Anastasia

The CJB is the Best way to Create an Underground Market for Pornography

Anastasia is an Australian writer of erotica who publishes in the US and UK. She questions what will be achieved by driving pornography underground.

Although I am a heterosexual woman in my thirties, my sexuality wouldn't really have any bearing on my view regarding pornography. Democracy has mutated into an odd definition in recent times, one that is more in line with reactionary views than well thought-out debate.

The definition of violence varies from one society to the next. Violent pornography is too general a term, and the majority of consensual adult pornography on the market today depicts models above the legal age, who engage in consensual sex, and this distinction is not mentioned in the legislation. Extreme material is defined as 'pornographic' material. Does this mean that Great Britain is returning to the era of banning books such as D H Laurence's Lady Chatterley's Lover and The Story of O? If 'extreme' is defined as 'pornographic,' then this is the backward step that is currently taking place, and although I am a parent, and do share concerns regarding adult content being accessed by children, I also feel that it is more a parent's responsibility to monitor Internet usage rather than handing absolute power to governments.

Violent pornography has not been part of my life. As a writer of erotica and a publisher of online erotica, I have seldom come across extreme violent pornography in my travels, creative or otherwise. Then again, my definition of extreme differs from the generalized definition of 'porn'. Extreme, to me, is non-consensual intercourse, paedophilia and necrophilia. As for what paraphilias consenting adults engage in, that is their choice, and they are entitled to make that choice. Pornography is not the cause of violence, and there is research to back this up: criminals tend to have criminal tendencies prior to possessing or viewing pornography.

Anthony D'Amato's paper (July 2006, Northwestern University), 'Porn Up, Rape Down,' refers to rape statistics within the United States decreasing over the previous twenty-five years since access to pornography has been more readily available. This finding refutes the Reagan and Nixon governments' view that pornography increased social violence.

This law, to me, reflects a quick band-aid approach, but the problems that result in violence against women aren't that simple. Wife battering/domestic violence is seldom related to pornographic stimuli, and often related to other disorders, stresses or addictions (e.g. alcoholism). The most common form of violence against women is domestic violence, which is why I fail to comprehend how an extreme stance against adult material, most of which erotically represents consenting adults, is to benefit society. In countries where violence against women is rife, the violence has little to do with pornography. The rapes in Bosnia weren't about pornography, nor were they caused by it. The current situation in Darfur, that has seen many women and children slaughtered, doesn't have any pornographic links.

Yes, it is a concern that sex crimes do occur, and it is disconcerting to find that newspapers tend to focus on the porn found at the time of an arrest, but there is also a failure to fully document a criminal's full history. If that were done, people would see other predominant links that motivate an individual to commit a crime. My other concern, as a woman, is that politicians – in legislating this ambiguous law – are choosing a scapegoat and that scapegoat is pornography. The motivations behind violence toward women are far more complex, relating to socio-economic issues. Although I live in Australia, my concerns relate to an adult's individual right to choose. What is so evil about material creating sexual arousal? It can be an outlet for people who have organic sexual dysfunction, or for those who need that little bit extra to maintain their relationships. This law, and its sub-sections, enable a government to police every sexual element of an adult's life. How do I view this law as an online publisher of erotic fiction? I dread it because it is ambiguous. Can a person be arrested for reading fiction on my online magazine? [Not if the material is in written form; only images are covered by the law - Backlash] Are magazines such as Scarlet Magazine to be monitored from this point onward? Are young adults to receive government-approved sex education only, or do they have a democratic right to explore their own sexuality? It appears that this law is about enforcing Spartan sexuality – and even the ancient Spartans weren't this obstinate. Anyone with common sense would know that banning takes things underground. One of the best ways to create an illegal black market is to ban. Will adult content/erotica be the new methamphetamine?

back to the main womens' views page