More handpicked essays just for you.
History of entertainment
Susan Brownmiller's "Let's Put Pornography Back in the Closet
History of entertainment
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In her essay “Let’s Put Pornography Back in the Closet,” Susan Brownmiller, a prominent feminist activist, argues that pornography should not be protected under the First Amendment (59). Her position is based on the belief that pornography is degrading and abusive towards women (Brownmiller 59). She introduces the reader to the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment, and explains how it relates to her beliefs on censoring pornographic material (Brownmiller 58). In addition, she provides examples of First Amendment controversies such as Miller v. California and James Joyce’s Ulysses to explain how the law created a system to define pornographic material (Brownmiller 58). She described the system that used a three-part test as confusing (Brownmiller 58). Regardless of whether or not the First Amendment was intended to protect obscenities, she and many others believe that the legislatures should have the final say in the decision of creating and publishing pornography (Brownmiller 60).
Susan Brownmiller is a feminist, the founder of Women Against Pornography, and an author of several books (57). The essay “Let’s Put Pornography Back in the Closet” comes from the book Take Back the Night, published in 1980 (57). She clearly wants to inform and persuade the audience of this essay to believe that pornography is degrading to women. In her introduction, Brownmiller tries to gain the reader’s sympathy by stating, “Free speech is one of the great foundations on which our democracy rests” (57). However, she does not think that pornography should be protected under the First Amendment. Her reasoning is biased and based on her own moral beliefs.
In addition, she contradicts her own stance on the position when she mentions that previous literature containing sexually explicit content should not be censored (Brownmiller 59). Brownmiller paints a very strong, emotional, and offensive picture when she claims that women are, “being stripped, bound, raped, tortured, mutilated, and murdered in the name of commercial entertainment” (59). However, this statement is fallacious and does not provide any factual evidence. Furthermore, she makes the hasty generalization that pornography can make people think that certain things, such as rape, are acceptable (Brownmiller 59). Once again, her claim lacks support and relies solely on a faulty pathos appeal.
After reading “Let’s Put Pornography Back in the Closet” by Susan Brownmiller, my opinion regarding the censorship of pornography has not changed. Although her essay was very forthright and descriptive, it seemed very biased.
Let’s Put Pornography Back in the Closet” is an persuasive essay written by Susan Brown Miller stating and giving her reasons on why she thinks pornography should be removed from all the shelves in America. She goes on to state what kind of influence porn has negatively on society, and how it’s no good in our society to persuade readers that pornography should be taken off of public shelves. In her article, she does state very valid points and substantial reasons why pornography should be removed from shelves. But also, she does sound a lot like a person who is very critical of something that she believes is wrong morals wise because that’s how she was raised perhaps. Some of the methods she uses are the analogy method, quantitative method, and some emotional appeal as well. She also has some unsupported generalizations that she had made up herself. Either way, there were a few instances to where I was completely against with Miller’s arguments, but they were outweighed by the instances where I did agree with Miller. In all, this essay persuades me to support her opinion on pornography being taken out the public shelves because of the valid reasons and points that she used to support her opinion.
Chief Justice Warren Burger set three rules that are helpful in determining whether a material is pornographic or not. First, it is important to determine whether the material appeals to the prurient interest if an average person applies contemporary community standards to that materia (Barmore 475)l. Second, determine whether the material describes or depict sexual content, in a patently offensive manner (Barmore 476). Finally, determine whether the entire work lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value (Hafen 210). These three tests can help one determine whether a
Pornography is considered by many to be an unwelcome and distasteful part of our society. However, I argue that it is necessary to voice the unpopular viewpoints, under the Constitution. This paper is a defense of pornography as a constitutional right of free expression, under the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights. In illustrating this argument, I will first define pornography as a concept, and then address central arguments in favor of pornography remaining legal and relatively unregulated – such as the development of the pornography debate throughout modern US law, and how activist groups address the censorship of adult entertainment.
...ealize that there are men out there who have sick minds and the use of pornography adds to the power of their horrifying acts. I think women should stand up and fight for the rights they know they deserve. Women should be able to see themselves in a sexual matter without having to feel submissive, used, and dehumanized at the same moment. We women are powerful and I hope more powerful women like MacKinnon and Dworkin stand up, for then men will have no choice but to face the fact that it’s wrong and it’s going to change forever.
Susan Jacoby is a self-proclaimed "first amendment junkie" as she clearly states in her essay. What she is trying to portray is that she believes that the first amendment is the most important within the bill of rights, and that each individual should be able to take responsibility for their words. Having the first amendment regulated by any institution diminishes the speech that remains. Jacoby discusses the pornographic business throughout her essay, and the feminist who oppose their existence. A particularly interesting comment she makes is oddly specific towards the issues being brought up in the news lately about protest and neo-Nazis, "…it is ridiculous to suggest that the porn shops on 42nd Street are more disgusting to women than a
When deliberating over whether access to pornography should be prohibited, four areas of contention must be elaborated upon and evaluated critically to provide a sensible basis on which a judgement can be made. Firstly, it must be concluded whether pornography can be classed as a form of speech, and whether it enjoys the same protections as art and literature under the principle. Secondly, works such as those of Catherine MacKinnon can be drawn upon to offer a feminist perspective of the effects of pornography on the treatment of women within modern democratic society. Moreover, the principles of Devlin and Feinberg offer relevant acumen regarding the criminalisation of pornographic media. Overall, this essay will argue that whilst access to pornography should not be entirely prohibited; publications that depict ‘extreme’ situations should be subject to regulation and restriction.
“Those of us who trust sexuality must not allow ourselves to be controlled by those who fear it (Marty Klein).” In America censorship has affected various mediums: print, art, television, and internet, as it pertains to sexuality. However, the first amendment “protects” the right to free speech, and press. Congress has tried to pass bills to outlaw pornography, but have failed to ban books for sexual content, and dictate what can be said on TV and radio. If the government is allowed to censor these ways of communication, then we, as citizens of a democracy, will be treated as citizens under a dictatorship.
...gument against pornography is claiming that intercourse is an act of rape, the argument immediately seems outlandish and almost laughable, and it surely seems that way to the average person. People see these examples of radical feminism and attribute those isolated incidents as representative of the entire feminist movement as a whole. Therefore through complexity, the feminist movement lost a substantial amount of its genuine credibility due to perceived extremist views on female sexuality. This, among many other incidents, seems to be the cause of this great reversal in female sexuality in our current day society. Instead of putting an end to pornography, it flourishes. Instead of bringing an end to female objectification, it is often nowadays encouraged. This reversal of feminist ideals is the main cause for the damage to female gender roles in the 21st century.
Many people disagree on whether or not pornography is supported by the First Amendment. According to the Supreme Court something is obscene if it, “… [depicts] patently offensive, hard-core sexual conduct; lack serious scientific, literary, artistic, or political value; and appeal to the prurient interest of an average person…” (Brownmiller 62). This ruling is unfair because all of these requirements are based on a matter of opinion. There is no way to prove that something lacks artistic or political value, or if it is “hard-core sexual conduct”. Brownmiller also says that all images and videos of are completely untasteful and obscene, they show a ‘… presentation of the female body being stripped, bound, raped, tortured, mutilated, and murdered in the name of commercial entertainment” (Brownmiller 62). She believes that all pornography is obscene and dehumanizing to women, but that is not all women’s opinion. In an informal experiment conducted by Susan Jacoby, she surveyed five women asking their opinion an image in Penthouse; the replies ranged from “lovely” and “sensuous” to “revolting” and “demeaning” (Jacoby 49). Also, if someone does not want to watch pornography or look at magazines of revealing girls, then they should look for those videos or subscribe to those magazines. One can choose what they can and cannot
Ever since the beginning of Adult magazines and films, the field of pornography has constantly received opposition from religious groups and concerned parents that it's to vulgar and inappropriate for anyone's viewing especially minors. However the First Amendment of the United States Constitution illustrates the importance of freedom of the press (expression), otherwise meaning no censorship. It was however agreed that such material is not suitable for minors therefore declaring the minimum age 18 for purchasing adult material. The Constitution protects adult magazines and such; therefore that same material should be accessible electronically. Whether printed on paper, or displayed through the web, pornography cannot be banned lawfully without violating the Constitution.
During the 70’s and 80’s, the primary topics in feminist discussion on women’s sexuality were that of pornography, sex work, and human trafficking. This led to the need of the enlistment for sex worker rights in America. Around the 80’s, pornography was a prominent argument among feminists campaigning for women’s rights. The feminists involved held contrasting views on how to eliminate sexual violence against women, and the feminists involved were either classified as liberal or radical. The final group of feminists described as “pro-sex”, views are considered the true feminist defense of
The combination of liberal and radical feminism is not one that often comes to the mind, but it can be useful to consult various viewpoints when tackling complex issues. Despite drastic differences between them, these two views of feminism do hold some similarities with each other by virtue of their common goal (when that goal is simplified to simply equality of the genders). In this paper I will be outlining some of the basic similarities and differences between these two ideologies of feminism and I may not cover all of the connections and gaps between the two for the sake of length. Moving forward from this explanation of liberal and radical feminism, I will use it to explain their views of pornography and how it aided my own understanding
The United States has always prided itself on being a free country that values its first amendment. Many people agree that the most important right in the United States constitution is a citizen’s right to freely express him or herself. The problem in this situation is that people also value living in a country without fear of being offended. Our laws are created to protect one’s self as well as others. So, it is important to attempt to meet everyone’s needs as much as is possible in a free society. Dennis Barrie, director of Contemporary Arts Center of Cincinnati, was indicted and eventually acquitted for the exhibition of photographs by Robert Mapplethorpe, depicting nudity and human bondage. In 1991 Barrie spoke of the events surrounding the situation at the seventy-ninth annual convocation of the College Art Association in a speech called “The Scene of the Crime”. When Barrie described the day that the police entered the museum to remove the photographs he makes an important point, “More than anything, that image—that image of policeman in uniforms pushing patrons out of a museum because of what is on the walls—is the image that’s going to haunt me for the rest of my life. Because that isn’t our country, or it shouldn’t be our country” (Barrie 30).
She also found that pornography leads men and women to experience conflict, suffering, and sexual dissatisfaction. http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/probe/docs/porno.html) Hence, censorship is essential in order to maintain peace and stability in the society. It will decrease the crime rate. Children can be exposed to sexual matters in school in a different manner than in education. Excessive amounts of sexually explicit material would surely be harmful.
In recent years, pornography has established itself as perhaps the most controversial topic arising out of the use of the Internet. The easy availability of this type of sexually explicit material has caused a panic among government officials, family groups, religious groups and law enforcement bodies and this panic has been perpetuated in the media.