Protecting children from porn

MSNBC recently reported that "[f]orty-two percent of Internet users aged 10 to 17 surveyed said they had seen online pornography in the past year. Of those, 66 percent said they did not want to view the images and had not sought them out ..."

University of Alberta researcher Sonya Thompson found that, in a similar study, "... almost one-quarter of the boys watched pornographic DVDs or videos 'too many times to count' and 35 percent said the same about Internet smut."

A Christian social conservative like me naturally finds these statistics troubling, but to many there is nothing wrong with pornography or masturbation. They consider such things to be simply part of the "sexual exploration" that children go through. Though many who oppose pornography say that it denigrates women and is responsible for much of the sexual violence against them, these arguments are often brushed aside as groundless by those who find pornography harmless. Regardless, pornography is readily available to children and causes them to think about sex, or even partake in it, at a time when they are emotionally and physically immature, thus robbing them of their childhood.

Lynn Segal, professor of psychology and gender studies at the University of London, categorized views on pornography in three different ways: Liberal, Moral Right and Feminist (though the feminist view has many factions). In a 1990 article in the Feminist Review titled "Pornography and Violence: What the 'Experts' Really Say," Segal summarizes each view: the Liberal "... argues that there is no scientific evidence for pornography causing harm in society, and therefore no sound reason for banning it." The Moral Right "... sees pornography as a threat to traditional family values, arguing that sex exists for procreation and should be confined to marriage." And the Feminist view disapproves of pornography "[i]n its heterosexual versions, reducing women to flesh [HTML_REMOVED] or bits of flesh [HTML_REMOVED] [since] it celebrates the idea of men's insatiable appetite and women's ubiquitous sexual availability."

The Liberal view prevails in our culture, and yet I am more inclined to side with the Moral Right, though I would throw the word "enjoyment" in with "procreation." The aforementioned feminist view troubles Segal, herself a feminist, and she "...fear[s] that the evolving exploration by women of their own sexuality is put at risk by forming alliances with [HTML_REMOVED] instead of combating [HTML_REMOVED] the conservative anti-pornography crusade ...."

I think the more important issue is whether or not pornography really does have a negative effect on the viewer, especially children. If it does, the Liberal view is invalidated, and the Feminist view should be altered to accommodate all pornography, not just that which makes women appear submissive.

In a 1988 study reported in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, researchers Donnerstein, Linz and Penrod concluded, in Segal's own words, "... that exposure to violent pornography (for example, depictions of rape) does increase sexual arousal in some men, especially if the victim is shown as 'enjoying' the rape."

A good portion of pornography on the Internet has advanced from relatively tame Playboy centerfolds to more shocking and perverse stuff. For many, bare skin alone is not exciting, and pornography has become increasingly more explicit. Rape is now a common fantasy realized in pornography [HTML_REMOVED] especially Japanese pornography.

"Within Japan itself, the dramatic increase in available pornography and sexually explicit materials is apparent to even a casual observer," wrote Professor Milton Diamond of the University of Hawaii in 1999 in the International Journal of Law and Psychiatry. "The [pornography] produced caters to every taste and fetish and is typically much more aggressive and violent than that seen in the United States." A lot of Japanese pornography is readily available on the Internet, and the sheer amount that is dedicated to the genre of rape is shockingly disturbing. "Most charges of obscenity presently are related to depictions of group or violent rape," said Diamond, "or realistic and graphic film or video depictions of sexual behaviors considered deviant and dangerous ..."

When we hear that children have easy access to pornography online, we would be na[HTML_REMOVED]ve to think that they do not see the shocking and violent kind that permeates cyberspace. In an interview with MSNBC, University of Chicago psychiatrist Sharon Hirsch says, "[Children are] seeing things that they're really not emotionally prepared to see yet, which can cause trauma to them."

Children are not emotionally prepared to see any sort of sexual activity, not just the violent kind, which obviously places me in the camp of the Moral Right. Few will be surprised that I think sex should exist between a husband and wife [HTML_REMOVED] not on the Internet, in magazines, or in the classroom. Of course children need sexual education, but it should be appropriate to their maturity and understanding.

Pornography is not harmless [HTML_REMOVED] it robs children of innocence. It's probably not that great for the rest of us, either.

Reach columnist Brandon Dennis at opinion@thedaily.washington.edu.