Monday, February 4, 2019
Interpretation of A Feminist View on Pornography Essay -- Critique Reb
Interpretation of A Feminist consider on Pornography The clause that I will be break of serve down in the following paper is Pornography, Civil Rights, and Speech by Catherine A. MacKinnon. I study the best bea to start is to briefly unwrap MacKinnon and her word. MacKinnon is a professor of law at the University of Michigan. The article deals with the affects of smut fungus on society. MacKinnon feels that some erotica should be illegal. Her reason for this view is non that she finds it offensive, yet rather that she considers it as a form of sexual discrimination. There atomic number 18 many different views on pornography ranging from the belief that it is harmless conjuring trick all the way to it being a prime factor of the deadening for society. MacKinnon maintains that pornography subordinates women and institutionalizes male supremacy. She even goes so far as to say that it is a political practice. Advocates of pornography claim its ultimate abate to be pleasure , but MacKinnon says that the actual end is power. The article will attempt to indicate a correlation between pornography and the violence taken against women, as well as their social and economic in compare. I feel that the article itself is poorly written, but will attempt to make her points a minor easier to understand. I feel the necessity to state that the feelings of the paper are that of my views on MacKinnons article. They are non my views and may in fact be, misinterpretations of her views. To bring through us the confusion, I will rebut it with my views that pornography is harmless, at the end of the paper.The article starts with a brief passage on sexual equality in society. Her presentation of the argument is to explain it as if she agreed with it, sole(prenominal) to refute it by say... ...hy. It is a genre in which men are completely subordinate, and women fox all the power. Her article is so weak because it does not take that into account. I know that is only o ne case, but we have stated time and again that philosophy must be consistent. If she cannot/does not take dominatrix into account, then her philosophy is inconsistent. To fully explain this article and pornography would require a lengthy paper that exceeds the requirements and purpose of this prcis. I will end my paper by saying that I believe everyone has a right to free speech and equality, and I appreciate the article for what it was worth, but I do not feel it is justifiable or relevant to society. She bases her entire argument on an improvable correlation of pornography and sexual discrimination. Not to mention the fact that women also buy pornography. just now that is a whole other prcis.