How should laws regulate pornography?

Option 1: Legalize the production, distribution and sale of pornography.

A decision to legalize pornography does not require that pornography go unregulated.

Pro: Pornography enriches a sex life and fulfills important needs. Pornography can stimulate sexual desire where that desire is lacking in loving and socially sanctioned relationships. At the very least, it is harmless entertainment.

The quantity of porn manufactured and circulated is some indication of the degree to which people fail to achieve sexual satisfaction with the opposite sex (or even with the same sex, if we consider the amount of gay and lesbian porn available).

Pornography may give some individuals the only or the best sex life they have. It may satisfy people who would otherwise remain sexually needy. Pornography can give the deformed, the handicapped, the socially inept some access to sexual pleasures otherwise unavailable to them.

Pornography can be more intense than real life is for most of the time. It can be a sexual stimulant which is for many people more powerful than anything else found in their world. The finest pornography does more than stimulate the sexual appetite: for some, it may lead to the most satisfying climax, may even produce a spontaneous orgasm.

And porn can supplement an already exciting and fulfilling sex life: It can provide an extra dimension and open up a range of interests and feelings not otherwise available, inaccessible in ordinary life. It can liberate us from puritanical attitudes about sex; porn can help us recapture something we have lost in our civilized world. It can help us 'return to nature': it lets us experience elemental drives and satisfactions.

Since we are aware that other people can look back at us, a viewer's eyes may not be as free to roam over another person's body as they are to roam over a pornographic image. Therefore a pornographic magazine or video may afford its viewers a greater opportunity for satisfying lust. This is one advantage that porn affords over a sexual encounter with a human being.

Con: The argument that pornography returns its users to a state of nature (conceived as somehow better than the so-called 'civilized' state) is not so much a defense of porn as it is a criticism of 'civilized' society, with its dishonesty, repression, and neuroses. For pornography still does not provide the opportunity for contact with other human beings, as would be possible in a desired state of nature.

Con: Pornography typically features actors who are more attractive than most people. It shows a variety of sexual experiences that may not be readily available in 'real life'. Thus in some respects pornography may provide more satisfaction than a regular sexual partner provides, and so it may breed dissatisfaction with a mate.

Pro: Pornography is a celebration of human sexuality. It revels in the glory of physical existence.

Pro: Pornography is educational: It provides training in the mechanics of foreplay and intercourse. And as it teaches techniques, it can build the confidence of a person in his or her sexual performance. At the very least, realistic photos can reveal standard anatomy. And as such, they can satisfy everyday curiosity and minimize surprise in a sexual situation with another person.

Con: The simplicity of the photographic image of a person bears little resemblance to the complexity of a real human being. The simple sort of relationship one builds with a pinup teaches little about relating to a multi-dimensional person. Photographs or stories are unlikely to make anyone a better conversationalist and even less likely to turn anyone into a more competent sexual performer.

Examples of sex crimes include rape, prostitution, exhibitionism, voyeurism, verbal indecency (e.g., obscene phone calls) and consensual sexual acts with minors.

There are three major hypotheses regarding the connection between the availability or use of pornography and the incidence of sex crimes: (1) The use of pornography is associated with an increase in the incidence of sex crimes. (2) The use of pornography is associated with a decrease in the incidence of sex crimes. (3) The use of pornography has no effect on the incidence of sex crimes.

Two theories regarding the effects of pornography predict exactly opposite results: One theory predicts that an increase in the availability or use of pornography will result in an increase in sex crimes. This view maintains that there is a positive correlation between the availability or use of pornography and the incidence of sex crimes. Another theory predicts that an increase in the availability or use of pornography will result in an decrease in sex crimes. This view maintains that there is a negative correlation between the availability or use of pornography and the incidence of sex crimes.

Any systematic attempt to determine which of these hypotheses is correct must grapple with each of the following problems and perhaps others: (1) How does a study measure the 'use' of pornography? Does it take into account the amount of time spent with porn? Does it consider the environment of the users, the context in which porn is used? (2) How can the effect of pornography be isolated from the effects of other factors that contribute to sex crimes? How can pornography be considered any more or less of a factor in the genesis of sex crimes than, say, alienation or unemployment? If researchers collect data on the use of pornography by sex offenders only, they cannot draw logical conclusions regarding the impact of pornography on the general population. (3) Does the study focus on factors that have a plausible relation to the incidence of sex crimes? The ratio of the number of sex crimes to the number of adult bookstores or theaters in a given area is a very crude measurement: it does not account for the people who live outside the area but who visit the stores and theaters to get sexually oriented materials.

The methodologies for determining the correlation between the exposure to pornography and the incidence of crime include: (1) experimental research to determine the degree to which pornography leads to aggressive behavior, (2) correlational research to determine whether there is any relationship between the circulation of pornography and the incidence of rape, and (3) clinical research to reveal the degree to which sex offenders have used pornography.

In the pursuit of conclusions about the relationship of pornography to sex crimes, these research methodologies may formulate the following questions: (1) Do subjects in a controlled setting who are exposed to pornography manifest any inclination to aggression? (2) Do the circulation rates of pornographic magazines and videotapes correlate with statistics on violent sexual crimes? (3) Have persons arrested for sex crimes typically been users of pornography?

Pro: Pornography does not cause crime in any direct way. To say that A causes B is to say that every instance of A results in an instance of B. So saying that pornography causes crime is saying that, for every exposure to or use of pornography, a crime results. Whenever an individual, whether a priest, minister, rabbi, police officer or government official, is exposed to porn, that person will commit a crime. Clearly, this is not true: Many people have used or have been exposed to pornography and have not committed crimes. Such exposure to pornography has never been shown to have had such an inevitable influence.

Pro: The use of pornography reduces the likelihood of aggressive or other undesirable behavior. By affording an alternative sexual outlet, pornographic materials can reduce the sexual energies which would lead certain people to press others for sexual activity that those other people do not want. Pornography reduces the number of sex crimes.

Con: If the 'catharsis theory of pornography'—the theory that pornography reduces the drive of certain people to commit sex crimes—is correct, then unrelieved sexual tensions lead to a higher rate of sex crimes, and porn, by relieving some sexual frustration, reduces the incidence of those crimes. This would suggest that in those communities where porn is not available, where it is not present to channel sexual energies, the crime rate should be higher. And yet statistics from communities where porn is not readily available reveal no more (or even fewer) sex crimes than occur in communities where porn is easily obtained.

Pro: No recent scientific research has demonstrated a clear link between pornography and crime. Specifically, pornography has not been shown to cause violence. While some people have long suspected that materials which appeal to 'prurient interests' predispose individuals to commit sex crimes, studies have not produced conclusive results. In most cases, the sale and use of pornography has no immediate adverse impact on society. To the degree that it provides harmless pleasure, pornography can even benefit the individual. So the restrictions placed on pornography by society ought to be minimal. Various studies of the relation of the use of pornography to the commission of crimes, in particular, sex crimes, fail to show convincingly that any clear connection exists.

Reply: All the research methodologies employed thus far to study the issue have severe limitations. Therefore the studies that are based on these methodologies could miss whatever link exists between the use of pornography and the incidence of sex crimes.

Con: An important reason for the suppression of the production and distribution of pornography is that young people can be seduced by it. Pornography is likely to have the greatest impact on the psychological development of the youngest people, because the youngest have the least experience to help them evaluate it. Adolescents resent limitations on their freedom and will be frustrated by their inability to get pornographic materials when they know those materials exist. But when they become adults, they will understand and appreciate the policies that protected them from wasting a significant portion of their early years.

Con: Pornography is a bad influence not only on minors, whose views are being shaped by the media to which they are exposed as they grow up, but also on adults. Pornography depicts morally forbidden behavior, specifically, intercourse outside of marriage, sexual activity without love and commitment and without regard for the possibility of procreation or the transmission of disease. It incites wrongful desires. It corrupts people and disrupts social stability by promoting premarital and extramarital sex. Ang it may lead to anti-social behavior. It may desensitize its users to the best interests of their sex partners. Pornography depicts people as objects or things instead of human beings, and this 'objectification' leads to an attitude conducive to rape. Censorship helps to prevent the erosion of moral standards.

In Paris Adult Theatre v. Slaton, the Supreme Court cited the "legitimate state interests at stake in stemming the tide of commercialized obscenity". The Court expressed its concern for "the interest of the public in the quality of life and the total community environment, the tone of commerce in the great city centers, and, possibly, the public safety itself."

Laws teach citizens about values that are important to society. Laws that enforce the censorship of pornography help influence, in a positive way, the attitudes of people toward sexual behavior, and they help promote a sense of responsibility to society.

If pornography produces excessive desire for immediate sexual gratification, if it leads to the loss of regard for human qualities beyond sexual attractiveness, if it helps to induce anti-social behavior, then it contributes to the gradual deterioration of society. The censorship of pornography is therefore a measure that could stem the decline of civilization.

Reply: Anything that humans do affects their attitudes and future behavior. The use of pornography, therefore, must have some impact on human life. But the nature and magnitude of that impact are matters of considerable controversy. What any given individual brings to pornography—attitudes, habits, prejudices—is far more influential in determining the outcome of a pornographic experience than the pornographic experience itself. Very rare is the ten or twenty minute experience that utterly changes a life. No exposure to porn—even that which occurs frequently over many decades—is likely to upset the character developed in childhood and reinforced countless times throughout the years.

The individual fits new experiences, as well as the same old experiences, including exposures to pornography, into existing mental frameworks. The individual judges the sexual content of all media in the light of religious and philosophical beliefs and in the light of views already formed about the nature of human relationships and sexual activity. Attitudes evolve, and yet they rarely change dramatically in an instant.

Most adults who enjoy pornography and even those who use it frequently are unlikely to make the mistake of supposing that people in 'real life' are just like the people in porn. Older people are likely to have had many superficial relationships and at least a few deeper relationships that have helped to shape their attitudes about sexual activity and in turn pornography. The lessons learned in interpersonal communications will in most cases determine where pornography fits, or whether it fits at all, in the conduct of a life.

Pro: Pornography is a form of expression, and the freedom of expression ought to be protected. Censorship has a chilling effect on artists and writers: it tends to prevent them from expressing their ideas in a completely honest and open way. The freedom to publish pornography is a value worth defending even if the material published has no redeeming value. Censorship of materials of little value will, in some cases, discourage artists and authors from producing works of higher value. Censorship may inhibit the creation of works relevant to important concerns of a great many people.

Censorship may also have a chilling effect on retailers and librarians. It may prompt retailers to stop ordering certain publications or make those materials available only to customers who request them. It may prompt librarians to avoid choosing certain works for their libraries.

Moreover, laws against pornography are subject to abuse. Whether or not the censorship of sexually explicit materials is a good idea, government should not be given this power, because the government might extend it beyond acceptable bounds. Very strict regulation of pornography is likely to foster the slide of legislation down a 'slippery slope': government, once it has succeeded at regulating activity in one area, is more likely to increase the number and extend the scope of regulations in that area and other areas as well. For example, authorities may use their power of censorship, their ability to influence the production and distribution of published works, to inhibit the exchange of certain religious or political views.

Censors may use the concern for public decency as an excuse for suppressing the criticism or parody of political or religious subjects. The law which prohibits pornography might be used to squelch the expression of ideas. For example, the sexual content of a novel might be used as a pretext for suppressing the work if it has what opponents consider an unacceptable political or religious message.

The exchange of information or ideas regarding or depicting inappropriate, obscene, or criminal behavior should be distinguished from the actual inappropriate, obscene, or criminal behavior. Even if pornography depicts evil and illegal activities (including voyeurism, exhibitionism, child molestation, rape), it should not be censored any more than crime dramas should be. The depiction of wrongdoing is not in itself wrong: depictions of wrongdoing could occur in lessons promoting the most stringent moral values.

Censorship is an attempt primarily to suppress a mental activity, and while it might ultimately be aimed at influencing behavior, its ability to do so is questionable. Mental activity—even thoughts of committing crimes—should not be restricted; only evil actions ought to be prohibited. Even seeing the advantage of criminal behavior does not necessarily produce the willingness to indulge in that behavior. We can imagine ourselves committing a crime, but such a thought may not be coupled with willingness to commit that crime or even approval of the notion.

Censorship of mental activity is impractical. Were it strong enough to be effective, it would also most likely cause many undesirable side effects—mental diseases or disturbances and associated behavioral problems, for example. And censorship is counterproductive: often, it makes the censored materials even more interesting, attractive, and exciting than they are or deserve to be.

Con: Even though a good and decent power might be abused or extended to produce evil effects, there is no reason to suppose that such a power cannot be used in a good and decent way. In many cases where government had powers of censorship, it did not extend those powers beyond acceptable limits.

Pro: If pornography is a reproduction of something which is beautiful, then the reproduction is itself beautiful—at least to a degree. The naked body, without blemish or deformity, is beautiful. The naked human form is not evil, nor is sexual intercourse, nor is observing the naked body of another person, nor is watching sexual intercourse. Pornography owes its appeal to the appeal of human anatomy and behavior. To those who enjoy it, pornography captures an aspect of the beauty of human existence and action.

Those who would argue, as some parents and preachers do, that pornography is 'dirty', 'ugly', or 'perverted', will fail to change the mind of anyone who finds satisfaction in it. Few people would spend much time or money on something that they see as dirty or ugly. The attempt to associate porn with anything that engenders revulsion is doomed to fail, unless the audience is already convinced that porn is revolting. Anyone who aims to grapple with the issues relating to pornography must understand why it has a widespread appeal. And those who wish to convey the dangers of using pornography must first come to grips with the reasons why people use it. In brief, some people enjoy pornography because it partakes of beauty and because it gives pleasure.

Con: Attractiveness and enjoyment are not measures of beauty. Moreover, what is beautiful is not necessarily good. The seductiveness of pornography makes it dangerous. The sick person has a warped perception, a notion that something which is thoroughly bad is actually good: as a physically sick person may consider a poison to be beneficial, so a morally sick person may consider an evil to be a good.

Pro: Censorship requires expenditures for police and prosecutors. The money spent on fighting pornography could be better spent elsewhere.

Pro: Because of the difficulties in defining and applying such terms as 'obscene' and 'redeeming social value', attempts to censor materials which are 'obscene' and protect those which have 'redeeming social value' are bound to produce inconsistent and unfair results.

Con: Many laws permit, or cannot help but allow, a range of interpretations. But this is not in itself an adequate reason for not writing laws.

Pro: If pornography seems to represent a world of impossible satisfactions, those satisfactions are only relatively impossible—impossible for some, perhaps, but not for all. To the people who can afford to buy the pleasures or win them by the force of their personal appeal, the pleasures are attainable. If there is a concern that pornography will lead to disappointment or self-loathing, one should be warned against getting hopes too high: be careful not to stir up desires that cannot be satisfied with limited means. Shoppers who want to avoid getting depressed when they cannot afford to buy what they see should not go window-shopping in an expensive part of town.

Even so, fantasy is not a necessary accompaniment to the use of pornography. A well-produced pornographic image has the power to arouse its viewers, and, at least for some people, generate enough sexual excitement to produce a climax without tactile stimulation of the genitalia. Where the pornographic work is so realistic that it gives its viewer a sexual experience which is a similar or better experience than that which might be obtained with human companions, the users of pornography can altogether avoid unrealistic ideas that lead to disappointment.

Con: Pornography perpetuates illusions and stereotypes. It presents an imaginary world which has only tenuous links to everyday life. The user imagines the pornographic image to be something else, something more than an image, specifically, a human being, a person offering himself or herself for sex. The user employs imagination to the point of thinking that the image is something real, something more than merely an image of something else, that the image is actually the object of desire—a person. So every time pornography is used, the user deceives himself. In the use of pornography, the user has a vested interest in self-deception, make-believe. The mind is made to function improperly; the judgment is warped. Pornography leads its users to drift into fantasy, to disconnect their minds from the real world. It is a pale imitation of its subjects. The beauty of the human body is glorious, but the glory of porn, if it has any, is a reflected glory. Its appeal is essentially limited. As few people would have hunger satisfied by looking at pictures of food, so also few people would have all sexual desires satisfied by looking at pictures of naked bodies.

Pornography stirs up desires which cannot be satisfied; it offers more than it ever delivers. Pornography leads to unrealistic expectations. Pornography incites desires incapable of being satisfied. Its users may develop a desire for pleasures which cannot be obtained with other people. Few people can act out all of their pornographic fantasies. Pornography may be seen as somehow better than real life, and thus it may lead to dissatisfaction with real life. The purest pornography—the best of its kind—is like the purest narcotic: most intoxicating—and very dangerous. Yet in the end, pornography is undone by its purity. Someone may take years to discover that the promise of pornography—the promise of the easy availability of any number of handsome or beautiful companions for sex—is never going to be fulfilled. When its users become sated, pornography, unadulterated eroticism, reveals its limitation.

Pornography is unidimensional. For a time, that single dimension can be a sheer joy to explore. But all bodies eventually tire and need time to rest. At that point, porn loses its appeal. We all need more than porn has to offer. It does not provide the maximum or the best sexual satisfaction.

Obtaining consent for sexual contact requires some skill in establishing a human relationship. Since, most often, the access to genitalia is controlled by the owner, some negotiation with the owner is imperative. Pornography does not require its users to ask, persuade, convince, or coerce anyone for sex. And that is part of its appeal. But in the final analysis, the user of pornography does not get sex—sexual pleasure and even orgasm, yes, but not genital contact with another human being. In the end, the user of pornography remains utterly alone.

Con: To one who enjoys pornography, it may not seem to be a waste of time. For sexual pleasure is not always placed in the same category as other goods. Very often, activities that generate sexual pleasure are not evaluated in the same way as other activities are—in terms of their contribution to certain goals. Sexual pleasure holds a place above other experiences, especially those of work or the goal-directed activities that are not pleasant in themselves. Sexual pleasure is an end or an experience that is sought for itself and not for anything else. The drive to get sexual pleasure—an immediate reward—can then easily displace the drive to work for a distant reward.

Pornography is a pale imitation of reality, a poor substitute for real experience. Pornography diverts its users from activities that are ultimately more satisfying, specifically, relationships with human beings. Pornography often prompts masturbation, and a habit of sexual self-gratification drains the energies that move individuals to seek relationships with other people.

The satisfaction which the users of pornography may have found can lead them not into but away from interpersonal relationships. As they mature, the users of pornography will likely feel some dissatisfaction and disillusionment. When they eventually realize that pornography fails to provide complete satisfaction in the touching of others and in the completion of sexual intercourse, their frustration may lead to hopelessness. Thus, pornography can lead to self-destructive attitudes and behavior. Laws ought to help people avoid self-destructive attitudes and behavior.

Users of pornography may become dependent on it. And in some cases, pornography may desensitize its users to sexual excitement, and this may cause dissatisfaction with or disinclination toward human encounters. Many people, if they do not realize it at once, nevertheless come to believe that pornography is a dead-end. As a source of sexual excitement, it appears to be adding something to life, not taking anything away. In that way, it appears good or at least useful. Nevertheless, those who have had sexual contact with others note the difference between human affairs and encounters with pornography. The former can dispel loneliness; the latter cannot. To be sure, pornography can so fill the consciousness with sexual excitement that loneliness can be forgotten or ignored for a while. But a lonely person who has used porn to satisfy sexual desire becomes keenly aware of the absence of human contact.

Con: Pornography depicts actions that are generally performed in private. We ought not to see what is generally private.

Pro: Producers of and actors in pornographic media freely invite an audience to hear and see their products; there no violation of privacy, because there is no expectation of privacy.

Con: Pornography is sexist. Specifically, pornography discriminates against women.

Reply: Pornography only reflects (or at most only helps to perpetuate) what sexism there is in society; it does not count as the greatest promoter of a sexist agenda.

Con: Pornography is a violation of civil rights. It may be a species of hate crime. Pornography is an instrument used by men to oppress women.

Reply: Hatred is a state of mind, and it can be expressed in literature and images. But the overwhelming majority of those involved with pornography do not see in pornography any expression of hatred toward other people and never intend to use it that way. Furthermore, pictures in which hatred is expressed often elicit sympathy or revulsion—not agreement or delight—from viewers. Those who hate others may as likely vent their rage at any sort of picture in any magazine or video. Because there are hateful people, there is a market for hateful literature. And yet materials that clearly show hatred toward people do not necessarily generate that emotion or incite anti-social behavior.

Pornography is not an instrument of oppression; those who are involved in the production, distribution, and use of pornography generally operate freely and voluntarily. The women who choose to appear in pornography are primarily interested in the financial rewards it affords them. The income they can command from posing or acting in porn is most often greater than that which they could obtain from other jobs for which they might qualify.

And many women are moved by vanity and flattery to collaborate casually, briefly with pornographers.

If pornography is a violation of the civil rights of women, then it is also a violation of the civil rights of men, where men are depicted in porn.

Pro: Sexuality does not diminish the dignity of a human being. Pornography exalts the sex object: the sex object becomes the object of worship—the sex god or goddess, the ravishing creature desired by all.

Con: Pornography is an affront to human dignity. It makes mere objects of human beings. It degrades and dehumanizes its users by reducing human behavior to a mere animal activity. Since it excludes love and affection, it cannot exhibit concern for every aspect of a human being. It trivializes the erotic

. If the characters depicted in pornography are 'celebrated', they are nevertheless celebrated as objects—objects for consumption, even as food is celebrated as delicious. People object to being viewed as objects for consumption.

Governments ought not to promote but should nevertheless allow the production and distribution of pornography for those who want it. And at the same time, in cases where people prefer to avoid it, governments ought to protect people from exposure to pornography.

Recent developments in technology and powerful economic forces are factors in the increased availability of pornography. Any hope of eliminating porn or drastically restricting access to it are unrealistic. The best plan in these circumstances is educating all citizens about the nature of pornography, the reasons for its appeal and the dangers of its use.