Feminist View on Ponorgraphy (Essay Sample)

Feminist View of Pornography
Name
Institutional Affiliation
Instructor
Date of submission
In this paper we will assess the view of pornography from the three categories of the feminist, the three group are; anti-pornography, liberal, and pro sex feminist. The anti-pornography feminist theories argues that, pornography promote violence against women. According to Mackinnon (1989) pornography is a form of rape, an action of sexual politics and a way of enhancing gender inequality. She further state that pornographic materials present women as sexual objects that enjoy pain and experience pleasure in being raped. Pro sex feminist argue that censoring pornography is against the freedom of expression. Pro sex feminist claim that anti-pornography feminist advocate of censorship of expression by referring to it as pornography. Will censoring pornography undermine instead of promoting the right of women? To answer the question above, in this paper we will assess the use of pornography using feminist theories.
Feminist view of pornography indicate the significant of sexuality to the feminism and also the prostitution. The view of the pornography has an issue that has threatened to them into two group, especially among feminists in western countries. Some even made public that they won’t share stage with pro pornography feminists. The height of the division was in the year 1980s, during the Feminist Sex Wars. The war pitted anti-pornography feminism against sex-positive feminism.
There are three common feminist view on the pornography. The most common view particularly in academic is that pornography is a male culture that humiliate, defile and exploit women. A second view on the pornography, is the liberal position, that incorporate the freedom for expression and uses the right as a defense of pornography without strictly defending the pornography, but stating that everyone has the right to consume or produce words and images. A third feminist view of the pornography, publicly defend the pornography and have been labeled as the pro-sex feminist and who argue that porn is beneficial to benefits women. Several difference have been raised between the three positions.
Anti-pornography feminists claim that the feminist with who disagree with their view are either brainwashed dupes of patriarchy or as advocators for pornographers. Jeffreys (1990) states that feminists who believe women like men choose whether to participate in porn or not are liars and should stop spreading those lies to the general public. Jeffreys (1990) claim that are forced to participate in making pornography that it is not on free will but they have no choice. Illegal immigrant regardless of being male or female are at risk of being forced participate in pornography work. Anti-pornography feminist states that their pro-sex counterpart are enjoying women subordination and dominance.
The anti-pornography feminist also claim that, the liberal feminists are only silent about the issue of porn due to intimidation. Intimidation comes from the current sex-workers and also the stakeholders in the porn industry. In a situation where anti-pornography feminist differ with pro-porn feminist to the extent of refusing to share stage, notably the Catharine MacKinnon. Instead of responding with a compiled argument, pro-porn feminist respond with anger. Pornography industry is where they get money to pay their bill, thus censuring the industry will render them jobless, with no means to pay bills.
Page Mellish in her work Feminists Fighting Pornography states that all feminist issues are rooted in the pornography problems. (MacKinnon, ) refute the claim that some porn work incorporate words and images that are protected by the First Amendment. As per the MacKinnon as an act of sexual violence. Porn is viewed as both the main issue of the 21 century feminism and an inherent act of violence in fundamental feminist ideology, which Christina Hoff Sommers term as the gender feminism. Gender feminism concentrate on the history of an uninterrupted oppression of female by their male counterpart that spans cultural barriers. To anti-pornography feminist, the only viable explanation is that male and female are separate species, which are fighting each other. Men interests are articulated through and maintained by a capitalistic structure termed as patriarchy. The cause of the antagonism is so deep that it lies in manly biology itself. (Brownmiller) traces the origin of rape back to the Neanderthal times when men started use their penises as weapons. From the time in memorial rape has been used to intimidate women by men and keep them in fear. Anti-porn feminist also reject the claim that sex in a natural force which act against women such as motherhood. According to the feminist, men construct women's sexuality through the words and images of society, which the French philosopher Foucault referred to as the texts of society. After the construction of such women sexuality, men commercialize it and market it back in the form of porn. In other words, through pornography man describes woman sexually. Which in turn defines every aspect of women role in society. Anti-pornography feminist believe that, to end the oppression, patriarchy and its texts must be smashed. Liberal feminism is a similar to the 1960s feminism that advocated for equality with their male counterpart, who were not characteristic oppressors so much as recalcitrant partners to be rational. The call for equality between the two genders did not mean destroying the existing system, but revolutionizing it, for instance employing measures such as the affirmative action. The liberal principle is a woman's body, a woman's right underlay influences ranging from the rights to abort and also the lifestyle freedoms like lesbianism.
The choosing of the content was given more action than the content. Liberal feminists share the idea of freedom of expression including in the use of pornographic materials. An example of these organization is the Feminists for Free Expression (FFE) which have consistently being against the censorship of the pornography. For instance, the liberal feminists with the likes of Sallie Tisdale have steadfastly defended the freedom for sexuality. Most of the liberal feminists are appalled by Playboy and argues that is not pro-pornography. A number of reason why porn should be censored are: amazing works of art and literature would be forbidden; the act would also breach the First Amendment; the freedom of expression would be repressed; and that freedom of speech enhances creativity. A number of liberal feminists, have compromised their ideologies in the favor of anti-pornography position, and even seem to be willing to sacrifice free speech if that means women. For example, they also condemn the free market for commercializing women as body parts, which demeans women. In (Scambler & Jennings, 1998), an essay defending pornography, which sometimes seems to be an attack, Lisa Steel comments: Chauvinist representation of women, is all part of the same industry that, in the search of profits, reduces the community to consumer groups. And marketing conservative the same way the military is in every aspect. What we gain is less to what we loss so that a number of individual can a right to produce porn and make money. Such muddled and ambivalent defenses often offend the sex workers they are intended to protect.
In the recent period, the number of the Pro-sex feminism has been increasing. The pro-sex feminist labeled as the pro-sex have defended the right of a woman to take part in and to consume porn. Some of these women, such as Nina Hartley, are current or ex-sex-workers who know firsthand that posing for pornography is an uncovered choice that can be enriching. Pro-sex feminists have a common principle that is, a woman's body, a woman’s right and stress that woman choice with her body must be protected if not respected. Pro-sex feminist arguments in some cases seem to overlap with ideas of the liberal feminist ones. For instance, the two express concern over who will play the role of the censor because of the subjective words, such as degrading, which can be interpreted to mean whatever the censor intended.
The statute that banned Margaret Sanger because she used the words syphilis and gonorrhea is no different, in principle, than the one that interprets obscenity today. There is no protection even for the typical type of the feminist, for example our bodies which providing a cohort of women with the first clear view of their own biology. Unavoidably, ban will be used to act against the least popular views on porn which, are the weakest members of the community which include feminists and lesbians. When the Canadian Supreme Court decided in 1992 to protect women by restricting the importation of pornography, one of the first victims was the lesbian/gay Glad Day Bookstore, which had been on a police hit list. Among the books seized by Canadian customs were two books by Andrea Dworkin, Pornography: Men Possessing Women and Women hating. Such an event should not have surprised Dworkin who declared in (Take Back the Night), that the feminist in today’s world cannot rely on the legal system that is made and implemented by men who they refer to as sadist. On the dangers of banning the production of porn, pro-sex and liberal feminists in most cases do a agree.
Pornography is degrading to women. Degrading is a subjective term. I find commercials in which women become orgasmic over soapsuds to be tremendously degrading. Every woman has the right to define what is degrading and liberating for herself. The assumed degradation is often linked to the objectification of women: that is, porn converts them into sexual obj...