[soc.feminism] Dworkin questions

jet@karazm.math.uh.EDU ("J. Eric Townsend") (11/18/90)

In article <45691@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU> feit@acsu.buffalo.edu (Elissa Feit) writes:
>Re: The Amendment to Minneapolis's Civil rights law:
>(I quote from Dworkin's _Pornography_:)
>[definition deleted]

Dworkin defines pornography solely in terms of exploiting women. (12
mentions of women, no mention of men.)  Does she consider only that
which exploits women as harmfull to society?  Has she ever said
why she didn't include pornography that exploits men (or male
children)?

[I'm thinking of the text of the law that Dworkin drafted -- the last
sentence or so says, basically, that the pornography as just defined
(in terms of women) is still degrading when men, children, or
transexxuals are substituted.  I'm interpreting that as egalitarian --
is there a different interpretation of this?  --CLT]

I'm not ranking on her, I'm honestly curious.  Her work isn't that easy
to find, so I haven't read to much of it.  (However, a friend just scored
most of her works on interlibrary loan, so I might have a tough weekend
ahead of me soon.)


--
J. Eric Townsend     Internet: jet@uh.edu    Bitnet: jet@UHOU
Systems Manager - University of Houston Dept. of Mathematics - (713) 749-2120
EastEnders list: eastender@karazm.math.uh.edu
Skate UNIX(r)

gazit@cs.duke.EDU (Hillel Gazit) (11/19/90)

>[I'm thinking of the text of the law that Dworkin drafted -- the last
>sentence or so says, basically, that the pornography as just defined
>(in terms of women) is still degrading when men, children, or
>transexxuals are substituted.  I'm interpreting that as egalitarian --
>is there a different interpretation of this?  --CLT]

If it was egalitarian then the word "people" would be used instead of
"women" in the definition of porno, and the claim that "pornography is
a form of discrimination on the basis of sex would remain with no
support.  But claiming that in gay porno men are used instead of women
she defended her claim.

The Ordinance claimed only that porno "harms women", and never
mentioned that it may harm men.  By doing so it blocked men from suing
for damages.  That was important because:

1) Many of the feminist women-oriented erotic literature presents men
   in an unkind way.  That literature will go down the drain.

2) Dworkin's books could be banned because she presents men in a
   dehumanized way.  (And "as whores by nature"...)

I don't think that Dworkin cared too much about 1), but she had
no intention to let 2) to happen.

Hillel                                         gazit@cs.duke.edu

"I've always argued that there's an inverse correlation between a
country's degree of civilization and the restraints it put on its press."
   A New England voice from the back of the room cut in: "On *that*
argument, Paris is a more civilized place than Boston."
   "Precisely," answered Purvis.  For once, he waited for a reply.
   "O.K." said the New England voice mildly.  "I'm not arguing.
I just wanted to check."
                            -- ("Patent Pending", Arthur C. Clarke)