Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site dciem.UUCP
Path: utzoo!dciem!mmt
From: mmt@dciem.UUCP (Martin Taylor)
Newsgroups: net.legal,net.women
Subject: Re: Anti-porn ordinance
Message-ID: <1317@dciem.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 31-Dec-84 14:38:37 EST
Article-I.D.: dciem.1317
Posted: Mon Dec 31 14:38:37 1984
Date-Received: Mon, 31-Dec-84 16:16:17 EST
References: <249@ahuta.UUCP> <894@dual.UUCP> 
Reply-To: mmt@dciem.UUCP (Martin Taylor)
Organization: D.C.I.E.M., Toronto, Canada
Lines: 48
Summary: 

In article  west@utcsrgv.UUCP (Thomas L. West) writes:


>  Well, I would claim that men and women used in [blue] movies and such ARE being
>degraded.  I don't support the ordinance, but I claim that pornography, because
>of how it views humans in general, degrades the person who appears in it and
>human beings in general.  And that is *irrespective* of the willingness of the
>participants to degrade themselves.
>  I, for one, appreciate the fact that in Canada we are subjected to far less
>of this sort of stuff.  I believe we are better for it, despite the fact that
>some people are deprived of the chance to drool over such material.  The harm
>that this stuff causes in the way it warps the views of people on the opposite
>sex is far greater than the harm caused by loss of the individual's ability
>to buy such material.  However, I do NOT support the ordinance for the 
>fairly obvious reasons of its sexist leanings and its ability to influence
>far more than was ever intended.
>
>   Tom West

That's a load of bull (sexist comment!).  Why should people depicted
making love be degrading themselves when people depicted fistfighting
are not?  What is worse about sexual relations than knife fighting?
Surely the depiction of love and eroticism is way better than the
degrading sight of someone pitching a commercial for overpriced
furniture?

I have never understood where this notion come from, that pornography
is degrading or damaging to women.  It takes two to tango, doesn't it?
From the comments I have read, if the woman is shown taking the initiative,
she is "showing that women are easy."  If the man takes the initiative,
he is "showing women are there to be subjugated (or raped)."

If violence and sex are becoming intertwined in *N. American* pornography,
could it possibly be because of the repression (suppression?) that delivers
it into the hands of the underworld?  Could it be because N. American
culture (as seen in popular films and highly rated TV) is becoming
obscenely violent, and that violence spills over into pornography as well?

Ontario is probably the most puritan jurisdiction outside the Moslem
world.  It isn't necessarily the best in which to be a woman.  Compare
the rights, both legal and socially taken-for-granted, of women in
Ontario with those of Danish or Dutch women (where pornography is either
legal or tolerated).  I doubt you would find Ontario to show up very well.
-- 

Martin Taylor
{allegra,linus,ihnp4,floyd,ubc-vision}!utzoo!dciem!mmt
{uw-beaver,qucis,watmath}!utcsrgv!dciem!mmt