According to Jack Varnell, the political fight against pornography is nothing more than smoke and mirrors.
First…A little disclosure. When it comes to politics, I am extremely cynical. I don’t truly like any of the candidates and especially abhor a system that tends to rely on choosing the lesser of two evils, or the candidate that will do the least amount of harm to the country, and our way of life. By “our” I mean all of us, not just the wealthy. I’ll cop to, and claim my own “white, male privilege”, and have worked very hard to minimize it’s moral impact on me, those around me, or those I choose to serve. I like being a “Good Man”, and have developed my own standards for what that means for me through lots of trial and error and the willingness to be wrong.
I could go for hours spewing my left wing, progressive, borderline socialist ideas about government and how it should be done. The bottom line is, like with so many of our arguments, the labels are the true issue, along with the assumption that we know what the other person means when they use the terms. So let me be clear. (A Gingrich-ism) What I am talking about is simple, moral, decent treatment of people and the issues by a sort of “golden rule” I’m not too sure what Jesus would say to a professing Christian who made 23 (plus ) million last year and is fighting to NOT take care of the ill, and impoverished. I do hope I am there to hear it.
Personally, I feel we would all be served better by taking the disgusting amounts of money the candidates are spending to brainwash potential voters, and applying it to the deficit, or giving it to the well deserving NPRs, and Public Broadcasting Corps out there, in exchange for allotting an equal amount of time to all the candidates for a one time, showdown of a debate. No ads, no need for image consultants and researchers, and polls designed to predetermine results. No ongoing need to endure sweater vest exposure.
When the Republicans fight to protect their ridiculously unfair tax rates, and disguise it as “job creation”, a simple investigation of the economics or their own records quickly reveal the bullshit it truly is. What they are fighting for is the right to protect their own personal greed . Really, how much over 150 million dollars do you truly need when the rest of the country is losing jobs, going hungry, losing their home ? Is it really worth 1.6 million in consulting ”fees”, from an entity foreclosing on those homes?I guess so , if you sold your soul a long time ago. Perhaps Jennifer John a veteran, a mom -homeless since 2006 has a different take on this than our Republican candidates after dedicating a portion of her life to serving her country. If you are going to propose a colony on the moon, at least frame it in a way that might help end homelessness, or disclose your true motive of providing a place for unruly ex wives…
Before all you staunch Republicans jump my bones take note of my statement above. I don’t truly like ANY politicians, and feel the numbers approaching being a “Good Man” are minimal. Most of the ones who approach that ideal are likely …wait for it… women. The Republicans simply have the spotlight now, as they debate, and attack each other and Obama. I assure you I will have more to say later, as the temperature gauge rises and points at a different target.
♦◊♦
But it isn’t all cynicism for me. I am a dreamer. I believe in hope. I actually believe in magic. I am not so closed minded and bitter that I can’t see past the wall that being a card carrying member of the 99% has built around me. I believe the inherent goodness of human kind will prevail, and we will survive and be the better for it. My own experience at endurance under fire demonstrates that. There is a movement towards that, and though it may get a whole lot worse before it gets better, change is coming. Whether Obama was its author or not.
Until then, I have to believe in magic. Real magic. Not the illusory kind created by sleight of hand and smoke and mirrors. Prestidigitation is a skill to create diversion. Diversion is designed to de – focus us from the real issues. It creates an illusion of ethical or moral superiority and a commitment to such in an arena of politics. As an example, in a more quiet action by the politicians of the day, a war has been waged on Porn, as the killer of marriages. Wait. Mr. Speaker is going to take a stance on how to uphold the institute of marriage in America? Guys who took money from Goldman Sachs, or “consulted “ Fannie and Freddie as the economy crumbled and the rain of foreclosures began to feel porn is a bigger detractor from a happy marriage than being homeless or so broke you have to choose between food, healthcare, or heat? I suppose all that is necessary to fix the marriage crisis is give tax breaks to the oil companies who will run ads for tourism in the Gulf, rather than pay the people who were affected by, or lost their livelihood, in their race to destroy Earth. Maybe prop up the banks who will gladly offer low interest mortgages to the masses. As long as you have a job and income. Gotta sell those foreclosures somehow.
♦◊♦
Let’s look at how our friends at “Good”, and Nona Willis Aronowitz, have framed this smoke and mirror fight against Porn as the killer of marriage:
“Apparently it’s 1979 all over again: Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum, and Newt Gingrich have all pledged to crack down on pornography should they become president. Morality in Media, an organization opposing “pornography and indecency through public education and the application of the law,” launched an effort in October to recruit presidential candidates in both major parties to commit to strict enforcement of obscenity laws. Three of them took the bait. Santorum thinks that “[f]ederal obscenity laws should be vigorously enforced,” Romney signed the pledge in the name of “fundamental family values,” and Gingrich promised to “appoint an Attorney General who will enforce these laws.” According to MIM, pornography not only leads to “misogyny and violence against women,” but “destruction of marriage,” as well.
Of course, this is likely just political posturing; federal obscenity laws, citing a vague adherence to “community standards,” are tricky to effectively enforce, and it’s been clear since the advent of the Internet that fighting the existence of porn is a losing battle. But if these presidential candidates actually cared about preserving the institution, they would do a lot more besides vowing to eliminate smut. Here are some suggestions: “
Help create jobs.
Encourage people to marry later.
Make it easier to get a bachelor’s degree.
Concentrate on prosecuting child pornographers. (I will toss in Human Trafficking as well)
Let everyone get married.
As you take a few minutes to mull over the thoughts presented here, ask yourself, do you believe in magic? If so, is it prestidigitation or the kind that unicorns and rainbows are made from, and that is reliant on the inherent “Good” nature of humanity? Careful…Santa is making notes. I’d suggest removing the blinders and putting on some rose colored glasses for a while. Then let us know what you think.
—Photo C. G. P. Grey/Flickr
Photo via (cc) Flickr user hansol.
As to a crackdown on porn I can’t say – perhaps enforcing the laws would justify them in a sense. But the porn issue is more than that. As Richard Weaver said, ideas have consequences. And the idea that what happens between two consenting adults remains between them and is only between them is wrong, and has consequences. Who decides what the limits are to pornography – the pornographers? Let suppose that two consenting adults decide that they would each like to sacrifice some portion of one of their limbs for the other to eat on camera. What’s the difference?… Read more »
Feminism lost a lot of cachet with me when it turned sex negative. We often have a situation now where women demand “double privilege,” that is, greater economic equality (entirely justified) along with Victorian protections (not justified if women are to be equal.) The anti-pornography movement is an example of trying to reimpose Victorian sexual norms.
Hmmm. Interesting perspective. Thanks for reading.
IMHO, what has harmed marriage more than anything else. Celebrities, WHY???
How can young people take something like marriage serious when they see their idols getting a divorce after 7 days, 25 days etc. And not just once in a while but literally all the time , Kim Kardasian , Britney Spears, and many others.
If you want to save marriage, lets prevent anyone deemed by the state as being a celebrity from being married. <— Kinda tongue in cheek but not fully
Thanks for commenting John, but I suspect you may have connected your comment with the wrong post here. Appreciate the read.
Using a pretend-conversation about portn as a way to take pot shots at conservative ideas while pretending not to have a political agenda …
How about a little honesty?
Anthony, I started this piece with a disclosure. I also said I probably would have something to say to less conservative politicians at a different time. I own my bias. Not taking the bait here. I think that is just about as honest as I can be. The piece is also about rose colored magic. Sorry if you disagree. I suppose if it is dishonest then I may be like a child in that I model the behavior I see from the leadership. This would include my father, bosses, leaders, candidates and politicians. I do appreciate you reading and sharing… Read more »
I’m not too sure what Jesus would say to a professing Christian who made 23 (plus ) million last year and is fighting to NOT take care of the ill, and impoverished. Oh that’s easy. Jesus said the rich go to hell. Almost always. Even worse for the rich the tiny number of exceptions appear to be exceptions because they end up giving away their money. It’s one of the things he was actually pretty clear on. The Bible as a whole talks about money more than any topic (except god). Seems like that simple message has a hard time… Read more »
That may very well be the one here in Atlanta who paid undisclosed settlements to the teenage boys he molested. That may have something to do with causing a bankruptcy….
Thanks for reading David.
Nope, not Atlanta – must just be a bunch of churches like that. Topic came up because my wife was having some schadenfreude at her lawyer brother who is a big Republican and against Occupy. Suddenly he’s in financial trouble because Regions bank needs his work less (housing market crash of course). The Church he goes to has this huge financial problem too. Suddenly he’s got no health insurance, nor his wife who comes from money. Fortunately their kids are still insured. His wife has pre-existing conditions too (well who doesn’t) so another irony is she might end up one… Read more »
Jack – the issue with politics is that it’s primarily of emotional appeal. The most capable, brilliant, magnificent potential candidate imaginable would be scrutinized and maybe rejected for having smoked weed in their twenties. I’m afraid it is used because it is effective. Unfortunately.
In a round about way that is my point. If expected to meet the standards we set or judge others by, there would be very lonely elections. Instead we roust a President based on his morals while having an affair, and come back years later and it seems everyone forgot and or ignores the elephant in the room. It baffles me. As an aside, is it just me or is the thought of Newt with his finger on the “hot button” not the scariest thought in the world ?
Thanks for reading and commenting Elissa.
You lost me at “white male privilege”.
But let’s not forget that It’s not ONLY right wingers that gave bad priorities. Bunches of lefties obsess over Porn too. Around here we call them feminists.
I’ll stick to my guns on this one, and avoid the labels and bait to enter the feminist vs MRA debate. Both have very valid points. Both sides have acted as dividers, not unifiers or operatives for equality .However it is those labels that often cause the fray. For me to assume what you mean by throwing around the term feminist would be to defocus off the point of my post. It’s an opinion piece. I don’t like politics or politicians and a true moral and ethical position would go a long way to being a remedy for what ails… Read more »
What’s bad is not that you got the legal help, but that nobody else did. By rights you should NOT be still there, but by rights neither should the other people in similar situations.
Of all society’s problems, porn is not a major one. To make porn an election issues, is just pandering for votes, especially Newt. He doesn’t agree with that for a second.
Regarding marriage, though, maybe if Romney is elected, he will act to fully legalize not only same-sex marriage but also re-legalize polygamy.
A scary type of magic indeed.
True, it’s not a valid issue… but since when have American elections focused on valid issues? In particular, it’s standard practice for the GOP to drum up social issues–flag-burning, Willie Horton, gay marriage–to turn out the social-conservative vote when they don’t dare discuss actual issues like the economy, healthcare, or unemployment.
I think this is walking a dangerous line because you can easily confuse two issues. On one hand, there is a lot of support for pornography as an enabler for sexual violence. On the other, you are right in that it’s more than a political distraction that can become a red herring issue that not only taints the election, but also taints the legitimate concerns about pornography and its relation to sexual violence.
Very valid points I agree with. I would say my message -and it may be somewhat convoluted, is not about porn at all but at the tendency to mask the true issues. Particularly issues, far removed from, and in my opinion much more morally important than attempts to control an individual’s right to make those moral decisions on their own. Truly, is porn a bigger threat than homelessness or an economy that helps foster it? Are those in a position to make those calls, (like candidates) able to stand in the moral light they would shine on others as a… Read more »
“…there is a lot of support for pornography as an enabler for sexual violence.”
Which would be what, exactly? There is NO conclusive or even reasonable evidence that pornography does anything to you except waste time. There’s “evidence” to the reverse (i.e., pornography reducing sexual violence) as well, but it’s equally bullshit, as it’s all based on correlations and correlation is not causation.
“there is a lot of support for pornography as an enabler for sexual violence”
There is plenty of empirical evidence than pornography REDUCES sexual violence. Including the fact that there is an inverse correlation between porn availability and sexual violence. In fact because we know timing, namely we know that reductions in sexual violence follow increase availability of porn we have evidence that porn CAUSES a reduction in sexual violence.