Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site rpics.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!rpics!weltyrp
From: weltyrp@rpics.UUCP (Richard Welty)
Newsgroups: net.legal
Subject: Re: re: Pornography definition?
Message-ID: <213@rpics.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 25-Nov-85 20:25:28 EST
Article-I.D.: rpics.213
Posted: Mon Nov 25 20:25:28 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 28-Nov-85 03:39:51 EST
References: <1477@decwrl.UUCP>
Organization: RPI CS Department, Troy  NY
Lines: 37

> I thought our ordinance writers or whoever does such things have prohressed
> farther than this... Apparently men's pictures in similar poses aren't
> considered pornographic...
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> The following is a definition of pornography taken from a proposed
> anti-pornography ordinance (see the article titled "Re: At Last: Sojourner
> on Dworkin-MacKinnon" in net.women for more details):
> > 
> >      "Pornography is the graphic sexually explicit  subordination
> > of  women through pictures and/or words that also includes one or
> > (i) women  are  presented  dehumanized  as
> > sexual  objects,  things,  or  commodities;  or  
> ... many definitions ...
> > (vii) women are presented as whores by  nature;  or  
> > (viii)  women  are
> > presented as being penetrated by objects or animals; or
> > (ix) women are presented in scenarios of  degradation,  injury,  
> > torture, shown  as filthy or inferior, bleeding, bruised or hurt in
> > a context that makes these conditions sexual.

Out of curiosity, does valid journalistic photography come
under this proposed ordinance?
-- 
				Rich Welty

	"P. D. Q.'s early infancy ended with a striking decision;
	at the age of three, P. D. Q. Bach decided to give up music"
			- Prof. Peter Schickele,
			from "The Definitive Biography of P. D. Q. Bach"

	CSNet:   weltyrp@rpics
	ArpaNet: weltyrp.rpics@csnet-relay
	UUCP:  seismo!rpics!weltyrp