Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!ucbvax!spp
From: spp@ucbvax.ARPA (Stephen P Pope)
Newsgroups: net.women,net.politics
Subject: Re: A suggestion for a ground rule in any pornography debate
Message-ID: <10503@ucbvax.ARPA>
Date: Mon, 30-Sep-85 19:33:06 EDT
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.10503
Posted: Mon Sep 30 19:33:06 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 2-Oct-85 06:21:08 EDT
References: <5660@tekecs.UUCP> <1873@reed.UUCP> <10285@ucbvax.ARPA> <2265@mnetor.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: University of California at Berkeley
Lines: 79
Xref: watmath net.women:7574 net.politics:11268


> Sophie Quigley

> The point I was making (clearly I thought) was that there is not ONE
> feminist position on censorship of pornography.  What I've noticed
> from reading feminist litterature is that this issue is creating a
> split in the feminist community.  The next point I was making is that
> "the media" has been ignoring the voices of anti-censorship feminists.
> (I did say both of these things.  I don't know how much clearer I can
> make my point).  Therefore, all I was trying to say is that you shouldn't
> rely on the popular media to get a deep understanding on feminist ideas,
> just like you shouldn't rely on the popular media to get an understanding

Yes you stated these points clearly.  My own (limited by your 
standards) exposure to feminist writing on pornography hasn't
given me the impression that there is much PUBLISHED by
feminists who take the position that censorship is a far worse
evil than pornography.  Perhaps such views are expressed in
private forums.  If so it's time to give them more press.

>   All I would like is for anti-censorship people to say:
> "yes we realise that pornography hurts, but we really don't think that
> censorship is going to solve the problem" instead of "if pornography hurts
> you, it's because you are sexually repressed and you simply want to impose
> your prudishness on other people".  All I would like is some more compassion,

I happen to not believe that pornography hurts.  I allow that there
is a small fraction of society who feels harmed by it.  
My compassion extends to most such people, but I find some of
the pro-censorship attitudes repulsive, whatever their cause.

> >>And I think the above is a cheap shot.  Who are you to decide

> I don't know about "people like me" and their attitudes, but I don't see
> why you had to make personnal attacks against people who had a different
> opinion from yours.
> Maybe you felt threatened by them...

I'll retract the statement in question since it does come off as
a personal attack.  I maintain however that my analogy between
homophobes and pro-censors does APPEAR to explain certain 
pro-censor attitudes.
    And damn right I feel threatened.  I see the pendulum
swinging further and further to the right.  I don't like it,
and, and after a brief and polite interval of initial patience,
I'm not likely to have much compassion for anyone defending the
actions of the extreme right-wing.

> You see, you are doing it again: you are refusing to listen to other people's
> opinions on pornography.  Some pornography is obviously hateful of women.  Why
> are you refusing to admit this?  Admitting this does not entail that you have
> to be pro-censorship.

I suggest that if you delinieated what you find "obviously
hateful" about some pornography, I would find that 99 percent
of what you describe results from your personal objection to depiction
of certain sexual practices.  This assumes your objections
are along the lines of those of Gloria Steinham, Susan
Griffin and others.

> One would hope that people who care about these issues would care enough
> to distrust the media's portrayal of (anything in general, but more
> particularly) the feminist community's opinion on the matter.  That is
> probably very wishful thinking however.

I tend to think that I am entitled to my opinions even if I have
no knowledge of whether the opposition is a vocal one percent of
self-described feminists or the entire population of the country.
     Seriously, perhaps I am not totally familiar with the various
feminist positions on pornography.  Perhaps you, Sophie, are
not totally familiar with the history and practice of censorship
in the U.S.  Feminist writings you no doubt
would never advocate censoring would indeed be censored if the
situation reverted to that of the early twentieth century.
Why help turn back the clock?  ANY form of censorship requires
empowering someone to decide what should be banned.  Nobody
should be given that power.

steve pope