Christine Emba, author of Rethinking Sex: A Provocation, recently noted that pornography (a) is flooding the Internet, (b) focuses on violence, and (c) dehumanizes women.
“It’s hard not to see a connection between porn-trained behaviors– the choking, slapping, and spitting that have become the norm even in early sexual encounters— and young women’s distrust in young men,” she writes. (New York Times, May 19.)
This isn’t exactly news. More than 30 years ago, the University of Michigan law professor Katherine E. McKinnon proposed banning pornography because, she argued, it (a) contributes nothing to political debate, (b) arouses masturbatory fantasies in men and (c) prevents women from enjoying their full citizenship rights,
The criticisms raised by feminists like MacKinnon, Emba, Andrea Dworkin and countless others have been amply dissected by free speech advocates, who delight in pointing out that if sexually arousing material is dangerous per se, then society must censor not only pornography but also Joyce’s Ulysses, Ravel’s Bolero, and Rubens’ Rape of the Sabine Women. What’s more, if every expression that demeans minorities is harmful, then our authorities must protect us from The Merchant of Venice and Huckleberry Finn and Goodbye Columbus, not to mention most of Wagner’s music.
Canada’s lesson
Canadians learned as much in 1993 when Canada’s Supreme Court expanded the definition of obscenity to include depictions of sex that degrade or exploit women or other groups. That definition, in tandem with a well-intended Canadian law against “hate propaganda,” was mostly used to ban gay-oriented books, including such mainstream works as David Leavitt’s A Place I’ve Never Been and The Best Plays of Albert Innaurato, which includes the Tony award winning Gemini.
Makes you think twice about moving to Canada, doesn’t it?
As Canadian gays and lesbians discovered to their chagrin, there is indeed something worse in this world than unrestrained free speech: the absence of unrestrained free speech— because the greatest beneficiaries of free speech are oppressed minorities.
Women, blacks, Jews, gays, lesbians, and transgenders who object to free speech remind me of Sholem Aleichem’s rabbi of Chelm, who, when asked to rank the relative importance of the sun and the moon, replied solemnly, “The moon is more important, because it shines at night and enables us to see, whereas the sun shines during the day, when there is no need for it whatsoever.” Like the sun, free speech is so pervasive that we tend to take its blessings for granted and assume we could flourish without it.
Yes, yes— the first amendment enables us to consume pornography, which Christine Emba claims is a worthless and even dangerous commodity. But Alfred Kinsey found pornography immensely valuable to his pioneering 1948 study of male sexuality– a work that emboldened men to begin the painful but important process of examining their feelings. Pornography reflects male fantasies. Do we really enhance our understanding of what makes men tick by suppressing the evidence?
Mountain climbing alternative
I can think of another benefit. For most of us, sex is the ultimate sublime experience. And most religious leaders and ethicists of all faiths agree that monogamous committed relationships are essential to a healthy and happy society. So how does a monogamous married couple keep the flame burning? How do they refresh their inevitable need for variety, novelty, and fantasy in their sex lives? Through extramarital affairs? Visits to prostitutes or gigolos? Or turning to drugs or booze when sex is no longer exciting? Is there maybe some good reason why pornography has flourished for thousands of years, back to the polytheist temples with their naked icons and sexual performances?
OK, OK. Maybe sex isn’t the ultimate sublime experience for some people. You could join a book club. Become a pastry chef. Hang out in museums. Subscribe to the opera or the orchestra.
When I was a Penn undergrad, more than 60 years ago, I remember the track coach, Boo Morcom, holding forth at the training table on the glories of mountain climbing, which he claimed in all seriousness produced a greater high than sex.
“Even when you come down from the mountain and it’s all over,” he concluded, “you’re still floating for hours. Whereas with sex, you just lie there.”
We young jocks around the table were mostly ill-equipped to argue with him. And having climbed a few mountains myself and experienced that heady sense of being at the top of the world, I know what he meant. But my climbing days are over (weak calves). And in any case, there are no mountains where I live in downtown Philadelphia.
It's impossible for white males like me to imagine the frustration and anger suffered by women over the demeaning stereotypes that bombard them constantly. But as the Canadian example above suggests, the cure may be worse than the disease. Until we come up with a better alternative— like, say, widespread sex education— pornography may be the best, and least harmful, and most portable, sex teacher we have.
What’s worse than pornography? Maybe the absence of pornography?
Enjoy Dan Rottenberg’s new memoir, The Education of a Journalist: My Seventy Years on the Frontiers of Free Speech. You can also visit his website at www.danrottenberg.com
Or: it provides a version of sex to those for whom no other version is available.