Interpretation of A Feminist View on Pornography

Powerful Essays
Interpretation of A Feminist View on Pornography

The article that I will be breaking down in the following paper is “Pornography, Civil Rights, and Speech” by Catherine A. MacKinnon. I believe the best area to start is to briefly describe MacKinnon and her article. MacKinnon is a professor of law at the University of Michigan. The article deals with the affects of pornography on society. MacKinnon feels that some pornography should be illegal. Her reason for this view is not that she finds it offensive, but rather that she considers it as a form of sexual discrimination. There are many different views on pornography ranging from the belief that it is harmless fantasy all the way to it being a prime factor of the deterioration for society. MacKinnon says that pornography subordinates women and institutionalizes male supremacy. She even goes so far as to say that it is a political practice. Advocates of pornography claim its ultimate end to be pleasure, but MacKinnon says that the actual end is power. The article will attempt to prove a correlation between pornography and the violence taken against women, as well as their social and economic inequality. I feel that the article itself is poorly written, but will attempt to make her points a little easier to understand. I feel the necessity to state that the feelings of the paper are that of my views on MacKinnon’s article. They are not my views and may in fact be, misinterpretations of her views. To spare us the confusion, I will rebut it with my views that pornography is harmless, at the end of the paper.

The article starts with a brief passage on sexual equality in society. Her presentation of the argument is to explain it as if she agreed with it, only to refute it by say...

... middle of paper ...

...hy. It is a genre in which men are completely subordinate, and women have all the power. Her article is so weak because it does not take that into account. I know that is only one case, but we have stated time and again that philosophy must be consistent. If she cannot/does not take dominatrix into account, then her philosophy is inconsistent. To fully explain this article and pornography would require a lengthy paper that exceeds the requirements and purpose of this précis. I will end my paper by saying that I believe everyone has a right to free speech and equality, and I appreciate the article for what it was worth, but I do not feel it is justifiable or relevant to society. She bases her entire argument on an improvable correlation of pornography and sexual discrimination. Not to mention the fact that women also buy pornography. But that is a whole other précis.
Get Access