1. MACKINNON’S DEFINITION OF PORNOGRAPHY IS TOO RESTRICTIVE
Nadine Strossen, NQA, USA TODAY, January 12, 1995, up.
The “MacDworkinites” have fashioned a definition of “pornography” that would suppress far more expression than does the law of obscenity. As defined in their model law, pornography is “the sexually explicit subordination of women through pictures and/or words.” “Subordination” includes scenes in which
“women are presented in postures or positions of sexual submission, servility, or display,” or “women are presented in scenarios of degradation, humiliation, injury, torture.. . [sic] in a context that makes these conditions sexual.” This endangers everything from religious imagery and documentation of the Balkan rapes to self-help books about women’s health and sexuality.
2. MACKINNON’S DEFINITION OF PORNOGRAPHY BANS MAINSTREAM MATERIALS
Pete Hammill, NQA, PLAYBOY, January 1993, up.
But her [MacKinnon’s] definition of pornography outlined in Pornography and Civil Rights could cover everything from the latest Madonna video to the novels of Henty Miller, Al Capp’s Moonbeam McSwine and Gustave Flaubert’s Salaxnmbo, acres of surrealist paintings, the Koran and James Cagney hitting Mae Clarke with that grapefruit We would see the last of Black Bun Busters, but we could also lose Don Giovanni. The great flaw in the antiporn agitation is that it’s based on a mystery: the elusive nature of sexuality.
3. MACKINNON’S APPROACH TO PORNOGRAPHY IS PATERNALISTIC
Pete Hammill, NQA, PLAYBOY, January 1993, up.
Today, absolutely certain of their rectitude, totally free of doubt, equipped with an understanding of human beings that has eluded all previous generations, MacKinnon, Dworkin and their allies have been shaping a Victorian solution to their Victorian nightmares. That solution is, pardon the expression, paternalistic. As
MacKinnon writes: “Some of the same reasons children are granted some specific legal avenues for redress. [sic] also hold true for the social position of women compared to men.” Since women are, in the MacKinnon view, essentially children, they must be shielded from harm, corruption and filthy thoughts. The savage impulses of the male must be caged. And women must be alerted to the true nature of the beast.
4. MACKINNON USES A PATERNALISTIC APPROACH IN DEFINING PORNOGRAPHY
Nadine Strossen, NQA, USA TODAY, January 12, 1995, up.
MacKinnon, for example, writes: “Compare victims’ reports of rape with women’s reports of sex. They look a lot alike. . . [sic] (T)he major distinction between intercourse (normal) and rape (abnormal) is that the normal happens so often that one cannot... [sic] see anything wrong with it.” These ideas are hardly radical. They are a reincarnation of puritanical, Victorian notions that feminists have long tried to consign to the dustbin of history: woman as sexual victim; man as voracious satyr. These archaic stereotypes formed the basis for 1 9th-century laws prohibiting “vulgar” language from being used in the presence of women and girls. Such paternalism always leads to exclusion, discrimination and the loss of freedom and autonomy.
JAMES MADISON
James Madison was a unique member of the group known as the Founding Fathers. Not easily categorizable, Madison was original thinker given to philosophy.
Madison didn’t adhere devoutly to the party line of any of the three major factions (Federalist, anti-Federalist, or Democratic-Republican) of the time. Though he was a co-author of THE FEDERALIST PAPERS, he often split with co-author Alexander Hamilton on the issues of the day, showing his freedom from dogmatism.
As COMMENTARY MAGAZINE’s Gary Rosen put it:
Every academic field has its schemes of classification, and scholarship on the American founding is no different. As a result, James Madison, like the other leading figures of his generation, is often placed into one or another ideological box. It is said that he is a liberal or a republican, a nationalist or an advocate of states’ rights, a follower of the "court" party or of its "country" rival. There is no denying the usefulness of these labels, and I have gladly availed myself of them on many occasions. But taxonomies seldom do justice to individuals, and this is especially true when dealing with a thinker of Madison’s depth.
James Madison was a unique member of the group known as the Founding Fathers. Not easily categorizable, Madison was original thinker given to philosophy.
Madison didn’t adhere devoutly to the party line of any of the three major factions (Federalist, anti-Federalist, or Democratic-Republican) of the time. Though he was a co-author of THE FEDERALIST PAPERS, he often split with co-author Alexander Hamilton on the issues of the day, showing his freedom from dogmatism.
As COMMENTARY MAGAZINE’s Gary Rosen put it:
Every academic field has its schemes of classification, and scholarship on the American founding is no different. As a result, James Madison, like the other leading figures of his generation, is often placed into one or another ideological box. It is said that he is a liberal or a republican, a nationalist or an advocate of states’ rights, a follower of the "court" party or of its "country" rival. There is no denying the usefulness of these labels, and I have gladly availed myself of them on many occasions. But taxonomies seldom do justice to individuals, and this is especially true when dealing with a thinker of Madison’s depth.
Most importantly, though: Madison was the smallest U.S. president, standing 5" 4" and weighing about 100 pounds. Interestingly enough, both of his vice presidents passed on in office, including George Clinton, who died in office in 1812. Reports that Madison and Clinton invented “The Funk Bomb” to contribute to the national defense are unverified.
Seriously, though, Madison was an important figure in the early political life of the country. His idea on the separation of church and state, the avoidance of oppression, and the structure of representative government remain influential.
We’ll begin by examining the manner in which Madison busted onto the nation scene in 1780, and then discuss the ideas he brought to the table.
Share with your friends: |