The Pornography Plague​—The Threat Is Real!

WHAT you may read below is a sampling of pornography today. Does it shock you? Does it make you feel sick inside? Yet it is from publications that give a mild description of the content of some of the pornography presently circulating. Though the quoted sources used language they felt suitable for public reading, to spare you, Awake! had to edit some of that language further.

Hence, saying that ‘porn has always been around, so there’s nothing to worry about’ reveals an unawareness of a significant change in content in recent years. It is no longer just scenes of nudity or sexual intercourse. Nowadays it is a loathsome outpouring of filth, perversions, and raw violence. There are scenes of heterosexual and homosexual rape; Lesbian, gay, oral, anal, and group sex; incest; bestiality; torture, mutilation, and murder​—often involving preteens. This is important to keep in mind as we consider the view of some that pornography is harmless and hence no threat to you.

Harmful or Beneficial?

There are two general theories about the effects of porn. One is the catharsis, or “release,” idea. Its advocates contend that such material has no bad effect on normal people, yet it provides a safe release for the sexually aggressive and therefore is harmless and may even be beneficial. Of course, those who argue this way are admitting that what a person reads or sees does produce an effect. Still, they say that there is no solid evidence to show a link between pornography and rape or other kinds of violence.

But voices just as strong argue that there is a link. These are the voices of experience​—of those who have to deal directly with the depressing effects of porn. They reject as specious the many arguments that demand ‘exact scientific data’ to prove a link, and they insist on the other theory: that there are people who imitate and have imitated what they see in pornography.

In a letter to The New York Times, the associate editor of Police Times listed examples of what convinces many in police work that “pornography helps create a moral and social climate that is conducive to sexual abuse and exploitation.” Some examples provided were:

● “William Marshall, studying Canadian rapists in prison, reports, ‘various forms of pornographic fantasies may lead to crime.’ Ten of 18 rapists confessed that pornography influenced them to force females to have sex.”

● “According to . . . [the] founder of the Phoenix-based Citizens for Decency Through Law, ‘Police vice squads report that 77 percent of child molesters of boys and 87 percent of child molesters of girls admitted trying out the sexual behavior modeled by pornography.’”

● “The Los Angeles Police Department points out that in the more than 40 child-sex-abuse cases it investigated . . . pornographic photos were found to be present in every case.”

● “Adult and child pornography is used . . . to seduce children into sex. In one case, a 6-year-old girl testified that her father used pornography to entice her.”

In addition, according to The New York Times of May 14, 1986, the commission on pornography formed by the Justice Department of the United States has concluded from its one-year study “that substantial exposure to materials of this type bears some causal relationship to the level of sexual violence, sexual coercion or unwanted sexual aggression in the population so exposed.”

True, there are those who disagree with this conclusion, but even they acknowledge the need for control of needless violence and involvement of children in porn, again in effect admitting that porn does affect its users. It ought to be obvious that there is a connection between what one sees and reads and what one thinks and does.

Despite clever arguments against the idea of links, one thing is clear: Pornographers know exactly why they produce smut and users know exactly why they buy it. Its purpose is admitted by pornographers​—sexual arousal. What then follows, whether masturbation or worse, cannot callously be dismissed as solely the responsibility of the user. The product by its very design abuses the consumer. It and its purveyors are every bit as reprehensible as any addictive drug and its pushers.

‘What About Our Rights?’

Still, there are those who warn about depriving people of their rights to possess, read, and watch whatever they wish in the privacy of their own homes, as well as of rights to publish and distribute such material. Abuse of censorship is feared.

These are generally valid concerns. But even though there is such a thing as freedom of speech, you cannot say or publish libelous things about others or make a false public outcry that would endanger the safety and lives of others. No human government guarantees absolute freedom. The rights and freedoms of others must be taken into account.

Those who ask, “What’s wrong with a person’s viewing pornography privately if he does not imitate it to hurt others?” are overlooking an important facet of human rights. Since porn is used to seduce the very young to get involved in incest and other forms of child sex-abuse, and since both adults and small children shown in photos and films are often forced to participate in producing pornography, how can anyone deny that harm is done to them?

Moreover, what about the violence suffered when those used for pornography are bound, tortured, mutilated, and submitted to painful, unnatural sex? And what about some children being turned over to child-sex rings for their profitable international trade? “Disgusting!” you say. But what about their rights? Is that the price that must be paid for other people to have the right to “enjoy” pornography? Is that ‘doing unto others as you would have others do unto you’?​—Matthew 7:12.

Still, many say that censorship is not the answer. For one thing, to prosecute pornographers you have to be able to identify what is and what is not porn. Yet, even the courts have not been successful in doing so.

What is clear is that you and your family are threatened by this porn plague. The police, antipornography groups, customs agents, and censors all seem unable to control or eliminate the epidemic. Is there any way for concerned people to protect the ones they love?

[Box on page 5]

“Three men successively kidnap a woman, a twelve-year-old girl, and a grandmother, and beat them senseless, kicking them in the face, head, and body. After they have passed out, they are raped and beaten again.”

‘Women’s naked and mutilated bodies suspended upside down on barbed-wire fences, and a woman forced to [participate in an act of bestiality].’

‘Little girls [involved with oral sex and bestiality], and boys of eight or nine being . . . sodomized.’

[Box on page 6]

A March 1985 poll conducted in the United States by the Gallup Organization for Newsweek magazine shows the following interesting views held by Americans on matters relating to pornography:

● An overwhelming 73 percent of Americans believed that explicit sexual materials “lead some people to commit rape or sexual violence.”

● Only 34 percent thought pornography provided “a safe outlet for people with sexual problems.”

● The majority, 76 percent, believed that explicit materials “lead some people to lose respect for women.”

● More than two thirds, 67 percent, felt that pornography can “lead to a breakdown of public morals.”

● A notable 63 percent to 73 percent thought a total ban ought to be placed on videos, films, or magazines featuring sexual violence.