kstevens@latour.DEC (Ken Stevens 297-5342) (11/19/85)
I thought our ordinance writers or whoever does such things have prohressed farther than this... Apparently men's pictures in similar poses aren't considered pornographic... The following is a definition of pornography taken from a proposed anti-pornography ordinance (see the article titled "Re: At Last: Sojourner on Dworkin-MacKinnon" in net.women for more details): > > "Pornography is the graphic sexually explicit subordination > of women through pictures and/or words that also includes one or > (i) women are presented dehumanized as > sexual objects, things, or commodities; or > (ii) women are > presented as sexual objects who enjoy pain or humiliation; or > (iii) women are presented as sexual objects who experience sexual > pleasure in being raped; or > (iv) women are presented as sexual objects tied up or cut > up or mutilated or bruised or physically hurt; or > (v) women are presented in postures of sexual submis- > sion, servility, or display; or > (vi) women's body parts-- > including but not limited to vagina, breasts, or buttocks--are > exhibited such that women are reduced to those parts; or > (vii) women are presented as whores by nature; or > (viii) women are > presented as being penetrated by objects or animals; or > (ix) women are presented in scenarios of degradation, injury, > torture, shown as filthy or inferior, bleeding, bruised or hurt in > a context that makes these conditions sexual.
weltyrp@rpics.UUCP (Richard Welty) (11/26/85)
> I thought our ordinance writers or whoever does such things have prohressed > farther than this... Apparently men's pictures in similar poses aren't > considered pornographic... > > > > > > The following is a definition of pornography taken from a proposed > anti-pornography ordinance (see the article titled "Re: At Last: Sojourner > on Dworkin-MacKinnon" in net.women for more details): > > > > "Pornography is the graphic sexually explicit subordination > > of women through pictures and/or words that also includes one or > > (i) women are presented dehumanized as > > sexual objects, things, or commodities; or > ... many definitions ... > > (vii) women are presented as whores by nature; or > > (viii) women are > > presented as being penetrated by objects or animals; or > > (ix) women are presented in scenarios of degradation, injury, > > torture, shown as filthy or inferior, bleeding, bruised or hurt in > > a context that makes these conditions sexual. Out of curiosity, does valid journalistic photography come under this proposed ordinance? -- Rich Welty "P. D. Q.'s early infancy ended with a striking decision; at the age of three, P. D. Q. Bach decided to give up music" - Prof. Peter Schickele, from "The Definitive Biography of P. D. Q. Bach" CSNet: weltyrp@rpics ArpaNet: weltyrp.rpics@csnet-relay UUCP: seismo!rpics!weltyrp
chrise@ihlpl.UUCP (Chris Edmonds) (11/27/85)
> on Dworkin-MacKinnon" in net.women for more details): ^^^^^ > > of women through pictures and/or words that also includes one or ^^^^^ > > (i) women are presented dehumanized as ^^^^^ > > (ii) women are ^^^^^ > > (iii) women are presented as sexual objects who experience sexual ^^^^^ > > (iv) women are presented as sexual objects tied up or cut ^^^^^ > > (v) women are presented in postures of sexual submis- ^^^^^ > > (vi) women's body parts-- ^^^^^ > > exhibited such that women are reduced to those parts; or ^^^^^ > > (vii) women are presented as whores by nature; or ^^^^^ > > (viii) women are ^^^^^ > > (ix) women are presented in scenarios of degradation, injury, ^^^^^ There is something wrong when a definition of pornography references itself ONLY to women. I am opposed to any legislation that does not provide equal protection to all races, age groups, sexes, etc, etc. DON'T send flames about... 1. Most pornography is of women (I agree) 2. Most victims are women (I agree) 3. I must be in favor of porn (I'm not) 4. Or any other irrelevancies (I probably agree with you) Chris Edmonds @AT&T Something-or-Other, Naperville, IL, ...ihnp4!ihlpl!chrise