Pornography and Capitalism

Airing first in 2002, "American Porn" is a Frontline documentary on the American porn industry. It sheds light into some of the practices of the porn industry (especially with the current technology and internet explosion) and traces some of the history of porn legislation. In particular, the film discusses the "Miller Test," which is the current standard for determining whether or not speech can be labeled as "obscene." Based on "community standards," this rule seems to be fundamentally flawed given our capitalistic society.

First of all, I must say that I am a firm supporter of pornography in general. I think arguments against pornography as a whole are weak at best, and the current proliferation of porn represents a healthy move beyond past sexual repression. However, there are certainly examples of porn that seem intuitively unnacceptable -- child pornography, depictions of rape and (sexually charged) homicide -- that complicate the matter. Part of the beauty of capitalism and globalization is the ability for individuals to satisfy their very particular desires. Sexual fetishism should certainly not be discouraged. But where do we draw the line? "American Porn" discussed (and partially depicted) an example of a pornographic video where a woman is kidnapped, violently raped, and murdered afterwards. Though I do not immediately feel the need to place a ban on such depictions, I must admit that something does not feel quite right and am hesitant to immediately condone such forms of pornography.

The current Miller Test, defined in the 1973 case Miller vs. California, is as follows. A form of expression can be labeled obscene (and therefore not be subject to protection from the 1st Amendment) based on:

• Whether "the average person, applying contemporary community standards," would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest,
• Whether the work depicts/describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by applicable state law,
• Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.

[taken from Wikipedia and based off findlaw.com]

The use of "community standards," nebulous to begin with, seems to be fundamentally incompatible with our capitalistic system if we are to maintain a morally acceptable position. Assuming that there exists some extreme varieties of porn (perhaps the previously cited example, perhaps worse) that are prima facie morally unacceptable, it is not difficult to see the way the Miller test allows capitalism to continually push us towards the boundary between acceptable and unacceptable.

The fact that the pornography industry is profit-driven, that it is in part run by average Joes whose business choice was dictated by the market means that the business is purely driven by consumer demand. As consumers demand more, these businesses produce more. Given their organizational and administrative prowess, these firms help to institutionally condone a specific genre of pornography. Now accepted by the community due to this influence, the sensationalism fades and a new wave of demand for the most experienced consumers proceeds to push the boundaries further. There is no patent mechanism for some sort of moral intervention into this process. Thus, it can be said that the Miller test for the legality of pornography is questionable in the face of our profit-driven capitalist system. (Or, we could say that it is capitalism that's the issue, but issue is much more complex and for some other time...)


--
[A link to the online stream of "American Porn" can be found here.]