search engine optimization
Free Search Engine Submission Search Engine Optimization
Related Topics:
search engine optimization
search engine marketing
seo
search engine submission
search engine optimization services
search
engine
optimization
ranking
placement
free
search engine placement
search engine ranking
free search engine submission
website optimization
Google
free website submission
seo services
web design
web site promotion
submission
internet marketing
Network Solutions
submit website
seo company
PPC Management
search engine optimization company
marketing
advertising
website promotion
Search Engine Optimization Service
Pay Per Click
search engine secrets
firm
website
search engine promotion
link popularity
Link Development
Submit-it
top search engine ranking
|
Free Search Engine Submission Search Engine Optimization search engine optimization
.
Free Search Engine Submission Search Engine Optimization search engine optimization Information
Mark Wicclair argues that we should be very wary about the censorship of
pornography,
even if pornography, as Helen Longino defines it, exists. In
order to fully understand
Wicclair's reason for being wary of the censorship
of pornography it is important that we
use Helen Longino's definition of
pornography. Helen Longino defines pornography as
"[the] verbal or pictoral
explicit representations of sexual behavior that...have as a
distinguishing
characteristic 'the degrading and demeaning portrayal of the role
and status
of the human female...as a mere sexual object to be exploited and
manipulated sexually (p.43)."
Helen Longino's definition can be used as
the basis of numerous arguments dealing with
pornography. In this paper, I
will deal with only one controversial aspect of
pornography. That aspect is
the censorship of pornography. Although Wicclair raises
several reasons for
being wary of the censorship of pornography, I will discuss only two
of
those objections in this paper.
The first reason Wicclair gives for his
claim that we should be wary about the
censorship of pornography is that
negative side effects are likely to occur if pornography
is censored.
Wicclair focuses his argument on the slippery slope effect, which he claims
is a negative effect of the censoring of pornography. In this context, the
slippery slope
effect is defined by Wicclair as "...a serious risk that once
any censorship is allowed, the
power to censor will, over time, expand in
unintended and undesirable directions
(p.382)." This definition along with
"...the fact that it is extremely difficult, if not
impossible, to formulate
unequivocal and unambiguous criteria for censorship (Wicclair
p. 382),"
Wicclair makes the conclusion that "[t]he slippery slope effect will
eventually...suppress the rights, interests, and values of others (p.382)."
I agree with Wicclair's first reason for his argument against the censorship
of
pornography. I also believe that the censorship of pornography will cause
the slippery
slope effect. Because the slippery slope effect is extremely
difficult to stop once it has
been started, I believe the censorship of
pornography will lead to the suppression of many
freedoms of expression.
When many freedoms of expression are suppressed then
censorship no longer
effects just pornography in Longino's sense. Therefore, I believe
that by
censoring pornography citizens of American will most likely have less expressive
liberty.
I also believe that once Longino's definition of pornography is
censored, the
slippery slope effect will continually occur, as its name
implies. Thus, the argument of
censoring pornography as Longino defines it
would cease to exist and the argument of
censoring pornography as a less
explicit definition than Longino's would then take
precedence. I believe
that the redefining of pornography would continue to occur
allowing new
censorship arguments to rise. This snowball effect (the slippery slope
effect) will eventually impact numerous aspects of American life that were
not intended
to be effected by the original argument for censoring
pornography.
Though I could give several examples that redefining
pornography eventually
effects American life, I will give only two examples:
education and economy. First,
continually redefining pornography will
eventually lead to the censorship of education
because pornographic
material, even as Longino defines it, is discussed and visually
presented in
most higher educational institutions. Many college courses could not be
taught if it were not for the liberty to openly discuss and watch
pornography and all its
aspects. If we begin to censor pornography, then the
some aspects of the educational
system will eventually disappear, such as
certain health courses, and students in higher
education will be slighted.
Second, if pornography continues to be redefined the
economy will be
impacted. With the slippery slope effect, the definition of pornography
will
become so strict that many advertisements, movies, and art could not be
displayed.
The censorship of pornography in the television industry alone
could lead to the loss of
billions of dollars. More importantly, many
artists and photographers who depict certain
sexual scenes may be put out of
work. So, that is why I believe the slippery slope effect
will keep
redefining pornography and allowing for the argument of censorship to
encroach on many aspects of American life.
A second reason Wicclair
gives for his argument that we should be wary of
censoring pornography is
"that exposure to pornography has a cathartic effect and that it
therefore
produces a net reduction in harm to women (Wicclair p.383)." Wicclair further
explains
[t]his claim [the cathartic claim] is based upon two
assumptions, neither of
which has proven to be false: (1) Men who are not
already violence-prone are
more likely to be 'turned off' than to be 'turned
on by depiction's of rape,
brutality, dismemberment, etc. (2) For men in the
later category, exposure to
pornography can function as a substitute for
actually causing harm (Wicclair
p. 383).
This quote explains Wicclair's
definition of the cathartic effect in the context of
pornography, although
the cathartic effect can be applied to many aspects of life.
I agree with
Wicclair's second reason for why we should be wary of censoring
pornography.
I believe that people who are not mentally and physically attracted to
violence are not mentally or physically attracted to depiction's of violence
in
pornography. In addition, I believe that violent depictions in
pornography act as an outlet
for those people who are attracted physically
and mentally to violent depiction's in
pornography. In other words, I too
believe in the cathartic effect.
I believe it is important to understand
that the only reason an object or idea
should be censored is if that object
or idea violates an American law, such as the first
amendment to the
constitution. Although advocates of censorship believe that the
"...censorship of pornography is a legitimate means of preventing harm to
women
(Wicclair, p. 383)" and the fact there are documented cases of
pornography leading to
violent crime, I believe laws censoring pornography,
as Longino defines it, should not be
made. I believe this because by making
censorship laws for pornography, as Longino
defines it, a citizens rights
and liberties will be infringed upon instead of being protected.
Laws are
made in America for many reasons, but for the most part, they are made to
protect the rights and liberties of a citizen, which are outlined by the
constitution, and
these laws are made with the majority of citizens in mind.
By making censorship laws
for pornography, citizens will no longer have the
liberty to read, use, or watch whatever
they choose. The first amendment
right, which includes freedom of speech, may be
infringed upon. More
importantly, I believe it is invalid to make censorship laws for
pornography
just because a hundred or even a thousand cases of violent pornographic
rape
scenes were acted out. It is most likely that those people involved in those
cases
will still act out violent depiction's of rape once pornography is
censored. Therefore, we
should be wary about censoring pornography because
it will only hinder our rights and
liberties and it will not prohibit
violent rape scenes from being depicted. That is why I
agree with Wicclair's
second reason for being wary of censoring pornography and
believe we should
be careful in the pornography censorship laws we make because they
will not
necessarily protect our rights and liberties as citizens.
In this paper, I
have shown that Mark Wicclair believes the slippery slope effect
will
greatly impact American life because the slippery slope effect will lead to the
constant redefining of pornography. I have also shown that the cathartic
effect is a valid
argument for why we should be wary about the censorship of
pornography because it
shows that censorship laws will not necessarily
prohibit violent depictions of rape from
being acted out and that our rights
and liberties, such as the first amendment, will be
infringed upon. I have
supported those reasons with my own beliefs and logical
reasoning. Thus,
making both the slippery slope effect and the cathartic effect valid
reasons
for why Wicclair and myself believe we should be wary of censoring
pornography. It is essential to ask whether or not the issue impedes on an
American
value or violates a law. I have shown in this paper, through
Wicclair's reasons as well as
my own, that we should be wary about the
censorship of pornography.Mark Wicclair argues that we should be very wary about
the censorship of pornography,
even if pornography, as Helen Longino defines
it, exists. In order to fully understand
Wicclair's reason for being wary of
the censorship of pornography it is important that we
use Helen Longino's
definition of pornography. Helen Longino defines pornography as
"[the]
verbal or pictoral explicit representations of sexual behavior that...have as a
distinguishing characteristic 'the degrading and demeaning portrayal of the
role
and status of the human female...as a mere sexual object to be
exploited and
manipulated sexually (p.43)."
Helen Longino's definition
can be used as the basis of numerous arguments dealing with
pornography. In
this paper, I will deal with only one controversial aspect of
pornography.
That aspect is the censorship of pornography. Although Wicclair raises
several reasons for being wary of the censorship of pornography, I will
discuss only two
of those objections in this paper.
The first reason
Wicclair gives for his claim that we should be wary about the
censorship of
pornography is that negative side effects are likely to occur if pornography
is censored. Wicclair focuses his argument on the slippery slope effect,
which he claims
is a negative effect of the censoring of pornography. In
this context, the slippery slope
effect is defined by Wicclair as "...a
serious risk that once any censorship is allowed, the
power to censor will,
over time, expand in unintended and undesirable directions
(p.382)." This
definition along with "...the fact that it is extremely difficult, if not
impossible, to formulate unequivocal and unambiguous criteria for censorship
(Wicclair
p. 382)," Wicclair makes the conclusion that "[t]he slippery slope
effect will
eventually...suppress the rights, interests, and values of
others (p.382)."
I agree with Wicclair's first reason for his argument
against the censorship of
pornography. I also believe that the censorship of
pornography will cause the slippery
slope effect. Because the slippery slope
effect is extremely difficult to stop once it has
been started, I believe
the censorship of pornography will lead to the suppression of many
freedoms
of expression. When many freedoms of expression are suppressed then
censorship no longer effects just pornography in Longino's sense. Therefore,
I believe
that by censoring pornography citizens of American will most
likely have less expressive
liberty.
I also believe that once Longino's
definition of pornography is censored, the
slippery slope effect will
continually occur, as its name implies. Thus, the argument of
censoring
pornography as Longino defines it would cease to exist and the argument of
censoring pornography as a less explicit definition than Longino's would
then take
precedence. I believe that the redefining of pornography would
continue to occur
allowing new censorship arguments to rise. This snowball
effect (the slippery slope
effect) will eventually impact numerous aspects
of American life that were not intended
to be effected by the original
argument for censoring pornography.
Though I could give several examples
that redefining pornography eventually
effects American life, I will give
only two examples: education and economy. First,
continually redefining
pornography will eventually lead to the censorship of education
because
pornographic material, even as Longino defines it, is discussed and visually
presented in most higher educational institutions. Many college courses
could not be
taught if it were not for the liberty to openly discuss and
watch pornography and all its
aspects. If we begin to censor pornography,
then the some aspects of the educational
system will eventually disappear,
such as certain health courses, and students in higher
education will be
slighted. Second, if pornography continues to be redefined the
economy will
be impacted. With the slippery slope effect, the definition of pornography
will become so strict that many advertisements, movies, and art could not be
displayed.
The censorship of pornography in the television industry alone
could lead to the loss of
billions of dollars. More importantly, many
artists and photographers who depict certain
sexual scenes may be put out of
work. So, that is why I believe the slippery slope effect
will keep
redefining pornography and allowing for the argument of censorship to
encroach on many aspects of American life.
A second reason Wicclair
gives for his argument that we should be wary of
censoring pornography is
"that exposure to pornography has a cathartic effect and that it
therefore
produces a net reduction in harm to women (Wicclair p.383)." Wicclair further
explains
[t]his claim [the cathartic claim] is based upon two
assumptions, neither of
which has proven to be false: (1) Men who are not
already violence-prone are
more likely to be 'turned off' than to be 'turned
on by depiction's of rape,
brutality, dismemberment, etc. (2) For men in the
later category, exposure to
pornography can function as a substitute for
actually causing harm (Wicclair
p. 383).
This quote explains Wicclair's
definition of the cathartic effect in the context of
pornography, although
the cathartic effect can be applied to many aspects of life.
I agree with
Wicclair's second reason for why we should be wary of censoring
pornography.
I believe that people who are not mentally and physically attracted to
violence are not mentally or physically attracted to depiction's of violence
in
pornography. In addition, I believe that violent depictions in
pornography act as an outlet
for those people who are attracted physically
and mentally to violent depiction's in
pornography. In other words, I too
believe in the cathartic effect.
I believe it is important to understand
that the only reason an object or idea
should be censored is if that object
or idea violates an American law, such as the first
amendment to the
constitution. Although advocates of censorship believe that the
"...censorship of pornography is a legitimate means of preventing harm to
women
(Wicclair, p. 383)" and the fact there are documented cases of
pornography leading to
violent crime, I believe laws censoring pornography,
as Longino defines it, should not be
made. I believe this because by making
censorship laws for pornography, as Longino
defines it, a citizens rights
and liberties will be infringed upon instead of being protected.
Laws are
made in America for many reasons, but for the most part, they are made to
protect the rights and liberties of a citizen, which are outlined by the
constitution, and
these laws are made with the majority of citizens in mind.
By making censorship laws
for pornography, citizens will no longer have the
liberty to read, use, or watch whatever
they choose. The first amendment
right, which includes freedom of speech, may be
infringed upon. More
importantly, I believe it is invalid to make censorship laws for
pornography
just because a hundred or even a thousand cases of violent pornographic
rape
scenes were acted out. It is most likely that those people involved in those
cases
will still act out violent depiction's of rape once pornography is
censored. Therefore, we
should be wary about censoring pornography because
it will only hinder our rights and
liberties and it will not prohibit
violent rape scenes from being depicted. That is why I
agree with Wicclair's
second reason for being wary of censoring pornography and
believe we should
be careful in the pornography censorship laws we make because they
will not
necessarily protect our rights and liberties as citizens.
In this paper, I
have shown that Mark Wicclair believes the slippery slope effect
will
greatly impact American life because the slippery slope effect will lead to the
constant redefining of pornography. I have also shown that the cathartic
effect is a valid
argument for why we should be wary about the censorship of
pornography because it
shows that censorship laws will not necessarily
prohibit violent depictions of rape from
being acted out and that our rights
and liberties, such as the first amendment, will be
infringed upon. I have
supported those reasons with my own beliefs and logical
reasoning. Thus,
making both the slippery slope effect and the cathartic effect valid
reasons
for why Wicclair and myself believe we should be wary of censoring
pornography. It is essential to ask whether or not the issue impedes on an
American
value or violates a law. I have shown in this paper, through
Wicclair's reasons as well as
my own, that we should be wary about the
censorship of pornography.Mark Wicclair argues that we should be very wary about
the censorship of pornography,
even if pornography, as Helen Longino defines
it, exists. In order to fully understand
Wicclair's reason for being wary of
the censorship of pornography it is important that we
use Helen Longino's
definition of pornography. Helen Longino defines pornography as
"[the]
verbal or pictoral explicit representations of sexual behavior that...have as a
distinguishing characteristic 'the degrading and demeaning portrayal of the
role
and status of the human female...as a mere sexual object to be
exploited and
manipulated sexually (p.43)."
Helen Longino's definition
can be used as the basis of numerous arguments dealing with
pornography. In
this paper, I will deal with only one controversial aspect of
pornography.
That aspect is the censorship of pornography. Although Wicclair raises
several reasons for being wary of the censorship of pornography, I will
discuss only two
of those objections in this paper.
The first reason
Wicclair gives for his claim that we should be wary about the
censorship of
pornography is that negative side effects are likely to occur if pornography
is censored. Wicclair focuses his argument on the slippery slope effect,
which he claims
is a negative effect of the censoring of pornography. In
this context, the slippery slope
effect is defined by Wicclair as "...a
serious risk that once any censorship is allowed, the
power to censor will,
over time, expand in unintended and undesirable directions
(p.382)." This
definition along with "...the fact that it is extremely difficult, if not
impossible, to formulate unequivocal and unambiguous criteria for censorship
(Wicclair
p. 382)," Wicclair makes the conclusion that "[t]he slippery slope
effect will
eventually...suppress the rights, interests, and values of
others (p.382)."
I agree with Wicclair's first reason for his argument
against the censorship of
pornography. I also believe that the censorship of
pornography will cause the slippery
slope effect. Because the slippery slope
effect is extremely difficult to stop once it has
been started, I believe
the censorship of pornography will lead to the suppression of many
freedoms
of expression. When many freedoms of expression are suppressed then
censorship no longer effects just pornography in Longino's sense. Therefore,
I believe
that by censoring pornography citizens of American will most
likely have less expressive
liberty.
I also believe that once Longino's
definition of pornography is censored, the
slippery slope effect will
continually occur, as its name implies. Thus, the argument of
censoring
pornography as Longino defines it would cease to exist and the argument of
censoring pornography as a less explicit definition than Longino's would
then take
precedence. I believe that the redefining of pornography would
continue to occur
allowing new censorship arguments to rise. This snowball
effect (the slippery slope
effect) will eventually impact numerous aspects
of American life that were not intended
to be effected by the original
argument for censoring pornography.
Though I could give several examples
that redefining pornography eventually
effects American life, I will give
only two examples: education and economy. First,
continually redefining
pornography will eventually lead to the censorship of education
because
pornographic material, even as Longino defines it, is discussed and visually
presented in most higher educational institutions. Many college courses
could not be
taught if it were not for the liberty to openly discuss and
watch pornography and all its
aspects. If we begin to censor pornography,
then the some aspects of the educational
system will eventually disappear,
such as certain health courses, and students in higher
education will be
slighted. Second, if pornography continues to be redefined the
economy will
be impacted. With the slippery slope effect, the definition of pornography
will become so strict that many advertisements, movies, and art could not be
displayed.
The censorship of pornography in the television industry alone
could lead to the loss of
billions of dollars. More importantly, many
artists and photographers who depict certain
sexual scenes may be put out of
work. So, that is why I believe the slippery slope effect
will keep
redefining pornography and allowing for the argument of censorship to
encroach on many aspects of American life.
A second reason Wicclair
gives for his argument that we should be wary of
censoring pornography is
"that exposure to pornography has a cathartic effect and that it
therefore
produces a net reduction in harm to women (Wicclair p.383)." Wicclair further
explains
[t]his claim [the cathartic claim] is based upon two
assumptions, neither of
which has proven to be false: (1) Men who are not
already violence-prone are
more likely to be 'turned off' than to be 'turned
on by depiction's of rape,
brutality, dismemberment, etc. (2) For men in the
later category, exposure to
pornography can function as a substitute for
actually causing harm (Wicclair
p. 383).
This quote explains Wicclair's
definition of the cathartic effect in the context of
pornography, although
the cathartic effect can be applied to many aspects of life.
I agree with
Wicclair's second reason for why we should be wary of censoring
pornography.
I believe that people who are not mentally and physically attracted to
violence are not mentally or physically attracted to depiction's of violence
in
pornography. In addition, I believe that violent depictions in
pornography act as an outlet
for those people who are attracted physically
and mentally to violent depiction's in
pornography. In other words, I too
believe in the cathartic effect.
I believe it is important to understand
that the only reason an object or idea
should be censored is if that object
or idea violates an American law, such as the first
amendment to the
constitution. Although advocates of censorship believe that the
"...censorship of pornography is a legitimate means of preventing harm to
women
(Wicclair, p. 383)" and the fact there are documented cases of
pornography leading to
violent crime, I believe laws censoring pornography,
as Longino defines it, should not be
made. I believe this because by making
censorship laws for pornography, as Longino
defines it, a citizens rights
and liberties will be infringed upon instead of being protected.
Laws are
made in America for many reasons, but for the most part, they are made to
protect the rights and liberties of a citizen, which are outlined by the
constitution, and
these laws are made with the majority of citizens in mind.
By making censorship laws
for pornography, citizens will no longer have the
liberty to read, use, or watch whatever
they choose. The first amendment
right, which includes freedom of speech, may be
infringed upon. More
importantly, I believe it is invalid to make censorship laws for
pornography
just because a hundred or even a thousand cases of violent pornographic
rape
scenes were acted out. It is most likely that those people involved in those
cases
will still act out violent depiction's of rape once pornography is
censored. Therefore, we
should be wary about censoring pornography because
it will only hinder our rights and
liberties and it will not prohibit
violent rape scenes from being depicted. That is why I
agree with Wicclair's
second reason for being wary of censoring pornography and
believe we should
be careful in the pornography censorship laws we make because they
will not
necessarily protect our rights and liberties as citizens.
In this paper, I
have shown that Mark Wicclair believes the slippery slope effect
will
greatly impact American life because the slippery slope effect will lead to the
constant redefining of pornography. I have also shown that the cathartic
effect is a valid
argument for why we should be wary about the censorship of
pornography because it
shows that censorship laws will not necessarily
prohibit violent depictions of rape from
being acted out and that our rights
and liberties, such as the first amendment, will be
infringed upon. I have
supported those reasons with my own beliefs and logical
reasoning. Thus,
making both the slippery slope effect and the cathartic effect valid
reasons
for why Wicclair and myself believe we should be wary of censoring
pornography. It is essential to ask whether or not the issue impedes on an
American
value or violates a law. I have shown in this paper, through
Wicclair's reasons as well as
my own, that we should be wary about the
censorship of pornography.
Bibliography
Brock, Dan W. "Voluntary
Active Euthanasia: An Overview and Defense." Excerpted
from "Voluntary
Active Euthanasia," Hastings Center Report 22 (March/April) 1992:
pp. 165.
Rachels, James. "Active and Passive Euthanasia," The New England Journal
of
Medicine, 292, No. 2 (January 9, 1975), pp. 78-79.
|
