7 March 2017
Sex isn’t Natural: A Deeper Look into Society’s Disgust
“Porn is in the eye of the beholder.”
Unlike the majority of species infesting this world, sex serves more than just reproductive significance in human life; it serves as a means of pleasure, which gives way to wet and wild fantasies. These fantasies have evolved into something greater than just ideals in a drooling teen’s brain—they now have snow-balled into whole communities. Even Americans have found homes in these crazy, obscene communities to worship the genitals God placed snugly in between our thighs. The BDSM community (Bondage and Discipline, Dominance and Submission, Sadism and Masochism) are widely known and have many members. They are communities that embrace pain and the dominant and submissive relationships sexual partners share. It may be shocking for some to realize a large part of this community contains women consenting to this sexual conduct, and a large portion of the viewers are also women. This huge concept is that is overlooked about pornography and can even extend to the understanding of intersectional feminism.
Yet, while dissecting these pieces one must keep in mind the different time period and how it relates to porn and feminism. Susan Jacoby, author of “First Amendment Junkie,” and Susan Brownmiller, author of “Put Pornography back in the Closet,” share similar ideals in their pieces, although it is slight. Both of these authors proclaim to be feminist advocating for feminists everywhere in concerns with the justification of porn: Jacoby is all for it while Brownmiller wants none of it. Yet, both women make a point to include how the first amendment plays a huge role in determining whether pornography should be accepted as free speech or not.
Jacoby expresses in her article that she is a believer in the “absolute interpretation of the first amendment,” (Jacoby) although, she fails to escribe what exactly that is. While trying to pinpoint what an “absolute interpretation” might be, author Bill Frank described in his article “The 1st Amendment is Not Absolute,” that, “with regards to the First Amendment is that a strict, literal interpretation of each right is not necessarily accurate” (Frank). This means that the first amendment can be challenged, which it often is, and that is what fuels this kind of conversation.
Brownmiller uses the first amendment in an entirely different way; she believes porn industries misuse the first amendment by displaying mutilated women. Brownmiller uses the example of Hollywood 10 claiming the defense of the first amendment as correct use, and also the protection the American Civil Liberties Union protecting the American Nazi Party under the first amendment is also justifiable. Brownmiller defends her point by adding the first amendment’s, “high purpose is the protection of unpopular ideas and political dissent” (Brownmiller). She then follows that up...