# Can text-only be legally obscene? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 20, 2008, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-text-only-be-legally-obscene/450016 "2008-05-20T20:16:38Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2008, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-text-only-be-legally-obscene/450016/1 "2008-05-20T20:16:38Z")
Karen Fletcher has decided to forgo being a test case for the First Amendment, and will plead guilty to six counts of distributing obscenity online; the obscenity in question was fictional stories, text only, published on a members-only Web site she ran. Before now, the government has never, so far as I can find, won a criminal conviction on text-only obscenity. Ms. Fletcher claims to suffer from agoraphobia, and that a trial would be impossible for her to endure. The terms of her guilty plea include an agreement for home detention in lieu of prison. I’m not sure I am comfortable with the possibility of a conviction for obscenity on text-only stories. ---
**Author:** ![Indistinguishable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/90ced4/32.png) [@Indistinguishable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Indistinguishable)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2008, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-text-only-be-legally-obscene/450016/2 "2008-05-20T20:19:36Z")
I’m not particularly comfortable with convictions for obscenity in general, but I would’ve imagined the law drew no particular explicit distinction between text and other media, no? One may arise implicitly, I suppose, from appeal to community standards and such things, if one believes that community standards are such that text is incapable of being patently offensive in the same way other media can be, or whatever it is that community standards are appealed to for, but this would not be intrinsic in the law, and I would find it a dubious proposition at any rate. ---
**Author:** ![LilShieste](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/9f8e36/32.png) [@LilShieste](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LilShieste)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2008, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-text-only-be-legally-obscene/450016/3 "2008-05-20T20:24:03Z")
For those of us not familiar with what is meant by “distributing obscenity”, could someone clarify? (Mainly, I’m wondering why something like this constitutes distributing obscenity, if skin mags don’t.) Offhand, I’m inclined to agree with the OP. (But depending on the details of these laws, it might just be because I think the laws are ridiculous.) ---
**Author:** ![WF\_Tomba](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/d9b06d/32.png) [@WF\_Tomba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WF_Tomba)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2008, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-text-only-be-legally-obscene/450016/4 "2008-05-20T20:25:37Z")
I’m not comfortable with the idea either. I thought this was settled with _Lady Chatterley’s Lover_ or something. I read an entire book about the court cases that basically put an end to the prosecution of book publishers for obscenity. It was called _The End of Obscenity_. Unfortunately I can’t remember much about it! ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2008, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-text-only-be-legally-obscene/450016/5 "2008-05-20T20:33:01Z")
[QUOTE=LilShieste] For those of us not familiar with what is meant by “distributing obscenity”, could someone clarify? (Mainly, I’m wondering why something like this constitutes distributing obscenity, if skin mags don’t.) Offhand, I’m inclined to agree with the OP. (But depending on the details of these laws, it might just be because I think the laws are ridiculous.) [/QUOTE] Here’s an article from when she was charged: [http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/news.aspx?id=17458](http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/news.aspx?id=17458) > [@](#): > > Fletcher’s site contained excerpts of stories about child sex, torture and murder that were available to all visitors, prosecutors said. Users could pay a fee to read whole stories, such as one that described the torture and sexual molestation of a 2-year-old, prosecutors said. > > Fletcher was charged with one count for each of six stories that involved the kidnapping, torture, sexual molestation and murder of children 9 years and younger. ---
**Author:** ![WF\_Tomba](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/d9b06d/32.png) [@WF\_Tomba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WF_Tomba)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2008, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-text-only-be-legally-obscene/450016/6 "2008-05-20T20:44:09Z")
Well, I don’t think I’d want to read her stories, but I’ll defend her right to distribute them. If you can’t publish something just because it’s disturbing and gross, your right to publish anything depends on an unknown person’s tender sensibilities. Imagine if posters to this MB had to adhere to the “community standards” of all the communities where the board is available. Anybody remember that thread where a poster detailed his attempts to measure the blood volume of his erection by dunking his dick in a cup of water? I bet that violated someone’s community standards. ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2008, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-text-only-be-legally-obscene/450016/7 "2008-05-20T20:48:05Z")
[QUOTE=Bricker] Karen Fletcher has decided to forgo being a test case for the First Amendment, and will plead guilty to six counts of distributing obscenity online; the obscenity in question was fictional stories, text only, published on a members-only Web site she ran. Before now, the government has never, so far as I can find, won a criminal conviction on text-only obscenity. Ms. Fletcher claims to suffer from agoraphobia, and that a trial would be impossible for her to endure. The terms of her guilty plea include an agreement for home detention in lieu of prison. I’m not sure I am comfortable with the possibility of a conviction for obscenity on text-only stories. [/QUOTE] Suppose a similar case comes up in the future but _does_ go to trial, and on up to the Supreme Court, and the SC overturns the conviction in some way that implies it shouldn’t have been brought up for prosecution? Will this have any legal implications for Fletcher herself? ---
**Author:** ![Eben](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/a8b319/32.png) [@Eben](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eben)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2008, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-text-only-be-legally-obscene/450016/8 "2008-05-20T20:49:42Z")
First of all I’m extremely disgusted by what she was doing. But second I’ve gotta wonder if anyone involved in the prosecution has ever heard of fan fic. Also, what about The Chocolate War they made me read in high school? There was underage sex and multiple beatings and emotional abuse aplenty in that. Granted it wasn’t as far underage, but would an internet posting of the text from it be prosecutable? ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2008, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-text-only-be-legally-obscene/450016/9 "2008-05-20T20:55:55Z")
[QUOTE=Eben] First of all I’m extremely disgusted by what she was doing. But second I’ve gotta wonder if anyone involved in the prosecution has ever heard of fan fic. Also, what about The Chocolate War they made me read in high school? There was underage sex and multiple beatings and emotional abuse aplenty in that. Granted it wasn’t as far underage, but would an internet posting of the text from it be prosecutable? [/QUOTE] I haven’t heard of The Chocolate War. But are these activities depicted in order to turn people on? (I _think_ that’s what is meant by the legal phraseology “appealing to the prurient interest.”) -FrL- ---
**Author:** ![alphaboi867](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alphaboi867/32/3898_2.png) [@alphaboi867](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alphaboi867)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2008, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-text-only-be-legally-obscene/450016/10 "2008-05-20T22:38:08Z")
[QUOTE=Frylock] Suppose a similar case comes up in the future but _does_ go to trial, and on up to the Supreme Court, and the SC overturns the conviction in some way that implies it shouldn’t have been brought up for prosecution? Will this have any legal implications for Fletcher herself? [/QUOTE] She’s allowed to vote and own firearms again? ---
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2008, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-text-only-be-legally-obscene/450016/11 "2008-05-20T23:32:34Z")
[QUOTE=Bricker] Karen Fletcher has decided to forgo being a test case for the First Amendment, and will plead guilty to six counts of distributing obscenity online; the obscenity in question was fictional stories, text only, published on a members-only Web site she ran. Before now, the government has never, so far as I can find, won a criminal conviction on text-only obscenity. Ms. Fletcher claims to suffer from agoraphobia, and that a trial would be impossible for her to endure. The terms of her guilty plea include an agreement for home detention in lieu of prison. I’m not sure I am comfortable with the possibility of a conviction for obscenity on text-only stories. [/QUOTE] Might help if you started out with restating the current legal definition of “obscene” material. Then we could go from there with interpretation. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Antinor01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecae2f/32.png) [@Antinor01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Antinor01)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2008, 11:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-text-only-be-legally-obscene/450016/12 "2008-05-20T23:35:01Z")
[QUOTE=DSYoungEsq] Might help if you started out with restating the current legal definition of “obscene” material. Then we could go from there with interpretation. 🙂 [/QUOTE] The last one I heard was ‘I know it when I see it.’ I don’t know if they’ve gotten any more precise. ---
**Author:** ![iamthewalrus\_3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/258eb7/32.png) [@iamthewalrus\_3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iamthewalrus_3)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2008, 11:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-text-only-be-legally-obscene/450016/13 "2008-05-20T23:49:26Z")
According to Wikipedia, the current test for Constitutional obscenity is the [Miller Test](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller_Test), which has three parts: > [@](#): > > # Whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest, > > # Whether the work depicts/describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct or excretory functions[2] specifically defined by applicable state law, > > # Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value. I don’t see much here that would apply differently to one form of media than another. It’s quite clear on the first point that there are text works that apply primarily to prurient interest. The third point is equally applicable to any medium. The only part of the test that seems like it could be specific to medium is the second prong. It could be argued that a photograph, sound recording, or video depiction of something is more capable of being “patently offensive” because it has a greater or more immediate impact on the senses. I don’t necessarily disagree with that argument, but I do think that it’s difficult to make any argument at all in such a hazy framework. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2008, 1:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-text-only-be-legally-obscene/450016/14 "2008-05-21T01:03:08Z")
[QUOTE=Frylock] Suppose a similar case comes up in the future but _does_ go to trial, and on up to the Supreme Court, and the SC overturns the conviction in some way that implies it shouldn’t have been brought up for prosecution? Will this have any legal implications for Fletcher herself? [/QUOTE] It won’t happen automatically, but ifd she wishes, she can apply to have the conviction expunged. ---
**Author:** ![LilShieste](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/9f8e36/32.png) [@LilShieste](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LilShieste)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2008, 1:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-text-only-be-legally-obscene/450016/15 "2008-05-21T01:27:36Z")
Thanks for the link, **Captain Amazing**. This whole concept of “distributing obscenity” sounds so ambiguous and open-ended, I don’t see how it _couldn’t_ include text-only incarnations. It just seems like a big middle finger to the idea of free speech. Wow. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2008, 1:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-text-only-be-legally-obscene/450016/16 "2008-05-21T01:41:52Z")
I think the more important question here is, “Is house arrest really punishment for an agoraphobic?” ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2008, 1:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-text-only-be-legally-obscene/450016/17 "2008-05-21T01:42:45Z")
I’m just glad they never saw the drawings of giant cocks and pussies I drew in the seventh grade. ---
**Author:** ![LilShieste](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/9f8e36/32.png) [@LilShieste](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LilShieste)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2008, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-text-only-be-legally-obscene/450016/18 "2008-05-21T01:52:24Z")
[QUOTE=Fear Itself] I’m just glad they never saw the drawings of giant cocks and pussies I drew in the seventh grade. [/QUOTE] Maybe it would have only been a problem if you gave/sold them away? (On a side note: your post reminded of some moments in the movie _Superbad_.) ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2008, 2:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-text-only-be-legally-obscene/450016/19 "2008-05-21T02:16:45Z")
[QUOTE=LilShieste] Maybe it would have only been a problem if you gave/sold them away? [/QUOTE] 5¢ for a Cock-and-Balls, 10¢ for a Wide-Open-Beaver. ---
**Author:** ![Two\_and\_a\_Half\_Inches\_of\_Fun](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ea666f/32.png) [@Two\_and\_a\_Half\_Inches\_of\_Fun](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Two_and_a_Half_Inches_of_Fun)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2008, 2:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-text-only-be-legally-obscene/450016/20 "2008-05-21T02:59:46Z")
[QUOTE=Bricker] It won’t happen automatically, but ifd she wishes, she can apply to have the conviction expunged. [/QUOTE] I thought when people plead guilty they had to forgo their right to future legal proceedings (appeals and such). Can she really get the conviction expunged? [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-text-only-be-legally-obscene/450016.md?page=2)