# Political Compass #58: Pornography should be legal. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 12, 2005, 8:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-58-pornography-should-be-legal/312148 "2005-07-12T08:13:05Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2005, 1:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-58-pornography-should-be-legal/312148/61 "2005-07-14T13:31:15Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > However, in a further effort to interrupt the chorus of agreement, let me pose a question - > > Joe Sleazeball produces a porno video. … Would the SDMB support the distribution of such a video? > > Regards, > Shodan Depends on what the meaning of “support” is. Would I contribute money to Joe Sleazeballs’ video production? No. Would I buy such a video? No. Do I think such a video should be censored? No. I’ll grant you it’s a nasty peice of work, but it’s consensual, and it’s fiction, so I give it a pass. I’ve got some questions for you, Shodan: Do you advocate the censorship of all the “barely legal” teen porn sites that infest the Internet? Shodan? Do you advocate the censorship of films that have a kidnapping theme in which the victim is “turned” to her accusers’ POV (like the Patty Hearst story). Would you advocate the censorship of a Patty Hearst-oid film that included explicit images of her being raped? Seems to me you want us to draw some lines, it’s only fair that you do, too. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2005, 1:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-58-pornography-should-be-legal/312148/62 "2005-07-14T13:34:59Z")
BTW, I also have no issue with empowering parents to control their children’s ability to access porn, via laws that make it illegal to sell porn to minors. But I’d probably use something like the Japanese system, which is slightly more lenient than the American system, which seems to be “all Disney” on one side of the line and "hardcore porn’ on the other. I have trouble with the porno shop restrictions because I know of communities which have attempted to use just such laws to restrict porn shop locations so strictly that they could not legally be located anywhere in the community. ---
**Author:** ![Metacom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecae2f/32.png) [@Metacom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Metacom)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2005, 1:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-58-pornography-should-be-legal/312148/63 "2005-07-14T13:39:29Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Would the SDMB support the distribution of such a video? I’d support his _right_ to distribute such a video, but I wouldn’t support the video itself, but buying it or otherwise supporting its production. ---
**Author:** ![Metacom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecae2f/32.png) [@Metacom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Metacom)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2005, 1:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-58-pornography-should-be-legal/312148/64 "2005-07-14T13:40:43Z")
Er, “by buying” not “but buying”. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2005, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-58-pornography-should-be-legal/312148/65 "2005-07-14T15:19:04Z")
By “support”, I meant “not advocate the censorship of”, in the sense of the OP. Nobody should be forced or expected to buy something they don’t want, obviously. > [@Evil Captor](#): > > I’ve got some questions for you, Shodan: > > Do you advocate the censorship of all the “barely legal” teen porn sites that infest the Internet? I don’t know - I’ve made it a point not to find out what they might be like, so I don’t have any information on which to base an opinion. > [@Evil Captor](#): > > Shodan? Do you advocate the censorship of films that have a kidnapping theme in which the victim is “turned” to her accusers’ POV (like the Patty Hearst story). Would you advocate the censorship of a Patty Hearst-oid film that included explicit images of her being raped? > > Seems to me you want us to draw some lines, it’s only fair that you do, too. That’s fair. It has to do with my definition of “pornography that should be banned”. The mere depiction of sexual behavior, even explicit, I don’t worry about. As long as I (and others) are able to exclude such things from our attention and from the experience of our children, I am content to live and let live. I object very strongly indeed to those assholes who fill up my inbox with spam about women and donkeys and herbals that will increase the size of my erection or the volume of my ejaculate :rolleyes:, but that is not measurably worse than the Vicodin and low mortgage offers that I also delete without reading. My definition of “poronography that should be banned” is: > [@](#): > > The sympathetic and explicit depiction of sexual behavior that is either unconsented, or is an expression of anger. “Sympathetic” in this case means that the average person could reasonably conclude that the producer of the porn was presenting the behavior in question as something to be approved of or emulated. I have no problem with using a jury of your fellow citizens as a way of finding out what the average person thinks a given work is advocating. But the work has to be both explicit and sympathetic. Neutral presentations, such as academic studies of rape or whatever, are not bannable. Non-explicit stuff, crime reports or such, are also not covered. Sado-masochistic stuff, and rape or bondage, are. Obviously this is subject to many of the same drawbacks as current obscenity laws. “I know it when I see it” is just as subjective as my standard. Back to work for me. More later, if there is any interest. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2005, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-58-pornography-should-be-legal/312148/66 "2005-07-14T15:41:47Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > My definition of “poronography that should be banned” is: > > > [@](#): > > > > The sympathetic and explicit depiction of sexual behavior that is either unconsented, or is an expression of anger. > > “Sympathetic” in this case means that the average person could reasonably conclude that the producer of the porn was presenting the behavior in question as something to be approved of or emulated. So, you’d censor a film adaptation of “The Fountainhead” that contained the rape scene of Dominique by Roark? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2005, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-58-pornography-should-be-legal/312148/67 "2005-07-14T15:49:14Z")
How about “sympathetic” depictions of murder? Here’s a scenario for you. What if someone makes a movie about a man being stripped, bound brutalized and finally murdered in a hyper-realistic manner which includes extended scenes of beatings with whips, the graphic flaying of skin from the body, broken bones, and concludes with showing the man, now completely covered with blood and open cuts, being nailed alive to a piece of wood and then left to suffocate in agony- all for the entertainment of the audience. Let us also suppose that this entire pageant is depicted as a beautifully and even religiously significant event? What if the movie promotes a view that this torture/murder event was something that not only happened historically but that it was _necessary_ to the welfare of all mankind that it did happen? IOW, we would essentially have a sympathetic movie that essentially amounted to a simulated homoerotic snuff film? Should that movie be banned? If not, why not? ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2005, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-58-pornography-should-be-legal/312148/68 "2005-07-14T15:50:42Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > So, you’d censor a film adaptation of “The Fountainhead” that contained the rape scene of Dominique by Roark? I’d censor the film based on the fact that is the worst adaptation of a novel EVER. And that Gary Cooper, who I do like, gave a pathetic performance of the heroic Howard. Sorry for the digression,Mace, but I just couldn’t resist. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2005, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-58-pornography-should-be-legal/312148/69 "2005-07-14T15:51:12Z")
Oh…and FYI, the Bible contains sympathetic portrayals of rape. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2005, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-58-pornography-should-be-legal/312148/70 "2005-07-14T16:02:14Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > I’d censor the film based on the fact that is the worst adaptation of a novel EVER. And that Gary Cooper, who I do like, gave a pathetic performance of the heroic Howard. > > Sorry for the digression,Mace, but I just couldn’t resist. Yeah, bad, bad film Even worse than “The Passion of the Christ”, which I was very disappointed in. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2005, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-58-pornography-should-be-legal/312148/71 "2005-07-14T16:28:06Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > So, you’d censor a film adaptation of “The Fountainhead” that contained the rape scene of Dominique by Roark? It’s been a while since I read the book, but yes, I expect I would if it were explicit. > [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > How about “sympathetic” depictions of murder? That would be a bit of a hijack, I should think. We were talking about pornography, so unless _The Passion of the Christ_ contains explicit sex scenes, I would rather stick to the subject at hand. Haven’t seen the film myself. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2005, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-58-pornography-should-be-legal/312148/72 "2005-07-14T16:51:49Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > But the work has to be both explicit and sympathetic. Neutral presentations, such as academic studies of rape or whatever, are not bannable. Non-explicit stuff, crime reports or such, are also not covered. Sado-masochistic stuff, and rape or bondage, are. So it would be your position that bondage is by nature not consensual? And as for rape, what about all those sympathetic rape scenes in romance novels, in which the hero, overcome by the heroine’s heaving bosom, rips off her bodice and takes her by force. There’s quite a large subgenre of such novels that are very explicit, and in which the rape is presented sympathetically as something the hero does because he’s just overcome by the heroine’s beauty/charm/bosomniness. Gonna censor them? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2005, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-58-pornography-should-be-legal/312148/73 "2005-07-14T16:54:26Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > It’s been a while since I read the book, but yes, I expect I would if it were explicit. > > That would be a bit of a hijack, I should think. We were talking about pornography, so unless _The Passion of the Christ_ contains explicit sex scenes, I would rather stick to the subject at hand. > > Haven’t seen the film myself. > > Regards, > Shodan You can’t get off that easy. You can’t say that people should be prohibited from depicting one kind of criminal act in a “sympathetic” fashion without explaining why that other criminal acts should not also be prohibited. What is it worse to be sympathetic to rape than to torture or murder (and, ftr, I personally hate rape scenes in movies and will fastforward through them if I can. I also think sympathetic portrayals of rape are contemptible. From a moral perspective, I probably agree with you. I’m just asking what should make it different from a _legal_ perspective). ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2005, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-58-pornography-should-be-legal/312148/74 "2005-07-14T17:05:54Z")
> [@Evil Captor](#): > > So it would be your position that bondage is by nature not consensual? No, that it is an expression of anger. Which is why it is bannable even if consensual. > [@Evil Captor](#): > > And as for rape, what about all those sympathetic rape scenes in romance novels, in which the hero, overcome by the heroine’s heaving bosom, rips off her bodice and takes her by force. There’s quite a large subgenre of such novels that are very explicit, and in which the rape is presented sympathetically as something the hero does because he’s just overcome by the heroine’s beauty/charm/bosomniness. Gonna censor them? Yes. Actually, probably **especially** them, since they are (imo) far more offensive than mere graphic depictions of intercourse or nudity. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2005, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-58-pornography-should-be-legal/312148/75 "2005-07-14T17:11:44Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > You can’t get off that easy. If you have anything to add to the discussion of the topic, perhaps you could add it before you attempt a hijack? Thanks in advance. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2005, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-58-pornography-should-be-legal/312148/76 "2005-07-14T17:15:08Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > If you have anything to add to the discussion of the topic, perhaps you could add it before you attempt a hijack? Thanks in advance. > > Regards, > Shodan I’m not hijacking anything, I’m asking you to clarify your answer. And I already gave my own opinion on the OP upthread. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2005, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-58-pornography-should-be-legal/312148/77 "2005-07-14T17:31:49Z")
> [@continuity eror](#): > > This is an interesting aspect to the issue–what about photographs that were manipulated in Photoshop or other computer programs to make it look like people were having sex with animals/children? No original crime would have been committed, since the actors involved might be thousands of miles away from the animals or children they seem to be having sex with. It wouldn’t even have to hurt the reputation of a child model, because using technology we have now, we can create a totally random human face that doesn’t look like any specific person. You don’t even have to use technology; there are some artists who can create works that are totally photo-realistic. Would/should these pictures of illicit sex acts that never happened be protected? Excellent point. My take would be that if the recipient cannot tell whether the children or animals are real or not, then it is as repugnant as if it was the real thing. The existence of clever counterfeit porn makes it easier for distributors of the real thing, in which real people are victims, to claim ignorance. ---
**Author:** ![Dunderman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ecb155/32.png) [@Dunderman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dunderman)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2005, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-58-pornography-should-be-legal/312148/78 "2005-07-14T18:01:43Z")
**Priceguy** (-8.50/-5.33) doesn’t remember what he ticked and has no clue what he’d tick now, but he cannot bring himself to tick anything without a _dis_ in it. My opposition to pornography has nothing to do with moralism, purism, conservatism or anything of the sort. I have absolutely no hangups or reservations about sex. I’ve been to a swinger’s club, I’ve done S&M and bondage, I’ve done everything I’ve been physically, mentally and practically able to and I loved almost all of it. I also love watching pornography. Like most people, certainly most men, I get aroused by it. Mainstream pornography doesn’t inspire in me feelings of revulsion, or horror, or guilt. Finally, and most importantly, in a perfect world, I’d have absolutely no trouble with pornography. In a world where all participants were fully consensual and all viewers understood at a fundamental level that what they’re seeing is fiction, pornography would be great. Unfortunately, I don’t believe we live in that world now. First of all, I do not believe that all participants in the porn industry as it exists today are fully consensual. I trust nobody denies that a disproportionate amount of porn stars has a history of abuse. Correlation does not prove causation, of course, but there has to be _some_ reason why the abused are more likely to go into porn. The ardent feminist view is that an abused woman loses her self-esteem and believes she is good for nothing except being abused, so she gets herself a job where she keeps being abused. Whether I buy that explanation I don’t know, but at least I agree that many porn stars are there because they’ve been abused and I have to wonder if allowing such a person to work in porn helps her or hurts her. If it hurts her, she is indulging in self-damaging behaviour, much like a mentally disturbed person who cuts herself. We “rescue” the latter, but not the former. I cannot see the difference between them. In both cases, mental problems lead them to commit harmful acts. The other factor is the viewers. I would certainly not support the video **Shodan** describes. I would not support it even if all the “it’s real” myth were stripped away, and the woman appeared to be 35 instead of 14. I would not do that because I believe we are affected by watching such material. I have certainly noticed it in myself, and not just in such blatant cases as the one **Shodan** describes. I change. My tastes change, my attitudes change, and I have to make a conscious effort not to. My experiences with other people lead me to be fairly certain that many people don’t bother to make that conscious effort. Several comments by accused rapists and the like lead me to believe that many men have taken a large part of their worldview from porn, which in turn influences their actions. Whatever we may think of porn, I think we can all agree that it does not, generally, depict reality. There is also the issue of where porn is being sold and seen. No Jew, for example, would (or should have to) accept having to see a magazine at their local store with a picture of a Jew and the words “World’s biggest, most hooked nose!”, but women have to accept seeing magazines with women on them and the words “World’s biggest, roundest tits!”. Now, on to the legal question. Should porn be banned outright? I believe not. I don’t believe it would work, and I believe it would create a worse situation than what we have today. To be honest, I have no clue what to do about the problems I’ve described. That’s why I didn’t identify what I tick above. If I take the test again, I guess I’ll have to pick the “fork n the eye” option (they still have that one, right?) rather than pick Agree or Disagree. …donning asbestos suit… ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2005, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-58-pornography-should-be-legal/312148/79 "2005-07-14T18:47:19Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > If you have anything to add to the discussion of the topic, perhaps you could add it before you attempt a hijack? Thanks in advance. I agree with **Dio**. This isn’t a hijack, but a legitimate attempt to understand why you take the position you do. You’ve decided that certain acts are worthy of censorship. Yet other acts, equally heinous or even more so, you let slide. Tell us how and why you differentiate murder from rape, if in fact you do. I’m very curious to understand. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2005, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-58-pornography-should-be-legal/312148/80 "2005-07-14T19:08:49Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > I agree with **Dio**. This isn’t a hijack, but a legitimate attempt to understand why you take the position you do. _:shrugs:_ I disagree. It _is_ a hijack. We were talking about pornography. If the topic has been exhausted, oh well. Regards, Shodan [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-58-pornography-should-be-legal/312148.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/political-compass-58-pornography-should-be-legal/312148.md?page=5)