The Sex Panic: Fighting The Myth That Censorship Is Good For Women Roz Udow National Coalition Against Censorship New York, New York "I do not believe we should allow government to tell women or men how we should think or write about our lives, including our sex lives. I don't think those kinds of laws are a good idea for anybody, and I know they are bad for women." Ann Lewis, political analyst. The culture war in our society, declared by Pat Robertson and spearheaded by the Radical Right, has at its heart a sex panic. Sex panics are not new in our history. They have occurred many times in the past, always with disastrous effects on the quality of women's lives. Margaret Sanger, Planned Parenthood's founder, was jailed in 1916 for telling women they could choose when and whether to have children. Until 1971, vestiges of "Comstockery" (obscenity laws initiated by Anthony Comstock in 1873) prohibited mailing birth control devices or even contraceptive informationall in the guise of protecting the "virtue" of women. In this same tradition, "moralists" across the nation have attacked sex education and such feminist works as The Feminine Mystique, Our Bodies Ourselves, and Ms. Magazine. Social purity movements inspired by law enforcement vice squads and conservative and religious "decency" groups are familiar episodes in our nation. Today, these forces have joined with a small but fervent feminist movement that claims "pornography" is the central cause of women's inequality. Most feminists do not support these views, however. A great number of those who support women's rights understand that censorship is dangerous to women and that they will always suffer disproportionately as a result of censorship campaigns. They reject claims that freedom and equality principles are in opposition and that women must choose between them; they insist that justice requires both. They are determined to dispel the myths that censorship is good for women, that women want censorship and that those who support censorship speak for women. Though women may criticize some pornography as sexist, it is unfortunately not the only form of expression that meets that definition. Many women -- artists, writers, lawyers, historians, scholars, home makers -- believe that women's serious efforts to achieve equality are derailed by simplistic notions that focus on words and images. Emotional rhetoric about expression that appeals to fear is intimidating; it makes discussion about these important public policy issues more difficult. It doesn't address real violence and it fuels the notion that women's sexuality is dangerous and must be controlled. Historically, women have always been harmed by censorship. In the name of "protecting" women from "smut," birth control information has been withheld, great works of art have been removed from display; books that describe women's bodies, and sex education and information about AIDS have been banned. Feminists who oppose censorship are especially dismayed that right wing groups, well known for their opposition to enhancing women's independence, have discovered women's rights as a reason to impose censorship. In fact, anti-pornography campaigns can have dangerous impacts. For example, the Supreme Court of Canada adopted an argument put forth by censorship supporter Catherine MacKinnon, allowing expression to be banned if it denigrated women. The first target of the censors? Lesbian expression. Canada's experience demonstrates the harmfulness of laws that give government the power to decide what expression is degrading to women. Certainly there is sexist material out there. Some of it is violent and may be horrifying to some of us or even most of us. But, once we allow censorship of these publications, we will see history repeat itself. Censorship has always been used to keep materials from the least powerful people in any society. It wasn't too long ago that information on birth control was kept out of the hands of women. People in favor of censorship know that knowledge is power There is also the question of defining exactly what is meant by the term "pornography." It is frequently and incorrectly used as though its meaning has a widely-accepted common understanding. In fact, the term is not used in U.S. law, and it is considered by most scholars and critics even more vague than the legal concept "obscenity," long famed for lack of clarity. Pornography is a subjective term that is customarily used for words and images whose sole purpose is sexual arousal. It has also been used to attack and suppress literature, art, sex education, AIDS education and information about women's sexuality. Recently, it has begun to be used by certain feminists as though sexually explicit expression is inherently "subordinating" or "degrading" to women (and as though these terms are themselves not subject to disagreement). Some arguments are also made that it must be banned to protect children. But even if everything some people deemed pornographic was banned, young people would continue to be exposed to sexual images in all kinds of media. The best way to help protect our children from images we believe inappropriate is through education. Education about sexuality and expression is the best defense. And as with other arguments, too many would-be censors would lump a lot of literature into the pornography pot, including the illustration of a naked little boy in the classic children's book, In the Night Kitchen, by Maurice Sendak. There is no evidence to support the repeated claims that exposure to sexually explicit expression causes violence against women, despite many attempts to find links. For example, the 1970 Commission on Obscenity and Pornography extensively researched a possible link between sexually explicit expression and anti- social behavior. Its conclusion: "Empirical research designed to clarify the question has found no reliable evidence to date that exposure to sexual materials plays a significant role in the causation of delinquent or criminal sexual behavior among youths or adults. If a case is to be made against pornography in 1970, it will have to be made on grounds other than demonstrated effects of a damaging personal or social nature." The 1986 Meese Commission on Pornography commissioned a review of the social science data, desperately hoping to find a causal link between sexually explicit materials and sex crimes. It could not do so. In fact, its insistence on recommendations for censorship included in its final report drew a powerful dissent from two women members of the Commission. Said Dr. Judith Becker, a professor of psychiatry and psychology whose entire research career has been devoted to studying sexual abuse and sexually violent behavior, "Pornography is an insignificant factor, if any factor at all, in the development of deviant behavior." The women who oppose censorship are everywhere. We have varied experiences, interests and views regarding sexuality, its representation and what we each may refer to as erotica or pornography. We know censorship is not a remedy for sexism, racism, homophobia, violence, poverty or inequality in our society and that groups with real grievances that must be addressed are always the first to be harmed by censorship. As journalist Ellen Willis says: "How long will it take oppressed groups to learn that if we give the state enough rope, it will wind up around our necks?" The National Coalition Against Censorship's Working Group on Women, Censorship and "Pornography" is a diverse group of 70 feminists, including artists, writers, critics, scholars, activists and intellectuals. They have joined together to let others know that women don't want, can't benefit from, and won't tolerate censorship. Selected Quotes About the Harms of Censorship Author Judy Blume: "If I were starting out now, I might not even write children's books. In this climate of fear, I might find it impossible to write honestly about kids." Historian Lisa Duggan: "[Obscenity laws] have always been used to restrict information about birth control and abortion, to limit public sex education, and to seize literature and art." Betty Friedan: "To introduce censorship in the United States in the guise of suppressing pornography is extremely dangerous to women. ...if anti- pornography legislation were passed, the first targets of it would be feminist books...[those] giving women control of their own bodies." Molly Ivins: "... women's major problems are still racism and sexism. Where I am, poverty and violence are the most serious problems, and it always amazes me to find people spending their time worrying about how women are depicted... We get so scared of something terrible-so scared of communists, of illegal aliens, of pornography, or of crime-that we decide the only way to protect ourselves is to cut back on our freedom. Ain't that the funniest idea, that if we were less free, we would be safer." Author Wendy Kaminer: "[MacKinnon's] is a very traditional theory of gender difference [which argues that] pornography is not speech, because men are beasts. When confronted with misogynist literature, they are seized with an irresistible impulse to act it out. ..It feels like fighting back, not asking for protection." Anthropologist Carole Vance: "The query, 'What do women want?' remains a provocative question in regard to art, imagery and sexual culture. And it is not a question that can be easily answered in a sexist society. Still,...the answer lies in expansion, not closure, and in increasing women's power and autonomy in art as well as sex."u =================================================== How to Win: A Practical Guide for Defeating the Radical Right in Your Community Copyright 1994 by Radical Right Task Force Permission is granted to reproduce this publication in whole or in part. All other rights reserved. For more information contact: Pat Lewis National Jewish Democratic Council 711 Second Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20002 (202) 544-7636 =================================================== This document is from the Politics section of the WELL gopher server: gopher://gopher.well.com/11/Politics/ Questions and comments to: gopher@well.com .