The Government Should NOT Censor Pornography

Some think it is. And porn users themselves sometimes worry about criticism for this reason as they also might think themselves it is wrong. They say a real person has to go naked or be filmed having sex as there is no other way of doing it to make porn. Some are not bothered to start with if porn takes advantage of young women. And nor if it happens for other reasons than porn.

When you hear the word pornography, you most likely don’t link positive things to the word. Pornography seems to have a negative connotation attached to it, and has become a debatable subject in particular in today’s technological advanced age, where it is easier to access pretty much anything. But why has pornography been labelled with such a negative connotation? In my essay i will explore the many views on the subject, such as that of radical Feminists who claim that pornography objectifies women. Then there are consequentialists view, which see pornography as setting a bad example.

Pornography can be defined as printed or visual material displaying erotic descriptions or visuals of sexual body parts or sexual activity, and is largely aimed to appeal to a male audience through sexual scenarios which often dehumanize and exploit women and their bodies. Though largely, pornography is is designed to please a masculinized audience, there are some feminists, from multiple genders, who aim to “reclaim their right to enjoy sexual images without violence and negativity” (Klinger). Ideally, pornography would be a context in which there would be a conscious movement towards eliciting a healthy reclamation of sexually charged images from all genders- especially women. Those against pornography usually emphasize the specifics of porn as it occurs in modern culture. Oftentimes anti-pornography feminists point out the extremely male-oriented vision of sexuality, the sexism, and with descriptions such as: “women presented as dehumanized sexual objects, things, or commodities; shown as enjoying humiliation, pain, or sexual assault; tied up, mutilated, or physically hurt; depicted in postures or positions of sexual submission or servility; shown with body parts- including though not limited to vagina, breast, or buttocks- exhibited such that women are reduced to those parts; women penetrated by animals or objects; and women presented in scenarios of degradation, humiliation, or torture, shown as filthy or inferior, bleeding, bruised, or hurt in a context that makes these conditions sexual” (MacKinnon).

(Davis, p. xix, 1983). Davis doesn't go on to explain how hard-core pornography can be less explicit than soft-core. However he does explain that hard-core pornography is more abstract in that, it depicts the sex act only and not the emotional or personal characteristics of the people involved in the act. (Davis, p. xx) He believes soft-core pornography is describing "a sexual experience", which conveys characteristics of the participants that are not described by hard-core pornography. Hard-core pornography describes "sexual behaviour" which involves more of the act of sex rather than the characteristics and feelings involved with sex.

Is The Use of Sexual Imagery in Ad Campaigns Unethical? People will soon realize that they're being manipulated by advertising companies due to sexual imagery. Even though a person may buy a product due to sexual imagery, it defeats the purpose of selling the product if the product is not any good. Also, companies will only gain temporary customers if sex is their only strategy for advertising Not only will the consumers feel cheated and utilized, it will take a much greater attempt on the part of the advertisers to regain the customer’s trust. Therefore, using sexual imagery in advertising is unethical because it distracts the consumer from the original issue in which it is for them to buy something.

The thought of a masculine or dominating woman may seem like something repulsive to the porn industry. Therefore, there is an obvious misrepresentation of the image of being a woman in terms of the woman being a sexual object; thus, suggesting to men the sexual fantasy of the subordination of women and the dominancy of men. To paraphrase MacKinnon, pornography is a type of sexual politics, which defines men as being superior to women just like the higher class dominates the working class. Pornography creates a type of sexuality which eroticizes male dominance and the submission of women (306); consequently suggesting that a woman’s role simply consists of keeping her husband or partner happy. “Making sex with the powerless ‘not allowed’ is a way of ‘keeping it’ defined ... ... middle of paper ... ...nclusion, violent pornography should not be protected by the constitution because this obscene practice inhibits the free speech of women; essentially making the woman invisible in the political power structure.

As with any other creative genre, pornography indulges a wide variety of tastes from the brutish to the exotic, and covers themes from humorous to sublime to tragic. There are some who hold that any work of man which depicts or describes sexual activity is harmful to those (especially children) who view it, and ought to be banned outright. They cite cases in which individuals have committed heinous acts of molestation or rape, ostensibly as a direct result of their exposure to sexually oriented material. On the other hand, there are those who say that pornography (or "erotica," if you prefer) is not only stimulating and beautiful, but even beneficial in some situations. They contend, for example, that exposure to erotic material can help rejuvenate flagging sexual desire in marriages that, while otherwise satisfactory, may have gone stale from a romantic standpoint.

However, I would assert that traditional pornography, although controversial, is protected by the first amendment because it is merely a form of entertainment that is utilized for sexual alleviation. In terms of controversial categories, such as gang rape and beastiality, I would argue that it should not be protected under the first amendment because it is repulsive. Indeed, my argument is subjective since these categories are completely out of the ordinary. I would argue on the basis of societal norms; however, in terms of a moral standpoint, I would argue that it is not immoral since the act is consensual. Fortunately, women, along with men, can independently choose a job of their likings.

IF viewed by a sexually immature adolescent, it can be harmful as it displays unrealistic standards for sex, improper to no contraception use and displays a relaxed attitude of casual sex and sex for pleasure. If pornography is the only sexual education a young person is receiving, it can be said that the young person is in trouble in terms of their sexual health. This, however, is not the fault of pornography itself. Pornography is a stimulating and arousing activity meant for sexual release. A child who views pornography is not interpreting it the same way an adult is and may perceive it as real where an adult would not.

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.