Obscenity is in the eye of the beholder (2024)

Porn!

Apparently, everyone knows what it is when they see it.

But do we?

For example, last year there was something of a global storm in a teacup following a complaint from a parent, at a school in Florida, that Michelangelo’s renaissance sculpture of David was “pornographic” and should not have been shown to students in a Year 6 art class.

Closer to home, at a recent Senate committee hearing, the sex education book, Welcome to Sex, written by Yumi Stynes and Dr Melissa Kang for teenagers, and, shortlisted for the Prime Minister’s Literary Award, was labelled a pornographic publication by Senator Malcolm Roberts.

And, for others, bikini-clad women on the beach, shop fronts displaying images of women in lingerie and even women in yoga pants have been considered lascivious, pornographic and even dangerous.

When something is labelled pornographic this does not mean it is actual pornography. Rather, the term tends to be used when people find something to be offensive or obscene.

Obscenity is in the eye of the beholder (1)

Moreover, the term is used it is often as part of scare campaigns designed to pluck our emotional and moral heartstrings in an effort to elicit public outrage and condemnation.

Ultimately, like beauty, what is offensive, obscene or pornographic is in the eye of beholder.

When it comes to actual pornography we need to be clear about what it is and what it isn’t.

The Oxford English dictionary provides us with a base definition of pornography: “printed or visual material containing the explicit description or display of sexual organs or activity intended to stimulate sexual excitement”.

When it comes to legal commercial pornography that we view online, or on a DVD, or magazines purchased from an adult store — yes, some people still watch DVDs and buy porn mags — this type of porn is underpinned by legal contracts plus strict and regular testing for STIs. Furthermore, it is also defined by consent — consent between performers, writers, and directors.

Sexual imagery produced and distributed without consent is not pornography. It is sexual abuse material.

Pornography is more than just sexualised imagery. Porn may also be viewed as art and artistic expression, political and feminist protest, an assertion of sexual agency, a form of labour that offers economic independence or an aid to understanding one’s sexuality.

Australians are interested and curious about porn. Really interested and curious.

Research from the Second Australian Study of Health and Relationships, published in 2014, showed that 76 per cent of men and 41 per cent of female respondents had viewed pornographic material in the last year.

My own research on the online porn viewing habits of Australians during the early phases of the COVID-19 pandemic showed a significant increase in traffic to one of the worlds largest online porn sites.

In the last few or so years we’ve also seen an increase in the number of people, here in Australia and elsewhere, joining online cam sites such as OnlyFans and becoming “content creators”.

The increase in online traffic to porn sites and the number of people on various social media platforms offering adult content has inevitably provoked scrutiny and reaction from politicians.

Porn has been described as a “public health crisis” driven by a “porn addiction” crisis by various state legislators in the US, often without any hard evidence to back up such claims.

Age verification and prohibition have become key instruments in the policy arsenal of these same policymakers. Ironically, these are often the same legislators who rail against any kind of constraints on freedom of speech and invasions of privacy on citizens by the government.

We have seen growing policy interest in age verification from both State and Federal governments in Australia.

On face value, this policy prescription looks and sounds good. However, legal, sex-tech and policy experts, plus civil liberty groups have all expressed major concerns about the efficacy of age verification and the unintended consequences of such policy approaches.

The likelihood of unintended consequences increases significantly when legislation is rushed through without proper and careful review and consideration.

In the wake of questions and concerns from politicians and citizens about our growing interest, curiosity and viewing of pornography, its vitally important that we discuss porn rationally and maturely.

Whether we like it or not, pornography is a part of mainstream culture in the 21st century. It’s been part of human culture for thousands of years. But it’s been treated as our “dirty little secret”, confined to a box hidden under the bed or in the closet.

Prohibiting porn is not a viable policy solution. History shows us that prohibition creates black markets and fuels even greater interest and demand for banned items such as alcohol, drugs, video-nasties, books and social media accounts.

Associate Professor Paul Maginn is the Director of the UWA Public Policy Institute. He is moderating a panel discussion about pornography and its regulation Monday, December 2 at Fremantle’s Hybrid Warehouse

Obscenity is in the eye of the beholder (2024)

References

Top Articles
Latest Posts
Recommended Articles
Article information

Author: Merrill Bechtelar CPA

Last Updated:

Views: 6482

Rating: 5 / 5 (50 voted)

Reviews: 89% of readers found this page helpful

Author information

Name: Merrill Bechtelar CPA

Birthday: 1996-05-19

Address: Apt. 114 873 White Lodge, Libbyfurt, CA 93006

Phone: +5983010455207

Job: Legacy Representative

Hobby: Blacksmithing, Urban exploration, Sudoku, Slacklining, Creative writing, Community, Letterboxing

Introduction: My name is Merrill Bechtelar CPA, I am a clean, agreeable, glorious, magnificent, witty, enchanting, comfortable person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.