In week five I had a lecture on the topic, should pornography be allowed. At this time I am going to have a discussion about the conservative view, traditional liberal view and radical feminist view on pornography
According to conservative arguments for censorship pornography should be banned because its sexually explicit content is obscene and morally corrupting. By pornography conservatives usually mean simply sexually explicit material either pictures or words. Since conservatives typically view all such material as obscene. They also believe pornography is bad for society and believe it’s morally wrong. Furthermore, pornography is bad for those who consume it, corrupting their character and preventing them from leading a good and worthwhile life in accordance with family and religious values. Conservatives therefore think that it is entirely legitimate for the state to prohibit consenting adults from publishing and viewing pornography, even in private, in order to protect the moral health of would be consumers and of society as a whole. (Baird and Rosenbaum 1991)
However, the traditional liberal defence of a right to pornography rejecting both the principle of legal moralist and the principle of legal paternalism, at least where consenting adults are concerned. This is not to say that liberal defenders of pornography necessarily approve of it. Liberals have traditionally defended a right to pornography on three main grounds. Firstly, on the grounds of freedom of speech or expression, which protects the freedom of individuals (in this case, pornographers) to express their opinions and to communicate those opinions to others, however mistaken, disagreeable or offensive others may find them. Liberals have tended to conceive of freedom, including freedom of expression, as negative freedom as non interference by others rather than as positive freedom, which involves having the positive goods and facilities required to exercise the freedom. Freedom is thus something that individuals have just so long as there are no coercive external obstacles notably, physical or legal restrictions in their way. However protecting porn in terms of rights to "free speech" and "privacy" ignores the fact that the public and private distinction is not the same for women as for men. Men's speech is protected while porn normalizes "the terror that enforces silence on women's point of view”. (Week 5 lecture notes)
On the other hand Radical feminists are against pornography arguing that that pornography exploits women and that is violence against women. Furthermore they believe that legislation is needed because of its connection to rape and rape is violence. Further basic elements of rape are present in all heterosexual relations. Also they believe that sexuality is the source of male oppression and porn are the cause of men’s sexuality.
References
Baird, R. and Rosenbaum, S. (eds.), 1991, Pornography: Private Right or Public Menace. Buffalo: Prometheus.
no author. (no date). should pornography be allowed. Available: https://wolf.wlv.ac.uk/lssc/61007/PH2004%20Lec%205%20Pornography.ppt?menu=297430. Last accessed 27 November 2009.
By
Lovepreet Kaur
0814904
