Intro to Ethics

The Right to Choose

The Right to Choose In this essay I will uphold that that society should respect a womans choice to be in pornography. I believe that any possible negative effects from a womans decision to star in pornography are greatly outweighed by the freedom that she retains. A woman has her own sexual autonomy and unique sexual identity and is able to use porn to grow either. On top of this it seems far worse to disallow an activity between consenting adults. Many of the counter points are also prone to error such as the idea that pornography degrades the women involved or that the existence of pornography harms all women, even those outside the industry. To preface the main arguments its helpful if there is a common understanding of what pornography is. The definition I use is a fairly simple one, audio, video or imagery that showcases sexual themes in order to arouse a consensual consumer. Most of the discussion will revolve around the video and images you would likely find in online pornography but anything fitting the definition is equally applicable. Note that the consumer is consenting to view the imagery and is doing so by their choosing. Sexual autonomy is an important concept that allows us freedom as sexual individuals. It is generally widely agreed that freedom is an important ideology to protect. Perhaps excluding ideological extremists, the vast majority of people enjoy having freedom in their speech and expression. It is unlikely for someone to enjoy people told that they cannot do something. Even those extremists themselves do not want to be told no, just that others conform to them. No one wants to be restricted or limited in the experiences available to them. There are some limits to our freedom that have been agreed upon over our history. Basic laws such as

persecuting murderers and thieves may limit our experiences but they do so to protect us from each other. The one place that the general consensus agrees upon to limit our freedom is when it begins to affect other non-consenting individuals. Once we start to negatively touch others without their consent our freedom ends. It is possible to cause negative harm to someone if they consent to it but these cases are not very common. It would seem foolish to think someone would ask to be stolen from or have their home broken into. There can definitely be special case scenarios but these are few and far between. Pornography is a transaction between the production team (director, cameramen, actors, actresses, etc) and the consumers. During this transaction we have two parties who are in complete consent. The production team is aware and consenting to the filming of the porn and the consumer has chosen to view it. This transaction does not bring in any individuals who have not consented. Of course there is the possibility that someone in the production team, likely an actor or actress, who may not be fully consensual to film. This is where it begins negatively affecting a person within the transaction and is definitely wrong. However there is no reason to assume that every case is like this or is it wise to get rid of pornography because of this possibility. It is far better to have stronger enforcement and moderation of consent. Let those forcing the victim be punished accordingly. If someone chooses on their own accord to star in pornography there should be no issue. They have the right and sexual autonomy to do as they please. Nobody in the transaction will be harmed if they are all consenting adults. Even in violent pornography, if the woman has consented it is fair to assume that the woman enjoys the experience. There may be a bit of

disdain but if there is consent in the end the woman has clearly deemed any displeasure as worth it. A common retort to this conclusion is that a woman acting in porn hurts the image of all women and increases male objectification of women. Susan Brison gives an example of a hypothetical club with African American men and women who are degraded by white men and women for money (380). She goes onto say that there would be an increase of hate crime and that African Americans would be better off with the club abolished. The problem found in this is in the morality of the people attending these clubs. If a person is willing to spend money to have the chance to degrade another person for their race they would likely already be a bigot. There is no innate or hormonal reasoning for enjoying this act. This is purely out of hatred. Pornography is a transaction that exists because of the strong hormonal desire to have sex. When sex isnt available people are able to turn to porn for a safe and personal sexual experience. It can actually decrease the chance of sexual assault as men arent as easily persuaded to take that route when sex isnt viable. They can go to pornography where there is consent from all parties. Our desire to have sex is nothing we can do about and the urge to do so can happen when we have no consenting partner to turn to. Men dont watch pornography because they hate women but because they desire to orgasm. Pornographys existence does not hurt all women because men are merely watching consenting adults have sex. There may be objectification of women but is that really an inherently bad thing? Sometimes other people can be used to accomplish something. In the case of sex, consenting adults can use each other to reach orgasm. This is a temporary mindset

and is often a two-way street. A woman likely has the same goal as a man going into sex and that is to orgasm. From the beginning to the end all individuals are there to reach their end state and are using each other to do so. A man watching pornography and objectifying the women involved during the porn will not make him objectify all women at all times. Excessive consumption of porn could have slight changes in mindset but this would be a small issue. Regardless, pornography is not the issue but the constant bombardment of sex would cause this change. If a man were to have excessive amounts of sex or spend a great deal of fantasizing they are likely to begin to objectify women more. This is conditioning that would be hard to avoid. Pornography is not the only catalyst. For people to completely stop sexually objectifying each other you would have to deplete humanitys sex drive. To censure a womans choice to star in pornography is still condemned by the lack of harm to women outside of the originally discussed transaction. A woman is free to express her sexual autonomy and doing so does no harm. Another common problem people against pornography seem to have is that it is degrading to the women in the porn. While this is possible its more of a case-by-case basis than premised. Some women may consent to do things that are degrading to them but they have the freedom to choose what they do. If women only choose what they truly are comfortable in doing than even violent or otherwise degrading sex would not actually be degrading. If a person doesnt feel degraded the act cannot be considered to be degrading. You cant fault a system that allows you to avoid being degraded. You can degrade yourself in daily life if you choose to but not surprisingly few people make that decision. Similarly, if a woman is

not comfortable with doing something in porn she has the right to refuse to do it. If there is an attempt to force her than she is having her rights attacked. There is no reason even in the most violent legal pornography that a woman needs to feel degraded as she has the right to refuse. To say that a woman should be unable to act in porn because she may be degraded is a potential risk but one that can easily be avoided by her being vocal. Andrew Altman mentions that women are better off with even legal violent pornography existing than a traditional sexual morality (395). What he means is that a society which is accepting of all sexual identities is better for women than one that requires women to be reliant on males for income and livelihood. This crosses with the idea of freedom of expression (as pornography as speech is questionable). If the two universes were given as options, one that had the current list of legal pornography with women free to choose their sexuality and how they express it and the other, one where women were tied to men and unable to experience anything but monogamous straight relationships the choice seems obvious. While the universe with pornography could have negative ramifications on the female gender it is exponentially more attractive than the option of reliance and restriction. A woman should not feel as if their sexual identity, sexual desires or autonomy is restricted when discussing it in a framework of legal and consenting adults. She should be able to choose her identity through porn and feel no shame in doing so. Some advocates on the anti-pornography side of the coin will often state that women can be coerced into the industry by economic pressure. Economic pressure leading a woman to pornography is lacking as an argument because there are many jobs anyone can apply for that

require little to no formal education. Working part time at a gas station, serving at restaurants, teaching your unique skills and many others are all available for these girls. While economic pressure could be an influence it is unlikely to be the only reason for a woman to choose to enter the pornography industry. If she had no interest whatsoever in consenting to sex on camera it would be easy for her to instead look for another job or ignore the thought of joining the industry to begin with. The idea that someone would be able to do a moral 180 just to earn some money which is attainable while maintaining their morals is a bit ridiculous. A woman working in the pornography industry is almost certainly there on their own free will. While its possible she is being blackmailed or pressured as an adult woman she should know she has the right to refuse consent. Economic pressure is not a viable excuse when there are many jobs offered that are accessible to people with all levels of education. There is no reason I can think of that justifies censuring a womans right to be in pornography. All women have sexual autonomy and the freedom to choose their sexuality and what defines it. There is no reason to blame degradation or objectification as reasons to vilify it as they either dont exist or are in such a small minority that the freedom that women receive by being given the choice to be in porn outweighs the issue. The liberal sexual morality is greatly preferential to the traditional morality and it should be obvious why. Wo men shouldnt need a spouse to be autonomous in any way. They should be free to do as they please. Coercion is a possible but unlikely issue as any mature adult would be able to avoid being persuaded to do something so unlike their natural character. Though both sides of the debate are important, at the end of the day pornography is a transaction between two major parties

(the viewer and the production team), both of which are made up of consenting adults who are free to do as they please.

Works Cited Altman, Andrew. Speech Codes and Expressive Harm. Ethics in Practice. Ed. LaFollette, Hugh. Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 2007. 395. Print. Brison, Susan. The Price We Pay? Pornography and Harm. Ethics in Practice. Ed. LaFollette, Hugh. Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 2007. 380. Print.