Proposal on Policy Changes in Pornography (Essay Sample)

A Proposal on Policy Changes in Pornography
Name
Academic Institution
Author Note
Class
Professor
TIME \@ "MMMM d, yyyy" August 26, 2017
A Proposal on Policy Changes in Pornography
Social problems usually pertain to conditions that disrupt society, as in cases of crime and racism. The constructionist approach on social problems considers a process, rather than a condition (Schneider, no date on the lecture slides, this is on 20626_92593). This process takes into consideration ways in which people assign meanings to objects in this world. Usually, such processes begin with claimsmakers who acknowledge that a certain condition is problematic, that it should be understood properly and that this problem definitely needs to be addressed. According to Schneider (no date on the lecture slides, this is on 20626_53763), claimsmakers essentially aim to change how society addresses problems. As such, it is required that their claims come with enough persuasion to influence changes on policymakers.
Most of the time, claimsmakers aim more than just to have the public notice an issue; they also hope that through their efforts, changes be made to make the situation better. In relation to this, claimsmakers are usually found working towards changes in policies and alterations in society’s current approach to certain issues. According to Best (2013), the most apparent way to demand policy changes is via the law. This is because laws play a pivotal role in distinguishing what is legitimate from what is not in a jurisdiction. Moreover, laws draw a clear line between what is permissible and what is not.
In relation to this, the current paper takes interest in the situation, inclusive of laws, concerning one understudied social issue: pornography. The regulation of pornography remains a controversial topic in the sphere of the internet. Its widespread availability, in addition to this, has caused panic in moralities of the government and law-enforcement bodies alike. As such, the current paper sheds light on the law on pornography nowadays and suggests that this should be a point of interest for claimsmakers. The paper argues that the law on pornography in the US is problematic, as it, itself, is a precursor in making pornography a social problem. This attention given to this social issue is particularly essential as the policies on pornography have ironically been known to have bad effects, as caused by suppression, and have, on other hand, had erroneous promotions. Towards the end, the current paper suggests a program that essentially covers different groups that serve as major proponents of pornography. It addresses the social problem associated to pornography by being able to decrease minors' accessibility to such materials and by improving entry measures to promote the youth's welfare.
Review of Related Literature
Defining Pornography
In the world of scientific literature, there have been several attempts to describe pornography, as well as distinguish it from terms that are in the same sexual context. However, there remains no consensus among policymakers and researchers on a legitimate definition for this word. According to Malamuth, Addison and Koss (2000), pornography can merely be identified when it is seen. In the same study, it is asserted that upon inspection of a given material, an observer can easily identify when he or she is looking at pornography. According to Malamuth (1999), the word pornography is derived from two Greek words porne, pertaining to “whore” and graphein, pertaining to “write.” As such, the word pornography literally means “writing of harlots.” While “obscenity” and “pornography” are used interchangeably by laypersons, the law has made a distinction between the two things, as the former refers to particular evaluation of a certain sexual material. In line with this, in the sense of law, what is “pornographic” is not necessarily “obscene.” All the same, the legal definition for pornography remains that tagged by the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of Miller v. California. Essentially, it would be judged as “pornography” if the given work sparks prurient interest, depicts sexuality offensively and the work essentially lacks literary, scientific or artistic value.
Legal Status of Pornography
In general, the status of internet pornography in the U.S. remains largely vague. However, several states seem to have a consensus in tagging distribution of sexually implicit content as prostitution. As for the legality status of pornography as a whole, it is largely determined by the Miller test. Essentially, Black (2014) tells that determining the legality depends on a local community’s opinion. Meaning to say, if a certain state considers a certain material as obscene, then it is to be banned. However, clearer regulations of pornography have been established upon the implementation of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, which was essentially enacted as an onset of the growth of media, as well as social conservatism. According to Dyer (2014), this act, in essence, prohibited informed transmission of implicit contents, which have sexual depictions. Unfortunately, it was only a matter of time before this act was challenged by organizations that were able to achieve the act’s eradication. Most of their arguments center on freedom of speech, by which implicitness, they argue, is a merely an expression of oneself.
As a substitute for the Communications Decency Act, the Child Online Protection Act was submitted in 1998, which essentially centered on protecting minors from accessing pornography. This act was implemented in several states, but it was again struck down in 1999 as its basis on pornographic description was merely “community standards,” and as such, was too broad. In 2000, another act was passed in the form of the Children’s Internet Protection Act. This act basically required public institutions to use filters in software that can prevent minors from viewing implicit content. As the pattern goes, it was later challenged by the American Library Association, as it encompassed libraries the most. With regards to production of pornography, it is generally regulated by 18 U.S.C. 2557, which requires producers to show evidence that all performers are over eighteen years at the time of production (Legal Information Institute, 2016). Undeniably, the government has not fallen short in creating policies to monitor the production and distribution of pornography.
In line with this, it is undeniable that pornography causes problems with the morals of the public, particularly because it corrupts the minds of its viewers. The issue consequently lies on whether or not the majority will utilize the State’s capacity to enforce morals through the law. In the contemporary world, however, arguments on pornography have in essence shifted from its morality to the harm it causes. Indeed, this shift in perspective may have been implemented because the mere view of the governing majority on morality is not enough to prohibit an act. In line with its causality of harm, it is asserted that pornography might corrupt minds, and as a result, lead to sexual crimes.
Previous Responses to Other Social Issues
In the combined readings of Sliver (2007), several social issues have been addressed to improve situations. The issue of random violence, for instance, is tackled, and it is interesting to note that the framing of the concept is manipulated. Essentially, tagging of crimes as “random” makes everyone a potential victim; thus, demanding the attention and concern of every citizen. In this certain example, the appeal of framing issues as a possible response to societal matters is emphasized.
In the topic of framing, another issue that was successfully relieved through such tactic is stalking (Sliver, 2007). In a time frame of fourteen years, activists have long fought for the creation of laws against stalking. In the early years, they have not been successful, as they have ineffectively associated the issue with obsession and psychological rape. However, it is the recent framing of the issue on a different light, otherwise called re-framing, with star stalking and violence against women that had been successful in inspiring lawmakers in finally addressing their concern. These claimsmaking efforts, manifested in re-framing of the given issue, are the very reason why today, stalking is a punishable crime in the country.
Sliver (2007) additionally highlights the issue on the varying attitudes associated with different drugs. Specifically the issue that was tackled was whether or not performance-enhancing drugs should be negatively connoted. The issue at hand is addressed by social construction. The circumstances are constructed in a way that there should be nothing wrong with using drugs if it is not for detrimental purposes, but on the contrary, merely to get better at given tasks. Albeit controversial, social construction ends up framing it as merely a form of self-enhancement, which does not at all involve any immorality.
Yet another approach in dealing with social issues is tagging them as emergencies, as this makes public officials give more attention to the issue at hand (Sliver, 2007). To label something as an emergency means giving of extraordinary efforts in order to alleviate the problem. While it has disadvantages, particularly on the long-term addressing of the issue, it remains undeniable that labeling an issue as an emergency permits the mobilization of resources.
Very much in line with tagging situations as “emergencies” is tagging them as “disasters,” which seems to have been former President Bush’s favorite tactic. This, according to Sliver (2007) is merely an onset of th...