Limiting Access To Consenting Adults To Pornography Summary

Vanessa William Kibaja

PHIL 108 – Prof. Farion

CENSORSHIP OF PORNOGRAPHY

Do you believe a community has the right to limit access to consenting adults to pornography, if the majority supports the censorship?

I do believe that the community has no right to limit the access to consenting adults to pornography if the majority supports the censorship. Rather than making a decision considering the number of people who agree on a certain issue, the community should focus on the best decision by looking at the pro and cons of the situation. In this case the main arguments could be; pornography do cause harm to others and on the other hand censoring of pornography violates human rights, limits the freedom of speech. I personally think that the community should limit the access to consenting adults to pornography but not because the majority agrees on the censorship but because of the harm caused by pornography to the society. The logic of harm in content to pornography is a very big issue. In order for one to clearly understand the harm caused by pornography one has to understand how pornography causes harm to the society. The harm caused by pornography starts from the filming process, the actors and actresses might be harmed from filming porn if they do not consent. This might be a physical harm or psychological harm.

She clearly explains her argument on the matter of consent, saying that people who work in the pornography industry do not always consent to it and it is very hard for one to know if somebody has consent or not (Brison). Just by asking an individual a question did you consent and receiving a reply that yes I did does into verify that one has consent. Some are forced; others are drugged while in some other situations something happens in between that was not part of the