Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site watmath.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!credmond
From: credmond@watmath.UUCP (Chris Redmond)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Definitions ("pornography")
Message-ID: <17009@watmath.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 27-Oct-85 11:53:15 EST
Article-I.D.: watmath.17009
Posted: Sun Oct 27 11:53:15 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 28-Oct-85 03:31:37 EST
References: <732@utai.UUCP> <909@utcs.uucp> <504@scirtp.UUCP> <12506@rochester.UUCP> <32373@lanl.ARPA> <410@unc.unc.UUCP>
Reply-To: credmond@watmath.UUCP (Chris Redmond)
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 38

>>>It's in the dictionary, look it up.  If porn was not defined, then
>>>it wouldn't be in the dictionary, in fact, it wouldn't be a word.
>
>>From the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language:
>>   pornography	n.  Written, graphic or other forms of communication
>>		    intended to excite lascivious feelings.
>
>In other words, "pornography" is a synonym for _erotica_.
>
It is very dangerous (and very common in freshman essays) to base any
sort of argument on "what it says in the dictionary". Most dictionaries
are compilations of the meanings which have been attached to words, and
there is no particular reason to think that future users will continue to
have the same meanings in mind.  Particularly on sensitive issues, or
words which are much in the news, a dictionary definition is likely to
be uselessly vague, or out of date compared with what people are currently
saying.  And, of course, dictionaries don't all agree on anything more
complex than words like "chair".  

If dictionaries were an impartial, infallible and final authority, there
would be no need for complicated judicial decisions about (for example)
whether a divorced husband's pension rights are "property" -- one could
just look up "property" and find out -- or whether a homosexual lover
is a "dependent".

And it would be impossible for surveys to report that a sizeable
number of people are opposed to pornography but have no problem with
Playboy magazine, while others wish to ban "pornography such as
Playboy". 

In short, it is necessary to define terms based on the immediate
situation -- to propose distinctions, for example, between pornography
and erotica, or between sexism and exploitation.  Those distinctions
are arbitrary when first made; eventually they may become generally
accepted and find their way into the dictionary, by which time some
new ambiguity will be the subject of public argument!