Availability of Pornography Should Not Be Confused With Community Acceptance

By Robert Peters*
President of Morality in Media

This article was first published at www.movieguide.org

There are two things that keep me going in the war against pornography. The first is my belief that with God all things are possible and that God is not “on the side” of individuals who exploit and debase sex for crass commercial purposes. The second is my belief that given a choice, most Americans would rather live in a decent and safe society rather than in a modern day Sodom and Gomorrah.

With the explosive increase in the availability of pornography, the second ground of my “confidence” has been tested! But while I fear the “good guys” in this war may be losing ground, I have not abandoned my belief that most Americans are not pleased with the proliferation of hardcore pornography via “adult businesses,” mainstream video stores, pay TV channels, the Internet, and now cell phones.

In June of this year, Leger Marketing announced the results of a survey of behaviors that Canadians consider immoral - results that both encouraged me and caused concern. Overall the results on the subject of pornography were more positive than I would have anticipated, with 58% of Canadians considering pornographic films immoral. But the gap between the sexes was considerable, with 67% of Canadian women, but only 46% of Canadian men, considering pornographic films immoral.

The Canadian poll results made me wonder how U.S. adults might differ. I hoped a higher percentage of U.S. adults would consider it morally unacceptable to view pornography, and I was not disappointed. According to a survey commissioned by Morality in Media and conducted by Harris Interactive in July 2006, almost three in four (73%) U.S. adults consider it morally unacceptable to view pornography. The exact question and response totals are as follows: “Do you consider it to be morally acceptable to view pornographic websites and videos?” Responses: 21%--Yes; 73%-- No; 4%--Not Sure; 2%--Refused.

But as in Canada, so in the U.S., there is a gap between the sexes. Overall, the U.S. data show that 64% of males and 81% of females consider it unacceptable to view pornography, while 29% of males and 13% of females consider it acceptable. But among males ages 18 to 34, only 51% consider it unacceptable, while 44% consider it acceptable. In contrast, 73% of females ages 18-34, 81% of females ages 35-54, and 90% of females ages 55+ consider it morally unacceptable to view pornography.

The opinions toward viewing this type of material also vary based on other major demographic segments. For example, 81% of U.S. adults with a high school education or less say it is not morally acceptable versus 66% for those with at least some college education or higher. Eight-in-ten Republicans (82%) as well as seven-in-ten Independents (71%) and Democrats (68%) say it is not morally acceptable. Married adults (76%) are more likely to find viewing this material not morally acceptable than are single adults (63%). Similarly, adults with children in the home (74%) are more likely to believe that viewing this material is not morally acceptable than those who do not have children (63%).

There are also substantial differences based on religion. For example, among those who identify themselves as Catholic, only 21% consider it morally acceptable to view pornography; and among self-identified Baptists, only 13% consider it acceptable. In contrast, for those indicating they are “other non-Christian” (this category includes atheists and agnostics), 42% consider it acceptable. Those who defend pornography, whether in court or in the court of public opinion, point to the proliferation of this sordid material as “proof” either that everyone is viewing it or that people no longer deem pornography unacceptable. The porn defenders overlook at least four factors.

First, much if not most pornography is consumed by a relatively small percentage of males who are hooked on it. Second, just because a person, whether out of curiosity or at a weak moment or for a period of time, views pornography does not mean he has become a devotee of it. This is especially true when Internet pornographers use aggressive and unscrupulous means to bring people to their websites, including porn spam, using innocent sounding domain names and common misspellings of websites, buying up expired domain names, manipulating search engine results, and “mouse trapping.” Third, even among long-term users, not all approve of their own behavior. Many addicts hate what they do.

And fourth, the primary reason that we have so much pornography today is because federal and state obscenity laws have not been vigorously enforced. A variety of prosecutorial explanations (excuses) have been given for not doing so; but to my knowledge, no prosecutor has ever stated publicly that he or she does not enforce obscenity laws because his or her community does not want these laws enforced.

During the 1992 presidential campaign, Bill Clinton stated in a letter, “Be assured that aggressive enforcement of federal obscenity laws by the Justice Department…will be a priority in a Clinton-Gore administration.” Janet Reno, his choice for Attorney General, however, did not share his concern about obscenity (i.e., it was not one of her “priorities”); and by 1994 enforcement of federal obscenity laws against commercial distributors of hardcore pornography had for the most part come to an end.

In 1997, Morality in Media commissioned Wirthlin Worldwide to ask the following question in a national survey, "Since the World Wide Web became more accessible in 1995, more than 20 million Web sites have been created. A large number of these Web sites contain hard-core pornography. The Supreme Court has said that those who distribute hard-core pornography can be prosecuted under obscenity laws. In 1996, Congress expanded the Federal obscenity laws, making it a crime to distribute obscene materials on the Internet. In your opinion, should the federal laws against Internet obscenity be vigorously enforced?" For all respondents, 82% said they supported enforcement; 16% said they didn’t.

It is disturbing that so many younger males think it is morally acceptable to view pornography. Since males in particular are vulnerable to visual portrayals of sex, however, perhaps it should not come as a surprise. For more than a decade, children have been stumbling into and seeking out Internet sites that allow visitors to view pornography without cost or proof of age. For this, we can thank the Supreme Court, which has failed to uphold laws intended to restrict children’s access to Internet pornography. Colleges and universities have also helped “pornify” youth culture by refusing to take steps to prevent use of school computers to access pornographic websites. Some have even introduced courses that present pornography in a positive light and invited porn stars to campus. For a recent look at one college porn scene, see Kelsey Blodget, “Pornography Becomes More Socially Accepted,” The Dartmouth, 5/4/06. Meanwhile, the entertainment media can’t seem to do enough to promote pornography and porn stars.

In its “2006 State of the Industry” report, the Free Speech Coalition (the “trade association of the adult entertainment industry”) stated, “Adult entertainment has become widely accepted by Americans across the nation, especially in recent years. Adult stars appear in mainstream films and talk shows. [The report could have added that porn stars also appear in music videos and rappers appear in hardcore porn videos.] There are best selling books by adult entertainment personalities. Films celebrate industry heroes like Larry Flynt.” “Furthermore,” the report continues, “if adult entertainment is widely accepted by mainstream populations, then the use of criminal obscenity law to regulate it is unconstitutional.”

In the 1974 Hamling v. United States obscenity case, the Supreme Court did say that the word “obscene” connotes sexual conduct that is “portrayed in a manner so offensive as to make it unacceptable under current community mores.” The Court also said that the “mere availability” of similar pornography in the community does not prove that the pornography a defendant is charged with distributing is not obscene.

By this time you may be asking, “What can I do to be part of the solution?” For one thing, you can go to the www.moralityinmedia.org website and click to the WRAP Campaign page, where you will find a two-page sheet that sets forth action steps for the annual White Ribbon Against Pornography (WRAP) Week [which runs this year from Sunday Oct. 29 through Sunday Nov. 5] and throughout the year.

One action step is to make complaints to federal prosecutors if you or your children are exposed to pornography on the Internet or to ads for pornography (porn spam). In 2002, Morality in Media (MIM) launched www.obscenitycrimes.org to enable citizens to report possible violations of federal Internet obscenity laws. MIM forwards complaints to the Justice Department in Washington and to each local U.S. Attorney where a complaint originated. MIM has also retained the services of two retired law enforcement agents who prepare their own investigative reports that describe the content of websites that citizens have complained about. Justice Department spokespersons have expressed appreciation for the website. Congress has also appropriated funds to help operate it. We need more citizen complaints!

Another action step is to educate your community about the pornography problem and solutions. Morality in Media is just one of many national, state and local organizations that can provide literature or a speaker or help organize a workshop to educate your community or church.

I do not say that that the war against pornography will be won easily. I do think there is still time to reverse the floodtide of obscenity pouring into our nation’s communities and homes; but at the rate our youth are following in the path of the Destroyer, it’s hard to know how much longer we have!

The English poet Alexander Pope once wrote: “Vice is a monster of so frightful face, as to be hated needs but to be seen; but seen too often, familiar with her face, we first endure, then tolerate, then embrace.” As I see it, most Americans are still at the hate and endurance stages when it comes to pornography, but among our nation’s cultural elite and young adults, many now tolerate and even embrace pornography.

Thankfully, all does not depend on us. Just last week (as I write) my wife asked me if I knew where the Bible verse was that talks about the “enemy coming in like a flood.” Since I am regarded as the “Bible expert” in our home, I must confess that I felt a bit sheepish as I reached for a concordance. But reach I did, and I was again encouraged by that wonderful word from the Book of Isaiah (59:19), which reads: “When the enemy shall come in like a flood, the Spirit of the Lord shall lift up a standard against him.”

*Robert Peters is president of Morality in Media, a national nonprofit organization based in New York City that works to curb traffic in obscene materials and uphold standards of decency in the media.