[net.legal] Porn: Censorship, past history and hysteria

rb@cci632.UUCP (Rex Ballard) (10/07/86)

>Investigate is nice harmless word, but you *seem* to want to investigate this
>possibility by removing an *unspecified* range of materials from everyone's
>accessibility.

>Your reference here seems to be to pedophilia, but you have 
>said similar things about violent porn, which you shade together sometimes 
>with so-called "psychologically violent" porn, which may include Playboy, but
>you call us overreacting if we mention Playboy, 'cause the courts have
>already ruled it OK... can you begin to see that it might be your responsibility
>that we are (I am) a little confused about just what you are arguing for????

This is a common censorship tactic, though Mark may not be aware he is using
it.  "Child buggering" is almost universally not accepted.  By creating the
image of exposing a 5-year old to sexual abuse, or to porn, the basis for
a "we need something" opinion is formed.  By creating the image of a violent
physically abusive rape being glamourized, filmed, or caused by some form
of porn, the basis of another "let's do something" opinion is formed.

There are hundreds of cases of child molesting, and equally numerable
cases of physically abusive rape.  It is so easy to get arguments for
either more or less censorship.  It still gets good reviews on the
road though.

Then comes the mandate to "do something" among voters, politicians, and
even scientists.  In the process of deciding "what to do", the decision
makers get broader and broader in their definition of "Children", "violence",
and "Pornography".  Eventually, a "child" becomes anyone under the age of 21
(because some local governments have legally defined them as such), "violence"
becomes any form of sexually explicit depiction, and pornography becomes 
any form of nudity, sexually suggestive attire, or activity not encountered
in normal daily life (This is why a shoestring bikini is rated "G", but
a 4 garter full length corset, seamed stockings and panties is rated "R",
or even "X").

This is the second time I have lived through the "porn crackdown".  In the
first one, people were incensed that in "I am curious yellow" 20 seconds
of "Actual SEX" was shown.  To heighten the drama, fundamentalists were
taking their 5 year old kids to see it, claiming ignorance.

The famous quote of the day from ratings/censorship advocates was something
like "Parents send their kids to see 'Who's Afraid of Virginia Wolf' thinking
its a nature show", indeed, they had documented evidence of several hundred
cases of this.  The whole thing was orchestated by one of the big-time
evangelists of the day, like Billy Graham or Oral Roberts or someone
like that.

The end result.  Virginia Wolf is a Shakespearean classic compared to the
language and situations depicted in the avarage "PG" rated movies.  "G"
rated movies are mostly re-releases of old Disney films.  If there is
any "Actual Sex", the film is automatically rated X.  The average "XXX"
rated film (a fictitious rating by the way), now has a whole 20 seconds
of coherant dialogue, a whole 3 minutes where the performers aren't
totally naked, and over twenty minutes of even more explicit "close-ups"
and "zoom-ins" than the scene that caused the censorship movement in
the first place.

About the only facet that still stands today, was the contriversy over
"Myra Breckenridge", the story of a transexual's transition from male
to female, including scenes of the male attractively cross-dressed.
Did you know that "Uncle Miltie" was taken off the air because of
this?  Transexualism and transvestite activities are still the
"ultimate taboo" in american televison, film and "general consumption
print".  According to one rumor, the North Carolina "porn movement" was
prompted by parents seeing Boy George on MTV!!

Again, the ugly head of censorship, with it's threat of even more
and harsher restricitons, raises it's ugly head.  The targets
haven't changed that much.  The tactics haven't either.  The
result, unfortunately, will probably be as bad, or worse this
time, as they were the last time.

Did you know that Ben Franklin, Paul Revere, and several other presses
sympathetic to the Independence movement were shut down on the basis
of "pornography"?  In particular, dirty limericks about loyalists and
King George.

>>	from Mole End			Mark Terribile
>						- Phil
	Rex B.