Republican Lawmakers Think Porn Is a Menace, but GOP Country Watch It the Most

0
363

Republican delegates adopted an amendment to their draft platform labeling porn a’ public health crisis.’ Odd, given that their party is led by a misogynist and red states ingest the most porn.”>

Forget about your guns, America. Republicans are coming for your porn.

In keeping with the throwback conservatism and pseudoscience weve come to expect from this election cycle, Republican delegates have labeled pornography as a public health crisis. The anti-pornography amendment was unanimously added to the draft platform during a Monday Republican National Convention subcommittee meeting on healthcare, education, and crime. While the GOPs 2012 platform also condemned child pornography and encouraged the process of implementing profanity laws, this amendment creates the stakes by insisting that, Pornography, with its harmful effects, especially on children, has become a public health crisis that is destroying the life of millions. Thats rightpornography is a life-ruiner. It ruins people lives.

The amendment was offered by North Carolina delegate Mary Forrester, who worked alongside the conservative Christian group Concerned Women for America to build her archaic dreaming an unfortunate reality. In addition to the state of their collective sons soiled tube socks, the CWA cites feminism, gay matrimony, and the siren call of Harry Potter among their numerous fears. Their self-described mission is to protect and promote Biblical values among all citizensfirst through prayer, then education, and finally by influencing our societythereby reversing the decline in moral values in our nation.

The doubtlessly well-intentioned CWA misplaces its concern by conflating pornography with sexual exploitation and the trafficking of women. By assuming that all sexuality work is non-consensual, conservative organizations like the CWA can purport to speak on behalf of the safety of all women, while campaigning to limit the independence and criminalize the livelihoods of many of them. Ironically enough, this exploitation debate reflects a brand of radical feminism that would likely feel very foreigner to Mary Forrester. In the 1980 s, a roster of anti-patriarchal powerhouses including Andrea Dworkin and Catharine MacKinnon publically campaigned against pornography, arguing that onscreen sexuality perpetuated violence against women and solidified harmful gender roles. Conversely, the GOPs objections to pornography are based in old school family values, complete with trumped-up charges that porn fosters infidelity and seduces young men away from matrimony.

While the new amendment surely isnt cause to move to Canadaor clear your browser historyjust yet, the rights war on pornography is no laughing matter.

In April, Utah Governor Gary Herbert signed off on a bold anti-porn solving. We hope that people hear and heed this voice of warn, Herbert pronounced at the signing ceremony. For our citizens know that there are real health risks that are involved and links with viewing pornography. Todd Weiler, the resolutions chief Senate sponsor, believed that the non-binding solving is contributing to community involvement. If a library or a McDonalds or anyone else was giving out cigarettes to our children, we would be picketing them, Weiler told. And, yet, our children are accessing pornography on their tablets on these sites and we seem to be okay with that.

Weilers statements mirror the GOPs invocation of children in its anti-porn platform. This purposely induced hysteria blurs the line between innocent children and consenting adults, and threatens to persecute the latter while failing to substantively protect the former. Its easy to induce a moral panic on behalf of children; arguing that you want to keep profanity away from kids is easier than admitting that youre a moral puritan who cant fathom female sexual independence. Once childrens security is invoked, were just one slippery slope away from banning pornography as a universal public health hazard.

Unfortunately for Herbert and Weiler, the science behind these anti-porn sentiments only isnt there. The Utah resolution was contended that pornography was a public health crisis. In fact, watching pornography is one of the few sexual behaviors that does not carry any risk of unintended pregnancy or illnes. Researchers tend to agree that porn is not biologically addictive and exposure to it does not lead to lower self-esteem. Additionally, the availability of porn does not increase rape and sexual violence, and porn is not likely to produce a generation of lifelong bachelors. Studies in countries that have enforced strict laws against pornography found that as access to pornography goes up, rape and sexual violence actually goes down. While other factors were surely at play, this research seems to refute right-wing assertions that easily accessible porn increases rates of violence.

As clinical psychologist David J. Ley told TIME : The overwhelming majority of porn users report no ill effects.A very, very small minority are reporting these concerns about ED. In the 2016 Twilight Zone, its no astonish that the Republican Party is attempting to label a largely victimless non-crime as a public health crisis, while simultaneously facilitating the epidemic of gun violence in America. Although, dedicated Trumps stated obsession with his own Trump Jr ., we may very well assure an increased focus on ED prevention during his( hopefully hypothetical) presidency.

Anyone who follows American politics, Trump, and/ or the Miss USA pageant will be quick to point out the hypocrisy inherent to this GOP initiative. Republicans moral outrage when it is necessary to porn is rivalled only by their love of porn. 2013 Pornhub statistics isolated 23 states where spectators on average expend the longest quantity of period tuning in; of those 23 states, 16 voted for 2012 Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney. Mississippi led the nation in time spent watching Pornhub videos, and in 18 of 24 conservative-voting states the number one porn search was creampie.

Meanwhile, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee is as ill-fitted for this puritanical stance as the rest of his party. Trump has a rich history of objectifying girls, and his penchant for asking girls to don bikinis or constructing jokes about get them on their knees is more in keeping with a porn producer than an anti-porn legislator. His Playboy cover is prominently displayed in his office, sometimes to hilarious impact. While his misogyny often manifests itself in sharp insults, its more consistently displayed through objectificationa brand of over-sexualization thats directly opposed to a family values platform. For proof, appear no further than Trumps numerous Howard Stern Show sound bites, where he rated women on a 1 to 10 scale and divulged that, A person who is very flat-chested is very hard to be a 10. Trump also attempted to monetize this misogynist worldview through his 1997 purchase of the Miss USA pageant, promising to get the bathing suits to be smaller and the heels to be higher.

As Megyn Kelly or any halfway sentient human being will tell you, this man is not fit to campaign on behalf of any female-identified person. Harry Potter-hating housewives, sex-positive feminists, and everyone in between ought to have serious objections to Trumps unapologetic phallocentrism. And while Trump, perhaps suffering from a rare bout of self-awareness, hasnt personally come out against porn, he has signaled that hell accept the GOP party platform.

While the anti-porn amendment is at odds with Trumps passion for objectifying girls, its surely in line with his anti-feminist image. Sex positivity is a movement with pragmatic roots; it recognizes that the stigmatization of sexuality and sexuality work is the foe of open dialogue and female autonomynot to mention health and safety. By actually engaging with pornography as a legitimate industryas opposed to a health hazardwe can begin to enact helpful regulations that folks actually want. At the end of the day, anti-pornography rhetoric distracts from the issues that actually affect the women and children it purports to protect.

Read more: www.thedailybeast.com

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here