OPPapers.com

Controversial Pornography

Controversial Pornography


by: Nicole Lamberson
Ms. Susan Trabert
English 102-060
December 12, 1996

Show a number of different people a simple piece of paper consisting of nothing
more than a red blotch of paint and ask them what they see. The responses will
vary from objects such as a cherry, to more simply, just plain red paint. This
is an indication of the individuality, or sum of qualities that characterize and
distinguish an individual from all others, instilled in every human being. Just
as facial features and hair color differ among individuals, similar
distinctiveness is found among personalities and opinions. Because of prominent
variance in belief among many individuals, a number of topics and issues have
become controversial in society today.

Similar to the varied responses to the red splotch of paint, photographs, video
tapes and paintings portraying nudity and sexual content receive a number of
clashing opinions. There are artists who paint and photograph nudity and
pornography who find the human body and sex portrayed in many forms to be
beautiful. However, there are also many extremely conservative individuals who
take offense to such "artwork" and find its contents appalling. And those who
enjoy the nudity and sexual content exhibited in pornographic materials should
marvel and delight in its details. Those who do not should simply look away. In
the words of Justice William O. Douglas, "no one is compelled to look"
(Brownmiller 663). There is no concrete manner to define materials that are
"obscene" or "offensive" because various images come to mind among individuals
when words similar to these are used to describe pornography. To classify a
distasteful picture from a beautiful one comes down to a matter of opinion and
taste. In previous instances, such as the Miller
Case of
1973, the Court attempted to define which materials could be judged as lewd or
indecent:

The materials are obscene if they depict patently...