why polarization is widely used.
I would now like to focus on the movement ideology. I would like to take a
closer look at the ideology itself, the barriers faced and the prevalent ideology which is to
be overcome.
The ideology supported by the anti-pornography movement is complicated.
While they are a feminist group and would not want censorship to prevail, there is
undeniable evidence that pornography hurts women. The anti-porn movement focuses on
the way in which women are portrayed in this medium. They also focus on the way that
sex crimes are caused or promoted by the use of pornography. This makes for a varied
support system for the movement. While a great majority of this country does not use
pornography and would not suffer in its absence, it is still an issue of freedom which
must be addressed. The anti-pornography has one major complaint against the present
status of pornography in this country. This is that women are being hurt by the use of
pornography. While they do express concern over the actresses involved in the making
of the films, they express more concern that this sex and violence against women
perpetuates itself to everyday lives and effects innocent women.
The main ideology that the anti-porn movement seeks to advance is to seriously
limit the production and consumption of pornography. They feel that this is not an issue
of censorship and must be dealt with by legislation. The J. S. Mills principle is one
theory that legislators have used in their attempts to ban suggestive material in the past.
The anti-porn movement believes that this principle directly relates to their task because
it limits the First Amendment rights in the event that people are being abused as a result.
The greatest barriers that the anti-porn movement faces are those of their fellow
liberals. Main stream feminists and other liberal movements and groups feel that this is
putting a stumbling stone in the way of the freedoms that they have collectively fought
for. There has been much conversation between the groups but neither side is wavering
on their beliefs. The strange part is that for the first time in my recollection, the anti-porn
movement, a part of the feminist movement, has aligned itself with a conservative
viewpoint. The main barriers are internal in my opinion. I feel that the average person in
this country would not really care about the lack of pornography. If people knew the ills
surrounding the pornography industry most people would surely support legislation to
limit its use and abuse. However, liberal followers are not willing to cooperate with
other groups that usually have opposing view points. This reminds me of a story about
two feuding farmers that both die in a flood along with their families because they
refused to join forces and bank the rising river. Because even many members of the
anti-porn movement are hesitant about crossing the bridge to join the conservative right
on this issue, women are being harmed. I apologize for the injected idea in this section
but I feel that when viewed from afar, every situation becomes more reasonable and at
the same time irrational.
The questions on page 75 in the text book Contemporary Movements and
Ideologies by Roberta Garner bring up some very good points about the anti-pornography
movement. First, I believe that the anti-porn movement would define the good society as
one where there are equal rights for women in all situations. More importantly, I believe
that the movement would state that safety and dignity for all people would be a very
cement norm in the good society. The current existing societies, after all, are neither safe
nor fair for women. The new set of beliefs and practices would be much more
complicated. The anti-porn movement is a feminist movement and would thus contain
many of these beliefs. The difference would be that laws would exist that would
maintain the dignity of all people through better portrayal of women and homosexuals in
a variety of media. The result would be less sex crimes and rape within the good society.
The way that we can change our society to make it correspond to our vision of the good
society is to limit the production and consumption of pornography which furthers the
abuses that the movement is against.
The ideological critique of the state is not yet clear cut. This issue blurs the
traditional way in which we like to divide our politics; the right against the left.
However, the economic sphere would be impacted by the passage of anti-porn
legislation. There would be protest because, after all, this is a business to many. There
would be no hunger or famine associated with the passage of such legislation so it is
arguable that, in the grand scheme of things, there would be little impact. Politically,
things are vastly different. I stated before that there are altering ideas that are both
holding back and advancing the movement. While some of the movement is hesitant
about aligning themselves with the conservative right, some of the movement adores the
idea. They like the idea because of the conservative rights ability and numbers. I feel
that if they split the left on this issue then the legislation would pass easily. Culturally,
the anti-pornography movement would further us as a people. Since some of our largest
set backs in the area of equality are in seeing others as objects, this movement would
greatly limit that impulse. Social reproduction would be very hard to estimate what
impact this movement would have on the sphere of social reproduction. In some
manners, it may limit the sex lives of some people who use pornography to enrich their
sex lives. In another way, it may help to make sex more sexual instead of an act.
Hopefully, there would be a new appreciation for life both existent and future.
In my opinion this movement is very easy to support. The evidence is
overwhelming that pornography harms people. I use ?people? here because, as a male, I
feel that there are many ills suffered by my sex as well. Altering perceptions about
women is horribly but, to have your perceptions altered unconsciously is almost as bad.
Men who are unaware that what they do hurts people are dangerous. There is nothing
innocent about pornography. There is nothing free about pornography. Pornography
hurts people. The freedom of a certain few to perform these acts has placed many people
in a position of suffering. Though I have never really used pornography, I have had
brushes with it back in my fraternity days. I had friends that relished in the gruesome art
that always turned my stomach. I feel very bad for those friends that I had who honestly
believed that pornography was okay. I wish that I hadn?t written this paper. I stayed up
late at night and read the articles and then thought until the wee hours of the morning.
There I found something that I hadn?t seen before. I found a country that can turn a blind
eye and not intervene in spite of the statistics. I found people who were completely
unable to see the disgusting residue that pornography leaves all over this country every
day. I found anger. Anger towards the users of pornography because they just don?t
know any better. Anger directed at the feminists who will fight to the grave for equal pay
while their sisters are robbed of their dignity, safety and lives. How do we expect to have
anything equal if we can?t even recognize these simple things? A person places their
hand on a hot stove and gets burned; this we understand. An angry loaner is convinced
that women just want to be bent over and screwed then when he rapes some woman on
her way through a parking lot we act surprised. I feel that this movement is going to gain
rapid support as soon as some of these findings are more main stream. I also would
believe that as more of these findings are discovered and researched this country would
increase efforts to help its own citizens. I can?t forget the quote by researcher Edward
Donnerstein after his 1983 study. ?The relationship between particularly violent sexual
images in media and subsequent aggression…is much stronger statistically than the
relationship between smoking and lung cancer.?
af3
Donnerstein, Edward. (1985). Unpublished transcipt of testimony to the Attorney
General’s Commission on Pornography Hearings, Houston, TX, pp. 5-33.
Donnerstein, Edward; Linz, Daniel. (1985). Presentation paper to the Attorney General’s
Commission on Pornography, Houston, TX, pp. 5-33.
Donnerstein, Edward; Linz, Daniel; Penrod, Steven. (1987). The Question of
Pornography: Research Findings and Policy Implications. New York: Free Press.
Everywoman. (1988). Pornography and Sexual Violence: Evidence of the Links. London:
Everywoman.
Goldstein, Michael; Kant, Harold. (1973). Pornography and Sexual Deviance. Berkeley,
CA: University of California Press.
Koss, Mary; Gidycz, Christine; Wisniewski, Nadine. (1987). The scope of rape:
Incidence and prevalence of sexual aggression and victimization in a national
sample of higher education students. Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Psychology, 55, 162-170.
MacKinnon, Catharine. (1987). Feminism Unmodified: Discourses on Life and Law.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Malamuth, Neil. (1981a). Rape fantasies as a function of exposure to violent sexual
stimuli. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 10, 33-47.
Radford, Jill; Russell, Diana (Eds.). (1992). Femicide: The Politics of Woman Killing.
New York: Twayne Publishers.
Russell, Diana. (1975). The Politics of Rape. New York: Stein and Day.
Russell, Diana. (1980). Pornography and violence: What does the new research say? In
Laura Lederer (Ed.), Take Back the Night: Women on Pornography (pp. 218-238).
New York: William Morrow.
Zillmann, Dolf, and Bryant, Jennings. (1984). Effects of massive exposure to
pornography. In Neil Malamuth and Edward Donnerstein (Eds.), Pornography
and Sexual Aggression, (pp. 115-138). New York: Academic Press.