Retro Raunch Revisit

PORNOGRAPHY (with its high cost in the eyes of those who would dictate morality) has its arguments going back to mankind's best efforts to tell stories about sexual behaviour in words & pictures. For decades, the American debate revolved mainly around the 1st Amendment championing personal right to access -- free expression & non-censorship vs. harmful material hiding behind the flag. The sexual revolution of the 1960's led to a proliferation of visually/verbally explicit material a lot more graphic than in times past. In 1970, a federal commission on obscenity & pornography had concluded that obscene materials were NOT a factor in sex crimes (inspite of the subject presentation said to be getting worse) and as a result, the availability of x-rated product exploded. The 70's & 80's saw a huge hardcore eruption in the porn market with a main flow in the rough areas of bondage, kidnap & rape content. As the industry grew, advances in technology made it much easier to see it with the estimation of a million homes having cable/satellite channels providing sex programming, and adult videotapes grossing $7 billion. The world's oldest business would swell & expand to become the biggest due to a mushrooming home market. Anti-porn advocates would denounce what they felt was all-out illegal operation, and predict tremendous efforts to wipe out what they called a serious problem of filth. Little could they imagine what a future-flooded landscape would resemble with the internet & social media arena... In 1973, the US Supreme Court told the country that communities were to set their own standards to what was deemed lewd, indecent & objectionable in the palette offering of art/language, but even within these communities, few people agreed. One community in Mississippi banned all x-rated movies from local video stores and pulled all skin mags from magazine racks across town, with one man even equating violence by saying "don't aim your pornography at me if you don't want me to aim my .45 at you." In crackdowns on the sale of porn, prosecutors were faced with hung juries, and regardless what the laws, people would continue to purchase anyway. Profitable consumerism would further emotionally charge the issue but no one initially thought of it in specifically avowed feminist terms until the 70's when advocates Andrea Dworkin & Catherine MacKinnon of the women's movement brought their radicalized form of protest to American life, calling porn a type of sexual terrorism and sexual discrimination making it a civil rights matter. They stated porn was both designed to keep females in a 2nd class position of citizenship, and had co-relation in sex crimes against women & children. The startling claim caused many people to re-examine porn. With surprising results, the porn-violence argument struck responsive chords and changed the nature of the debate almost overnight as comparisons/presentations cited many a shocking example of abuse, violation, mutilation, torture, BDSM brutalization & dehumanization, and some sensationalist accusations of snuff.

Porn was said to actually cause men to be both more aggressive towards the opposite sex, and believe women provoked & even enjoyed rape directly out of fantasizing. Former prostitutes/strippers in recounting horror stories of johns/patrons blamed porn while adult film actresses blamed individuals in society and NOT their own profession thus saying they allowed men to release sexual desire/frustration in the movies and therefore being less chance of them physically acting out via sexual assault. In 1983, Minneapolis under Dworkin & MacKinnon's definition of porn became the first city to curb porn through civil rights law by a vote of 7-6. The new law allowed for women to hold pornographers responsible for injury and sue as a result of coercion into the line of work, victimized suffering, and physical attack because of it. The city's mayor vetoed the legislation however under 1st Amendment grounds. A similar law passed in Indianapolis 2yrs later only to be struck down by the Supreme Court. Critics argued that the ordinances were so broadly worded that almost anything could be censored on a civil rights basis. Such a precedent came to be seen as more frightening that the porn itself. Dworkin & MacKinnon responded saying porn is not an idea or thought but an action carried out first. They denied restriction/censorship was their ultimate goal but rather their aim to disclose what happens to women by allowing those who've been harmed to file lawsuits.In 1986, the Federal Commission on Obscenity & Pornography overturned its previous 1970 decision by now saying there was relationship between violence & porn, and in some cases from non-violent porn that could still trigger trauma & incite pain. Detractors argued this conclusion was pre-drawn and pandering to anti-porn crusaders. Some experts contended that exposure to violent porn affected male attitudes though not necessarily male activity. In the distinguishment between fantasy & reality, by condemning porn, Dworkin & MacKinnon ironically allied themselves with Conservatives who staunchly opposed the Equal Rights Amendment and abortion -- 2 cornerstones of the feminist platform that fully contravened the duo's stance. As far as the women were concerned, they welcomed fellow anti-porn support from wherever and didn't seem too bothered with negative contrasts or contradictions. Nearly 50yrs after both women began their drive (Dworkin died in Apr 2005), their campaign for decades showed no signs of waning and in claiming their cause was to help women, many who rejected their arguments felt they actually undermined women's gains because anti-porn legislation appeared to suggest females couldn't stand up for themselves, and that protectionism was demeaning, condescending & patronizing. In a more laughable sense, the traditionalist groups calling for the banning of XXX-fare have done so complaining that porn has flourished because men got angry at women for being uplifted through social change which created a backlash that vented itself in hyper chauvinism & spousal abuse. As the 20th Century drew to a close, society's attitudes on porn continued to to be at odds with heightened conflict over the debate on its effect of connective violence and unresolved narrative due to no clear consensus on even proper definition.