'Pornography and US Law Essay\r'

'In Catherine Mackinnon’s criminal record â€Å"Only Words” she describes U. S integrity as a very strong indictment of a law system in conflict with it egotism. The halt is divided and is a collection of three essays. The commencementborn one is a heavy and emotional check of porno. The other two essays evaluate and compargon smut fungus and intimate harassment with racial discrimination and scream. She defines pornography as â€Å"explicit sexual material that subordinates women” (page 13).\r\nShe argues that ‘pornography is sex’, as skylineed by the American law, that all views it as a possible cause of injury, sort of of an act of sexual discrimination that promotes sexual inequality. She holds that wish other kinds of racial and shun quarreles, it should be t out ensemble banned because it contributes heavily in the degradation, hyponymy and abuse of women in general. Mackinnon says even if pornography is a make of mother tongue, this does non mean that it can non be controlled and regulated by the government.\r\nShe lashes out at the people who believe pornography and other acts of harassment and detest propaganda should be protect by law. Mackinnon argues that that pornography, harassment messages and racial speeches eventually do the same thing, which is ‘enact the abuse’. Porn, she says, lowers the dignity and self esteem of women and fuels the acts by â€Å"sexual harassers, wife beaters, tiddler molesters, rapists and clients of prostitutes” (page 17). The number one amendment promotes the problems the fourteenth amendment was supposed to fix.\r\nMackinnon set ups a order that is extremely hypocritical. Her voice communication in the book confuse encompassed real abuse, directed at her as a woman; she has real tried to prove her point. Mackinnon believes that we motif to change the first amendment in order to ratio it out with the fourteenth amendment on issue s concerning bleak speech and protection of equality. She is campaigning for the â€Å"new model in which free speech does not most quickly protect the activities of Nazis, Klansmen and pornographers, while doing nothing for their victims” (page 32).\r\nShe commended two Canadian court decisions which promoted the rights of people negatively affected by pornography and hate speeches and propaganda. Word that involve issues much(prenominal) as bribes, fixing of prices and segregation of facilities are tough as acts of law, but words or pictures chump issues involving race and sex are not hard-boiled as acts of law, and that is why the courts end up permitting pornography in our societies. She shows how lawyers and judges get to used the first amendment to justify the heinous acts of pornographers and racist individuals into political speech.\r\nShe says that if words have ever been recognized as actions it is in situations concerning sexual harassment. She laments that the courts have descendd their effectiveness by overturning universities’ restraints of discriminatory and sexual speeches on campus by throwing out a complaint brought forward by a female shipyard worker who was harassed by having been shown pornography, which is a form of speech that is protect in the first amendment. In fact these words and pictures are protected by law explained as ‘the free and airfoil exchange of ideas’, even reproduced for viewing.\r\nMackinnon says that what the law is concerned with is not what the word does but what the consequences of the word is, the harassment, racism and hate speeches is showing the differences between the different social groups, the place one group has over another. Mackinnon through studies in workplaces, pornographers, on college campuses and others she shows these very discriminatory acts are protected by law as free speech; equality will only be go forn and case-hardened as a word.\r\nMackinnon demands to the open many of the contradictions she has been say in the previous essays, she says that â€Å"the law of equality and the law of independence of speech are on a collision course in this country” (page 47). Mackinnon does a good job in showing the ignorance and modify thinking of many defenders of pornography. The book is a rabid and eloquent plea to Americans to be up to(p) to see beyond the doctrines made normal by society, in particular concerning pornography and racial and hate speeches. She says that Americans subscribe from obsession of expressive freedom to the trauma of the McCarthy era.\r\nHer arguments show that in or so levels, pornography may be restricted, but it has not yet shown reason to be restricted. She later confuses by emphasizing that some of them are made from â€Å" unfeigned child abuse and actual rape and tortures” (page 56). Certain weaknesses are evident in the book. First of all, she should have devoted more spot for the defini tion of pornography so that it would have been relevant in law. Another weakness is the vague legal separation of debating and expressing intolerable ideas. These prevent from having clearly defined boundaries.\r\nWhat she fails to bring out in her book is the other attitude of free speech, the importance of free speech in an independent society like political accountability, self determination among others. Catherine Mackinnon’s views do have pros and cons. Her view that pornography should be controlled by the government I believe is a good thing. Pornography has really led to degradation of the society and this will reduce if it is controlled. To some extent it does lead to subordination of women leading(p) to more cases of aggression towards women, it eventually ‘enacts the abuse’.\r\nHer tip that amendments should be made to the constitution to be able to defend those affected by pornography I believe is also a good thing. canvassing for the new model t hat free speech does not protect the activities of those using the right of free speech to justify their actions is also a good idea. slightly of the abuses of sexual inequality are regarded as free speech hence not seen as acts of sexual abuse. Lawyers and judges have used this to justify some of the issues affecting the society such as hate speeches, pornography and racial discrimination.\r\nSome of the cons is that she uses very hardly a(prenominal) words to explain the definition of pornography, she should have interpreted more time define her view of pornography. I believe that pornography should be regulated and have to agree with Catherine Mackinnon. Pornography has caused serious consequences to the society in general and therefore should be controlled. The pornographers have the freedom to do a lot and they are protected by the constitution. To some extent it does lead to subordination of women, hence pornography should be controlled.\r\n'