General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Thank goodness for men who like sex [View all]zazen
(2,978 posts)but you're right. And there really is legal backup for regulating pornography (not obscenity) and protecting erotic art. There were so many debates about this in the 80s and some sound legal arguments in the late 80s about how to amend the proposed Minneapolis legislation to be less broad.
I felt then and do now that had MacKinnon/Dworkin backed down a bit and allowed the three-pronged intellectual/artistic/political value as determined by a reasonable person argument to be built into the legislation, it might have been upheld. And the legislation was for civil remedies anyway.
Hitting the pornographers in their pocketbooks was a wise approach and the intent of the law, but they allowed ideological purity to trump the possible. I can't imagine how many adolescents' sexualities wouldn't have been twisted by this hateful gonzo pornography had this legislation been in effect before the advent of global internet usage. If the profit motive had been tamed a bit, perhaps they wouldn't have been so brazen. Don't know if it would have saved lives in countries without the regulations, but it might have made our pornographers more aggressive in shaming those places that could make gonzo without restraint.