how workers in the SEC were wasting all of their energy watching pornography instead of protecting our economy. We also saw how adolescents gain brain performance by participating in healthy activities such as sports and music and lose it by doing sedentary and compulsive activities like gaming, watching television, and pornography. We have probably all known at least one person who wasted all of his/her energy feeding some sort of addiction. We have all heard the term “raging hormones” and assimilated it to sexuality. We have been told that there are only two ways to deal with it, suppress it or release it. But where did those ideas come from, and are they the truth?
What if we took the focus off sexuality in our country and put it on making our world a better place, fulfilling our God given purposes, and using our energy to create and innovate. What if sex became a much smaller part of public conversation and was given a chance to be something private and unique to each individual and family? What if we cleansed our minds of all the images, distortions, and agendas and looked for something pure and natural again?
Sex Education in America
As I stated earlier, I believe education is one of the keys to change, and deeper conversations will help us decide first individually, then collectively, where we can find some common denominators that make sense. Let’s start by looking at two diametrically opposed views about sex education. The first view comes from a very informational and well written academic paper that explores sexuality as pedagogy from the Victorian period into the 21st century. This paragraph sums up the author’s view on the direction this country should take.
“We need to take seriously the pedagogic function of sexual representations in the media; but rather than respond with revulsion and fear, we need to accept, and even embrace media sex as an opportunity for kids to gain sexual knowledge that schools, and parents rarely provide. The role of parents and educators in this sexual pedagogy should not be censors, but docents and mentors”[1].
The second view from The Holy Bible, does not specifically mention sex but is a general instruction for child rearing and would adopt sexuality from a biblical standpoint to be part.
“Train up a child in the way he should go [teaching him to seek God’s wisdom and will for his abilities and talents], even when he is old he will not depart from it. (Proverbs 22:6) You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and mind and with all your soul and with all your strength [your entire being]. These words, which I am commanding you today, shall be [written] on your heart and mind. You shall teach them diligently to your children [impressing God’s precepts on their minds and penetrating their hearts with His truths] and shall speak of them when you sit in your house and when you walk on the road and when you lie down and when you get up (Deuteronomy 6:6-8)[2].
[1] Michael Kirk, “American Porn”, Frontline, (2002, February 2), Retrieved from: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/showsporn/
[2] K.C. Seigfried-Spellar & M.K. Rogers, “Does Deviant Pornography Use Follow a Guttman-like Progression”?. Computers in Human Behavior. (2013), 29(5): 1997-2003.
[3] Statistics by Category, “Predators/Exploitation/Child Pornography”enough.org, Retrieved from: http://www.enough.org/stats_exploitation
[4] F. D’Orlando. “The Demand for Pornography”, Journal Of Happiness Studies, (2011), 12(1), 51-75. doi:10.1007/s10902-009-9175-
[5]Eyewitness News, “Man Sentenced for Raping Three-year-old and Filming it”, Abc7NY.com news. http://abc7ny.com/man-sentenced-for-raping-3-month-old-and-filming-it/3037300/
[6] Johnathan Capriel, Tylisa Johnson & Jeffrey Solochek, “Pasco Assistant Principal Charged with Making Child Porn”, Tampa Bay Times, (February 14, 2018)
[7] Dr. Sharon Cooper, Department of Pediatrics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill testimony, (April 4, 2006), U.S. Representative Edward Whitfield (Republican-Kentucky) Holds A Hearing On Children And The Internet, Committee: Oversight And Investigations Subcommittee, Subcommittee: House Energy And Commerce Committee.
[8]Chuck Norris, “Porn’s part in Sex Trafficking”, WND.com, (2013, November) http://www.wnd.com/2013/11/porns-part-in-sex-trafficking/#LMhtdpeX1fpm6ZEh.99
[9] Maureen Magee, “Schools Take on Sex Trafficking”. San Diego Union Tribune, ( February 01, 2017)
[10] K.YU & L. Effron “Inside the Reality Show Where Aspiring Porn Stars Compete for Stardom”, ABCNews Nightline, (2015, February 5) http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/inside-reality-show-aspiring-porn-stars-compete-stardom/story?id=28752666
[11] E. Yahr “Lifetime’s ‘Duke student porn star’ movie is a scathing commentary on college tuition costs”. Washington Post, (2017, February 10) .
[12]O. Mesly,”Fear, Predatory Webs, and Blind Trust Characterize Market Bubbles. Journal Of Wealth Management, (2017, February 10) 17(4), 21-41
[13] Gail Dines, Russo, &A. Jensen, Pornography: The Production and Consumption of Inequality (New York: Rutledge, 1995), 24-25.
[14] AMA (2017) Definition, Statement of Ethics. Retrieved from: https://www.ama.org/AboutAMA/Pages/Definition-of-Marketing.aspz
[15] Joe Pinsker, “The Hidden Economics of Porn”. The Atlantic. (2016, April) Retrieved from: http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/04/pornography-industry-economics-tarrant/476580/
[16] S. Butler, & C.W. English, “Prostitution has its limits. U.S. News & World Report”, (2016, April), 122(14), 44. https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/porn/prosecuting/overview.html
[17] Jones, P.,”The U.S. Military and the Growth of Prostitution in Southeast Asia”. John Brown University.edu. (2000) Retrieved from: http://www.jbu.edu/assets/faculty/resource/file/faculty_profiles/preston_jones/navy_and_asia.pdf
[18] Ibid, p. 2-8
[19] J.P. Singh., & S. A. Hart, “Sex Workers and Cultural Policy: Mapping the Issues and Actors in Thailand”. Review Of Policy Research,(2007), 24(2), 155-173. doi:10.1111/j.1541-1338.2007.00274
[20] T.M. Steinfatt, Working at the bar: Sex work and health communication in Thailand. (Westport, CT: Ablex Publishing, 2002).
[21] R. Bishop & L. S. Robinson, Night market: Sexual cultures and the Thai economic miracle. (New York: Routledge, 1998).
[22] T. Nguyen, “Prostitution in Japan: A Young body worth a profit”. Iowa State University, (2000) Retrieved from: http://www.public.iastate.edu/rhetoric/105H17/nnguyen/cof.html
[23] Martha Alexander “Silicone Sally: Meet the Japanese men who shun real life relationships in favor of rubber romance with sex dolls”. Daily mail.uk, (2017, June 30)
[24] Martha Alexander, “Silicone Sally: Meet the Japanese men who shun real life realtionships in favor of rubber romance with sex dolls”. Daily mail.uk, (2017, June 30)
[25] N. Kristoff & S. Wudunn, “Half the Sky”. Independent Lens.(1998) Retrieved from: http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/half-the-sky/
[26] R. Gupta, Pornography in India,” in Big Porn Inc., edited by Melinda Tankard Reist and Abigail Bray, 239–248. (North Melbourne, Australia: Spinifex Press, 2011)
[27] Internet luring a real and present danger. CBC News. (2004) Retrieved from: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/internet-luring-a-real-and-present-danger-1.708378
[28]Dennis Durband, “The Harms Of Pornography Guide to Family Issues: The Harms of Pornography”. United Families, (2008). Retrieved from: http://unitedfamilies.org/issues-and-answers/guides-to-family-issues/the-harms-of-pornography/
[29] Trafficking in Persons Report (2016) Country Narratives. Retrieved from: https://www.state.gov/documents/organization/258878.pdf
[30] Trafficking in Persons Report (2016) Country Narratives, Hungary. Retrieved from: https://www.state.gov/j/tip/rls/tiprpt/countries/2017/271203.htm
[31]Trafficking in Persons Report (2016) Country Narratives, Iran. Retrieved from: https://www.state.gov/j/tip/rls/tiprpt/countries/2017/271207.htm
[32] Rebecca Lueng , “Porn in The USA”. CBS News. 60 minutes (November 21, 2003) Retrieved from: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/porn-in-the-usa-21-11-2003/
[33] David Bennett, “Libidinal economy, prostitution and consumer culture” (2010). Textual Practice, 24(1), 93-121. doi:10.1080/09502360903230912
[34] Ibid, p. 93-121
[35] Ibid, p. 93-121
[36] Ibid, p. 93-121
[37] Carl Lee McKinney, “SexEd : Pedagogy, Pornography, Precocity, and Adolescent Sexual Subjectivity”. UC San Diego: Communication (2014) b8201289. Retrieved from: http://escholarship.org/uc/item/86h2w4ww
[38]Frank Rich, “Naked capitalists: There’s no business like porn business”(2001). Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2001/05/20/magazine/naked-capitalists.html
Whatever your faith, it is clear to see that the latter view is about teaching through relationship and example and is the responsibility of the parent for the sake of all generations. As a Christian my belief is that God’s Word is the way, and sexuality is a sacred and protected area of life. But even for those with different beliefs, we can all agree that parents have wisdom from experience and are perfectly capable of guiding their children. That is not always the case, but for the most part, unless the parent is deranged or abusive, it seems it would be better for a parent to teach the child, than the media teaching the child. In fact, allowing the media to teach the child might be called neglect.
Who is the media? Do we personally know these people? We have already seen how science, which is supposed to be more factual and proven, cannot be totally trusted and how pedophiles, psychopaths, and profiteers can creep into our homes and schools. So why would we trust strangers, who may have an agenda, to teach our children? And why would we leave them to figure it out themselves? None of those ideas seem to make much sense.
A Brief History on American Ideologies on Sexuality
In the Victorian Era (1837-1901) the ideology toward sexuality in America was on the completely opposite side of the pendulum than it is today. Although people of this era have been stereotyped as prudish and hypocritical, they also had some well-balanced, common sense ideas about sex and were very concerned about protecting the youth. In Rachel Gurstein’s book, “The Repeal to Reticence”, she compares what she calls the party of reticence to the party of exposure. The main idea for the party of reticence was not about shaming for the sake of condemnation as Alfred Kinsey and Hugh Hefner believed, it was far more tender than that. As one author of Letters of James Russell Lowell (1894) so beautifully describes the sentiment, “Portions of every man’s life are essentially private, and knowledge of them belongs by right only to those intimates who he himself may see fit to trust with his confidence”[3]. Gurstein continues this argument by expounding on Norton’s writing by saying, “Norton’s writing underlines a crucial component of reticent sensibility in that personal affairs, because they can only be made intelligible by the tender understanding of a trusted intimate, must be protected from the unsympathetic gaze of strangers lest they become slight or ridiculous”[4].
Compare this type of ideology with the cheap portrayal of sex in pornography and one can see how they are worlds apart. Norton could foresee where exposure could go and tried to avoid it at all costs, “Vulgar curiosity is indeed always alert to spy into these sanctities of private life”[5]. That does not sound like a prude, it sounds like a man who knows how to guard his tender heart and the heart of those close to him.
The party of exposure, as Gurnstein coined the term, were those who began the fight for greater freedom in the area of sexuality. They used literature and the press to make their voices heard and may have they led the way for the so called “sexual revolution” of the 60’s and the predatory marketing practices of today’s media.
“The sex radicals insisted on speaking plainly, not only about sexual morality, hygiene, and contraception, but also about sexual misconduct as well, claiming a higher purity than puritanism…Advocates of exposure justified their probing by claiming that publicity and openness were best suited to a democracy; they tirelessly evoked the “public’s right to know”, and argued that the exposition and depiction of vice have the salutary effect of a warning to evildoers”[6].
As we can see neither the party of reticence, with what some viewed as the “conspiracy of silence”, nor the party of exposure with its’, “tell all” philosophy, had all the answers. However, as we have witnessed in recent current events, both had points to be considered. Some things do not need to be exposed to the public because it takes away the sacredness, the mystery, and the magic of pure intimacy, but we also cannot sweep evil under the rug and act as if it normal. Current events can attest to that fact.
In the case of the Turpin family[7], there was a conspiracy of silence. This family learned that intimacy meant pain, torture, and bondage and the parents had covered it up with precision. Although there were warning signs from onlookers, they chose not to get involved with private matters inside a family. On the other hand, the school shooter, Nicholas Cruz, had been exposing himself loudly for quite some time and no one was doing much about it[8]. The Las Vegas shooter, Stephen Paddock[9] kept himself isolated with limited social interaction but was hiding some pretty horrible secrets. In a strange and ironic way, Paddock’s “conspiracy of silence”, having an attraction to child pornography, was also an example of how “seeing the truth about everything” can be downright evil. Maybe when a person gets this depraved, he no longer has much control over his senses because they have been completely given over to an evil force.
Is it possible that all of the desensitization over the years has caused the human heart to grow cold? The following pages will display the legal history that defines obscenity in America. It is complicated. However, when we peel the layers and look at it through a timeline, it is clear to see how ideologies have changed its’ meaning and made it somewhat obscure. Maybe through a deeper understanding, American will take a fresh look at obscenity and decide if this is what they really want to release into the next generations.
From a legal perspective, the following charts will offer some insight as to “how” and “why” the term obscenity has changed. The progression from the 1800’s to the present day clearly shows how judges interpretations can change languages and lean toward opposite sides of the pendulum. We start our journey by looking at some quotes from the judges involved in the early decisions (1800’s) and contrasting them with more contemporary voices.
The first two quotes are from Rachelle Gurnstien’s studies from various references. She does not say specifically who the judges in these quotes were, but provides insight as to their philosophies. “It does not require an expert in art or literature to determine whether a picture is obscene or whether printed words are offensive to decency or good morals”[10]. “The case is one that addresses itself to good judgement, common sense, and knowledge of human nature, and the weaknesses of human nature”[11].
The following are direct quotes from later cases:
From Judge Pound in (People v. Wendling, 1932) “One may call a spade a spade without offending decency although modesty may be shocked…although the play lacked taste and refinement, the coarse realism was its’ dramatic affect”[12]. In (Roth v. US, 1957) Justice Brennan distinguished between sex and obscenity and defined prurient interest. “Itching; longing; uneasy with desire or longing; of persons, having itching, morbid, or lascivious longings; of desire, curiosity, or propensity, lewd.” … “a shameful or morbid interest in nudity, sex, or excretion”[13].
The most current definition of obscenity comes from (Miller v. CA, 1973). “Chief Justice Warren Burger laid out the new, three-part test: The basic guidelines for the trier of fact must be: (a) whether the average person applying contemporary community standards would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest; (b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; and (c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value[14]”.
As you can see the new definition of obscenity leaves a lot of room for confusion and debate. For instance: What does “average” person mean? What are community standards? Who is the community? Who decides whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value? Can the courts take on such a task? Summarizing some of the most important cases from then to now, we can see just how complicated it can become.
Dates Court Case Ruling
1886-1933[15], 1957-1973[16], 1978[17],1982-1996[18]
| 1868 | Regina v. Hicklin
Hicklin Test |
Obscenity was defined under the test of “whether the tendency of the matter charged as obscenity is to deprive and corrupt those who’s minds are open to such influences, and into who’s hands a publication of this sort may fall”(p.182). |
| 1873 | Comstock Act
Federal Statute passed that banned 5 kinds of materials from public mails |
1.) obscene, lewd, lascivious printed material of indecent character 2.) info or devices relating to birth control 3.) things intended or adapted for immoral use or nature 4.) any info regarding how to obtain the material above 5.) envelopes or post cards with indecent epithets (p.182) |
| 1879 | United States v. Bennett
|
Judge Blatchford rejected free speech as a defense on the basis that the law does not undertake to regulate the dissemination of obscene matter, but the mails of the US shall not be devoted to this purpose. “Free lovers and free thinkers may have a right to their views and may express them and even publish them, but they cannot not distribute through the mail (P. 183). |
| 1884 | People v. Muller | Judge Philips distinguished between art featuring nudity on one hand and blatant obscenity on the other. He proposed a test of motives to determine whether it is naturally calculated to excite in a spectator “impure imaginations” (p.185). |
| 1889 | United States v. Clark | Judge Thayer attempted to refine the Hicklin test by specifying whos’ morals should be protected. He distinguished between two classes of people 1.) “the intelligent and mature” 2.) the young and immature the ignorant, and those that are sensually inclined and likely to be influenced (p.186). |
| 1891 | United States v. Harmon | Judge Philips rejected free speech as a defense stating, “Liberty by all its forms and assertions in this country is regulated by law. It is not an unbridled license. Where vituperation and licentiousness begin, the liberty of press ends”(p.184). |
| 1913 | United States v. Kennerly
|
Judge Hand further distinguished potential victims based on the Hicklin Test of the most susceptible person. He introduced a relativist tone by saying that the words obscene, lewd, and lascivious have to catch up with the times and take on a more modern tone. In his words, “the present critical point in the compromise between candor and shame at which the community may have arrived here and now”(p.186-7). |
| 1924 | People v. Seltzer | Judge Wagner ruled against Seltzer on the grounds that he saw a split between style and content as an invitation to corruption stating, “Neither literary artistry, nor charm, nor grace of exquisite composition may cloak protectively those obnoxious impulses..which on patent appearance would be abhored”(p. 204) |
| 1929 | People v. Friede | City Magistrate Bushel expanded on Judge Hand’s interpretation of the victim stating that they could also be “those of mature age and high intellectual development and professional attainment (p.191). |
| 1930 | United States v. Dennett | The scope of obscenity law was considerably narrowed. Judge Hand found Dennett’s pamphlet not obscene on the grounds that its “high minded” style tends to “rationalize and dignify such emotions rather than to arouse lust”(p.191). |
| 1930 | People v. Pesky
|
The book, “Hands Around” was found obscene according to the Hicklin test. The judge suggested that “obscenity must be judged my normal people and “the literati” were the abnormal people who claimed that anyone who differs with their method of living and writing is puritanical and because of this attitude, to them, clean thinking or living is puritanical (p.194). |
| 1931 | United States v. One Obscene Book Entitled“Married Love” | Judge Woolsey states that the book “pleads with husbands for a better understanding of the physical and emotional side of sex and has no lascivious intent” He then determined that by replacing the person most liable to be corrupted with “any person with a normal mind”, the book would be helpful to married couples. In his closing statement he promoted frank discussion of sex and insinuated that all persons of sensibility would agree with his decisions unless they were tabooed by earlier ideologies, probably referring to those of the party of reticence (p.192). |
| 1932 | People v. Wendling | Judge Pound found the play not to be obscene because of its realism. “One may call a spade a spade without offending decency although modesty may be shocked” He said that although the play lacked taste and refinement, the coarse realism was it’s dramatic affect (reality shows). This broke another boundary in that was deeply imbedded in the 19th century that considered the “coarsening and vulgarizing of young people as part of the same continuum as the corruption of individual morality and the pollution of public space” (p. ). |
| 1933 | People v. Viking Press | Viking Press insisted that high literary merit distinguished it from obscenity and used the opinions of 40 leading writers and critics to substantiate their claim. Magistrate Greenspan broke the precedent of not allowing expert opinion and ruled in favor of the publisher. He added another phrase to the question of the supposed victim, “If the courts were to exclude books merely because they might incite lust in disordered minds, the books shelves would be barren”. This was a direct rebuttal that public morals and decency took precedence over literary culture. John Sumner successor to the NY society for the suppression of vice, stated, “obscenity laws represent the whole people, not just the literati” (p.200). |
| 1933 | United States v. One Book Called Ulysses | Judge Woolsey rejected practically all the key components of the Hicklin test. He insisted that the authors intent as well as the effect of the book read in entirety be considered and did not believe it was written to exploit obscenity. He equated the “dirty words” with the realism of the characters. He stated, “the established reputation of the book in estimation of approved critics, if book is modern, and the verdict of the past, if book is ancient are persuasive evidence”, thus shifting the authority of the obscenity determinations away from the jury (the people) to the “experts”. “The acceptance of expert testimony virtually guaranteed the literary merit would nullify any libidinous effect since it could be proved the material was art”(p.208). |
| 1957 | Butler v. State of Michigan | This decision rebutted the The Hicklin Test that stated “any material that tended to deprave or corrupt those whose minds are open to such immoral influences, ” including children”. Judge Frankfurter argued that the restriction was too broad and held that the law violated the due process clause of the 14th Amendment because it “reduce[d] the adult population of Michigan to reading only what is fit for children. |
| 1957 | Roth v. United States | “The Court upheld publisher Samuel Roth’s conviction for mailing material that appealed to the “prurient interest.” The ruling established the proposition that obscene expression was not entitled to First Amendment protections” Justice Brennan distinguished between sex and obscenity and defined prurient interest. “Itching; longing; uneasy with desire or longing; of persons, having itching, morbid, or lascivious longings; of desire, curiosity, or propensity, lewd.” … “a shameful or morbid interest in nudity, sex, or excretion”. |
| 1964 | Jacobellis v. Ohio | Justice Brennan elaborated on the Roth judgement and argued that when considering obscenity, “community standards” were to be national, not local standards.” [T]he constitutional status of an allegedly obscene work must be determined on the basis of a national standard. It is, after all, a national Constitution we are expounding. “He felt that because the movie was favorable in other states it met the community standard and could not be considered obscene. “It had been “favorably reviewed in a number of national publications, although disparaged in others, and was rated by at least two critics of national stature among the best films of the year (who are these people, was that weighed?) Judge Stewart concurred the ruling by saying only hard core porn should be considered obscene. As far as describing exactly what that was he said, “I’ll know it when I see it”. |
| 1965 | Ginzburg v. United States | The advertising for the publications emphasized their sexual imagery, and included a guarantee of a full refund “if the book fails to reach you because of U.S. Post Office censorship interference. Ginzburg had purposefully marketed the materials as pornography. He sought to have them mailed with postmarks from towns with salacious names (Intercourse and Blue Ball, Penn., and Middlesex, N.J.).
The Supreme Court upheld Ginzburg’s conviction. Writing for the majority, Justice Brennan held that in a close case, evidence that a defendant deliberately represented the materials in question as appealing to customers’ erotic interest could support a finding that the materials are obscene. |
| 1966 | A Book named, “John Cleland’s Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure”, Atty General of Com. Of Mass
The Roth-Memoirs Test |
The lower court found the book was obscene because “the “social importance” element of the Roth test did not require that a book “must be unqualifiedly worthless before it can be deemed obscene.” The U.S. Supreme Court reversed this decision, emphasizing that under Roth, material could not be deemed obscene unless it was “utterly without redeeming social value”: it must be established that (a) the dominant theme of the material taken as a whole appeals to a prurient interest in sex; (b) the material is patently offensive because it affronts contemporary community standards relating to the description or representation of sexual matters; and (c) the material is utterly without redeeming social value. Preceding this ruling the standard became known as the Roth-Memoirs test. |
| 1967 | Redrup v. New York | Three cases where state tried to prosecute citizens for buying pornographic material were all overturned by Supreme Court. Of the three judges, 2 agreed that state had no jurisdiction. The third however held to the opinion that a State’s power in this area is narrowly limited to a distinct and clearly identifiable class of material as stated in the Roth-memoirs test. |
| 1968 | Ginsberg v. State of N.Y. | Ginsberg established that a state can enact more stringent obscenity standards for the sale of sexually explicit material to children than to adults. Ginsberg challenged the law on the grounds that it created a more restrictive standard for children than for adults, thus violating minors’ First Amendment right to read. The statute was upheld. |
| 1969 | Stanley v. Georgia | In this case where materials were found in a persons home while investigating another crime, the Court held that a state cannot prohibit citizens from possessing obscene material for personal use. |
| 1973 | Miller v. CA | In this landmark case, a new definition of obscenity is established. “Chief Justice Warren Burger laid out the new, three-part test:
The basic guidelines for the trier of fact must be: (a) whether the average person applying contemporary community standards would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest; (b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; and (c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value”. He discarded the notion of “utterly without redeeming social value,” and replaced it with his final words in the phrase above. |
| 1978 |
FCC v. Pacifica Foundation, 438 U.S. 726 (1978)
|
The FCC found that certain words in the monologue depicted sexual and excretory activities in a particularly offensive manner, noted that they were broadcast in the early afternoon “when children are undoubtedly in the audience,” and concluded that the language as broadcast was indecent and prohibited by 1464. A three-judge panel of the Court of Appeals reversed. One judge claimed censorship or use of a rule that was overbroad. A 2nd judge concluded that 1464, construed narrowly as it has to be, covers only language that is obscene or otherwise unprotected by the First Amendment. The third judge, dissenting, concluded that the FCC had correctly condemned the daytime broadcast as indecent. |
| 1982 | NY v. Ferber | The Supreme Court held that child pornography was not entitled to First Amendment protection. States may enact regulation of child pornography that might be found unconstitutional under the Miller standard if applied to pornography involving adults. In cases involving children, a jury “need not find that the material appeals to the prurient interest of the average person; it is not required that sexual conduct portrayed be done so in a patently offensive manner; and the material at issue need not be considered as a whole”. |
| 1986 | Renton v. Playtime Theatres | In Renton, the Court solidified its position that although municipalities are barred by the First Amendment from banning adult theaters altogether, they may use zoning restrictions to restrict them to remote areas. Justice William Rehnquist delivered the opinion of the Court, which upheld a regulation of the city of Renton, Wash., prohibiting adult theaters from locating within 1,000 feet of any residential zone, single- or multiple-family dwelling, church, park, or school. |
| 1996 | Denver Communications v. FCC | The court struck down a provision permitting cable operators to ban indecent programming from public-access cable channels, such as those made available to community groups, but upheld a provision permitting operators to ban indecent programs from channels leased to commercial programmers. It also struck down a provision requiring cable operators who chose to allow indecent material to be broadcast on leased channels to segregate that material to a single channel, and to block that channel unless the cable subscriber requested to have it unblocked. |
| 1997 | Reno v. ACLU | Ruling: The CDA’s “indecent transmission” and “patently offensive display” provisions abridge “the freedom of speech” protected by the First Amendment. The court’s judgment enjoins the Government from enforcing § 223(a)(1)(B)’s prohibitions insofar as they relate to “indecent” communications, but expressly preserves the Government’s right to investigate and prosecute the obscenity or child pornography activities prohibited therein. The injunction against enforcement of § 223(d) is unqualified because that section contains no separate reference to obscenity or child pornography.[19] |
As you can see, obscenity has been a much debated and complicated issue. Many of the early cases involved literature, hence the term “literati” came to be. In the mid 1960’s, Maurice Girodias, publisher of the Olympia Press and promoter of so-called “high pornography”, considered pornography as art, mandating “the truth about life must be told”[20] no matter how indecent, unseemly, or ugly it is, and that artists as heroic seers and cultural outlaws deserve special dispensation from society.
“Writing dirty books was generally considered a professional exercise as well as a necessary participation, even an act of duty, in the fight against the Square World. What exactly the Square World was nobody could explain with any precision, but the notion was very strong and it was not the usual routine of the new generation picking a quarrel with the old, it was a much stronger and deeper protest. As Girodias boasted, “The colorful banner of pornography was as good as any other to rally the rebels: the more ludicrous the form of the revolt, the better it was, as the revolt would go against ordinary logic, ordinary good taste, restraint and current morals.”[21]
It is possible then that the revolt’s only true aim was shock value. In other words, they had an agenda! Many of the later court cases mentioned above were influenced by an article written by William B. Lockhart and Robert C. McClure entitled, “Literature, the Law of Obscenity, and the Constitution (1954)”[22] This was clear in Justice Douglas’s dissent to Judge Brennan’s ruling on the US v. Roth (1956) case. Justice Douglas referred to Lockhart and McClure as “two outstanding authorities on obscenity”[23]even though the work was clearly biased toward the exposure party. Justice Douglas did not agree with the idea of community standards because he connected “the community” to the party of reticence and felt that they would stagnate anything new through censorship therefore restricting future generations from growth. He was also not convinced that there was enough evidence to show that exposure to the evils of mankind was harmful to the public. He stated, “The absence of public information on the effect of obscene literature on human conduct should make us wary”[24].
Ironically, the party of exposure relied on The Kinsey Report as the greatest authority on sexual behavior. As one reformer put it, “The Kinsey report has done for sex what Columbus did for Geography”[25]. As we have learned, they were deceived. They became the hosts for the parasite and unknowingly spread the poison. It is clear to see that competing ideologies have been passed down and are at war. Instead of fighting each other, we might try using some common-sense boundaries to find solutions to our nation’s ills. It is usually the extremes that cause the most devastation.
Conclusion
Going back to the opening quote that stated the media should teach our children. Let us explore some other ideas the author of this very well written and researched paper has about what is wrong with the conservative view of sexuality.
“The ‘facts of life’ were fundamentally shaped by the Protestant, white, male, heterosexual, and middle-class values of those who created them at the turn of the twentieth century in the interest of protecting the young. Some of these ‘facts’ are: that the purpose of sex is biological reproduction, and thus heterosexual coitus is the ‘natural’ expression of sexual behavior; that pursuing sex for pleasure is potentially pathological; that healthy and ‘natural’sexual relations are monogamous; that males are ‘natural’ sexual aggressors, driven by a biological need for physical release; that females are ‘naturally’ passive, and submit to sex only for the sake of children and family; that adolescent sexual behavior is driven by ‘raging hormones’; that social progress depends on ‘judicious mating’; that ‘superior’ people are able to rationally suppress the sexual impulse; and that ‘inferior’ races, classes, and categories of people are controlled by their sexual desires …. In twentieth-century America, then, the birds and the bees provided a way to impart to the young a prophylactic knowledge that served both practical eugenics and the progressive cause by defining sexual behavior in terms of a social structure favoring men, marriage, and monogamy, and disfavoring miscegenation, class mixing, promiscuity, and homosexuality”[26].
The author has done his research and he clearly states his point of view, but there is always a slant on academic papers, “Good qualitative research contains comments by the researchers about how their interpretation of the findings is shaped by their backgrounds, such as their gender, culture, history, and socioeconomic background”[27] Until one does the research him/her self, and takes each one of the references and reads them thoroughly, he/she cannot come to the same conclusions as the author. However, many people just accept academic material as fact, partly because it is too much work to read all the references, and partly because it is easier to let someone else do the work. The fact is, science and academia do not have all the answers either.
Let us look at the above passage using some intellect, and some common sense. It is possible that protestant white men had a large part in forming the ideology of the 20th century view of sexuality, and some may even have had unhealthy prejudices, which is clearly evident in the eugenics movement. However, let us not throw out the baby with the bathwater and consider that some of their ideas could be considered factual.
For instance, “heterosexual coitus is the ‘natural’ expression of sexual behavior and pursuing sex for pleasure is potentially pathological and healthy and ‘natural’ sexual relations are monogamous”. By saying, “the natural expression of behavior”, they are clearly referring to the biology of the male and female reproductive system. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist (or a pornography video) to figure out what goes where and why. One could argue otherwise, but in simple terms, the bodies of the genders are designed in a very specific way for procreation. The fact that sex is pleasurable does not rebuke that fact that that pursing sex for pleasure is also “potentially” pathological. That has clearly been proven to be true in pornography and other sex addictions. The third point of calling monogamous sexual relations ‘natural’ could also be argued by looking at the studies on the rise of STD’s when promiscuity is increased.
On the other hand, if the Victorians truly believed that “that males are ‘natural’ sexual aggressors, driven by a biological need for physical release; that females are ‘naturally’ passive, and submit to sex only for the sake of children and family; that adolescent sexual behavior is driven by ‘raging hormones”, one could argue those points as well. This statement disregards temperaments, stereotypes genders, and puts most everything in the physical, disregarding a holistic approach to sex. Another passage from the author’s paper clearly show his slant, or what might be considered bias.
“Due to a “morbid modesty” and Victorian prudery, children were learning that sex was dirty and shameful; but rather than repressing the sexual impulse, this shaped it into dirty and shameful sexual behavior. To be able to make the “intelligent choice” of sexual self-control, adolescents would need an education that “build[s]up from early childhood the attitudes, tastes, desires, ideals, and habits which make for sound character.” By presenting a biological and evolutionary (and inherently eugenic) model of sex that defined it in terms of strategic reproduction, scientific sex education would inculcate a healthy understanding of sex as natural, and foster sexual behavior oriented strictly toward a rational decision to procreate[28].
This author and every other author, artist, politician, judge, or common person has a perspective. All of their opinions count, but they cannot all be accommodated. Every nation has boundaries. Every nation has a moral code. Pulling the reigns on the pollution that is spreading through the media and entertainment can have a major impact on the future of America. It is up to “We the People” to make our voices known. Are we willing to decrease the demand and cut off the supply of pornography for the sake of society? Let us continue to explore some more common-sense reasons to reject pornography and decide for ourselves.
10 Common Sense Reasons to Reject Pornography 