Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site watmath.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!twltims
From: twltims@watmath.UUCP (Tracy Tims)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: More Real Dirt on Porn
Message-ID: <7183@watmath.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 6-Mar-84 14:39:20 EST
Article-I.D.: watmath.7183
Posted: Tue Mar  6 14:39:20 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 7-Mar-84 07:40:53 EST
References: <2520@ncsu.UUCP>
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 50

	Last night I watched a movie on network TV.  It seemed to convey the
	message that "it's OK to hit your (pregnant) wife,  if you are good in
	bed" and "it's OK to rape your sister-in-law (while your wife is in the
	maternity ward) if she is already unbalanced so that no one will believe
	her when she complains."  I mean,  the message is pretty clear; brutish
	Stanley goes back to life as usual with Stella and the new baby,  while
	delicate, sensitive Blanche gets carted off to the looney bin.
	Although the movie is not "explicit",  the rape and wife-beating are
	unmistakable.  It would seem to be a definite affront to women and a 
	threat to society.  And yet...

Did you really understand ``A Streetcar Named Desire'' to be advocating rape
and wife beating or are you saying that you did as a debating technique?  I
found the movie to portray an extremely undesireable hellhole of violence and
insanity.

	I would argue that "A Streetcar Named Desire" is a classic of the
	theater, and any censorship of it would be a great loss.  Any
	similar artistic effort should also be taken seriously,  even though it
	falls short of success.  There is no workable method of distinguishing
	serious but flawed movies from successful exploitation movies.  The
	nauseating Gor books might be a serious science fiction portrayal of
	the way human society could have gone, and "Debbie Does Dallas" is the
	fable of some enterprising young cheerleaders who are led astray by
	our corrupt capitalistic system.  Who can tell?

	No set of rigid rules can tell porn from serious movies,  and any system
	based on opinion is subject to abuse from all sides.
	-- 

	_Doctor_                           Jon Mauney,    mcnc!ncsu!mauney
	\__Mu__/                           North Carolina State University

Remember, I don't like the word ``pornography'' on the basis that it obscures
the real issues.  If there are movies that have an undesireable effect on
society (and I defined that to mean ``movies that would increase the accept-
ability of violent actions in society, generally through advocating
violent acts'') then I argue that these movies should be banned.  Note that
by definition we have a tool for distinguishing them from artistic movies.
Yes, it is possible to create a seemingly desirable film that REALLY DOES
increase the acceptance of violence in society.  I would think that even
though the film was ``artistic'' it would be undesirable because of it's
effect.

I am not suggesting rules to distinguish ``porn'' from serious movies.  I am
suggesting distinguishing between movies with negative social value from
those that aren't terribly damaging.

	Tracy Tims	{linus,allegra,decvax,utcsrgv}!watmath!twltims
			The University of Waterloo, 519-885-1211 x2730