The Persecution of Porn

Many conservatives seek to rigidly regulate the porn industry so much that it keeps the industry from functioning (Cate, 1996).  In 2005, an old law was amended that forced all porn websites to prove their models are at least 18 years old (Han, 2005; Kesmodel, 2006).  It seems to be a perfectly good law, but actually is so rigidly worded that it almost makes it impossible for these websites to function (Han; Kesmodel).   It means that websites have to look at all of their past work and verify ages on all of the models, since the law applies retroactively (Kesmodel).  Also, it is very difficult for a website that is presenting pictures derived from secondary sources to get accurate information about models employed somewhere else (Kesmodel).  Many times, this requirement has caused models to retire, for fear of their identity leaking out (Kesmodel).  This type of thing was put in place to inhibit business, and not to actually regulate it (Han; Kesmodel).  

The media and the government creates a hysteria about the sexual content on the internet (Cate, 1996).  Much legislation has been borne of such unreasonable hysteria (Cate).  Many articles highlight the ‘dangers’ of internet porn without actually backing it up with any real proof (Cate).  Time magazine devoted their cover story in 1995 to the supposed evils of cyberporn (Cate).  Of course, it was found that the article in Time magazine was not as accurate as thought at the time, and had great methodical flaws in the research (Cate).  The magazine was forced amid public pressure and criticism to issue corrections and apologies about the article (Cate). 

Unfortuantely, that did not reverse the damage that had been done (Cate, 1996).  After Time magazine released that issue, Compuserve was ordered by a federal prosecutor in
Munich to close down over two hundred newsgroups, alleging that it was a violation of German law (Bilstad, 1996; Cate). 

            The obscenity laws enacted to regulate pornography have conflicted with the very nature of the internet, since the internet is such a vast technology that has no boundaries (Cate, 1996).  In laws prohibiting obscenity, these laws state that it must be judged obscene by community standards for it to be a violation (Cate).  However the internet crosses over state and community boundaries, so determining whether something violates community standards is difficult (Cate). 

An example of this conflict is shown through a court case involving the conviction of a couple named Robert and Carleen Thomas in
Memphis, Tennesee for operating an electronic bulletin board (Bilstad, 1996; Cate; United States v. Robert A. Thomas and Carleen Thomas, 1994/1996).   A government official from Tennessee went on the website seeking sexual images, and arrested them when he found child pornography posted by a user at the forum (Bilstad; Cate;
United States v. Robert A. Thomas and Carleen Thomas).  Even though Robert and Carleen Thomas operated the website in Milpitas, California, they were held liable for violating community standards in Memphis, Tennessee (Bilstad; Cate;
United States v. Robert A. Thomas and Carleen Thomas).  It is no matter that the original laws meant to establish the “community standards” clause to help prevent one community from making standards for the country (Cate). These antiquated views have made it extremely difficult for a society that has become increasingly reliant on the internet (Cate). 

In 1996, the Communications Decency Act was passed, which made any sexual material being ‘knowingly’ transmitted through the internet to minors a criminal offense (Communications Decency Act, 1996, 1997; Cate, 1996).  This law failed to consider that with the internet, its expansiveness is nearly impossible to police for ‘indecent materials’ reaching minors (Cate).  For internet providers to go through millions of e-mail would be not only physically unfeasible but also a breach of an individual’s right to privacy (Cate).  Because this law was impossible to comply with as well as enforce, the Supreme Court struck it down in 1997 (Reno, Attorney General of the United States, et al. v. American Civil Liberties Union et al.).

Many people who oppose pornography cite numerous studies that show how harmful it is to society, and how it predisposes men to rape women.  Those studies used simplistic methodological approaches that did not definitely prove any correlation between pornography and violence (Attwood, 2005).  Many of these tests had no relation to actual conditions, and thus cannot be representative (Attwood).  The results from these studies make the data seem to be more significant than it actually is (Attwood).

The reality is that there is great ambuiguity in relation to the correlation between violence and pornography, as well as in relation to contemporary views in regards to it (Attwood, 2005).  Also, there are numerous studies that have conflicting results from the ones most commonly presented by anti-pornographers (Attwood).  In many different focus studies, men view porn as just a fantasy and not representative of real life (Attwood).  Also, many men that consume porn either accept most of it, part of it or even none of it as a realistic portrayal (Attwood). 

There have been very little on studies of consumers of pornography in general, and little to no studies on female consumers of pornography (Attwood, 2005).  While the media shows the majority of women opposing porn, in reality, there is a great variability of responses (Attwood).  The results from many different studies showed that there was so many different views that one could not make a generalized statement about women’s views towards pornography (Attwood).    

Also, the reason for some women to not enjoy erotic images of men often stems from their discomfort with having a “unfeminine” position (Attwood).  The cultural scripts encourage men to be avid consumers of pornograpy while discouraging women from enjoying the very same thing (Attwood).  Women’s dislike of female pornography often stems from personal insecuries about attractiveness rather than its propensity to cause violence (Attwood). 

Pornography is and should be protected under the First Amendment (Cate, 1996).  The First Amendment must allow the free expression of all ideas without regard to whether they are right or justifiable (Cate).  In fact, it is having these ideas freely expressed that allows those very ideas to be discussed and judged by society (Cate).  It is a violation of the First Amendments for a government to pick and choose what types of expression are acceptable according to its own personal bias (Cate).  In 1989, Justice Brennan echoed that very same idea by stating that “the Government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable” (Texas vs. Johnson, 1989; Cate).  In a nation that prides itself on freedom of speech, the government’s attack on pornography is appalling and unacceptable (Cate).

References

Attwood, F. (2005). What do people do with porn? Qualitative research into the

consumption, use, and experience of pornography and other sexually explicit

media. Sexuality & Culture, 9, 65-86. Retrieved from the PsychINFO database.

Bilstad, B. T. (1996). Obscenity and indecency on the Usenet: The legal and political

future of alt.sex.stories [Special issue]. Journal of Computer-Mediated

Communication, 2. Retrieved April 28, 2006, from

http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol2/issue2/bilstad.html#footnote39

Cate, F. H. (1996). Cybersex: Regulating sexually explicit expression on the internet.

Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 14, 145-166. Retrieved April 28, 2006, from

the PsychINFO database.

Communications Decency Act, 47 U.S.C. § 230 (1996). 

Han, A. J. (2005, August 16). Crackdown on the web. Advocate, 70. Retrieved April 28,

2006, from the EBSCOhost database.

Kesmodel, D. (2006, February 13). Web sites fight proof-of-age rules for porn performers.

The Wall Street Journal, 247, B1-B6. Retrieved April 28, 2006, from the

EBSCOhost database.

Markoff, J. (1995, December 29). Online service blocks access to topics called

pornographic. New York Times, 145, pA1. Retrieved April 28, 2006, from the

EBSCOhost database.

Reno, Attorney General of the
United States, et al. v. American Civil Liberties Union et

al., 521
U.S. 844 (1997). Retrieved April 28, 2006, from

http://www.ciec.org/SC_appeal/decision.shtml

Texas vs. Johnson, 491
U.S.  397, 414 (1989).

United States v. Robert A. Thomas and Carleen Thomas, No. CR-94-20019-G (W.D.

Tenn. 1994), aff’d, 74 F.3d 701 (6th Cir. 1996).