Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T08:04:32.407Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Pornography's Many Meanings: A Reply to C.M. Concepcion

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 March 2020

Alisa L. Carse
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

C.M. Concepcion's review of “Pornography: An Uncivil Liberty?” (Carse 1995) fundamentally misconstrues the position defended in that article. This paper examines possible sources of this misconstrual, focusing critical attention on the narrowly crafted, morally loaded notion of “pornography” that figures centrally in the original argument under review. Pornography is not a category of speech that can be characterized as having one crucial meaning or message, nor is the message of pornography easily identifiable in instances of pornographic speech. This raises the problem of interpretive privilege, which haunts many of the antipornography arguments being offered in the contemporary debate, including the author's own earlier argument.

Type
Comment/Reply
Information
Hypatia , Volume 14 , Issue 1 , Winter 1999 , pp. 101 - 111
Copyright
Copyright © 1999 by Hypatia, Inc.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Blakely, Mary Kay. 1985. Is one woman's sexuality another woman's pornography? Ms., April, 41–47, 120‐22.Google Scholar
Butler, Judith. 1997. Excitable speech: A politics of the performative. New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Carse, Alisa L. 1995. Pornography: An uncivil liberty? Hypatia 10(1): 155–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duggan, LisaHunter, Nan, and Vance, Carol S. 1985. False promises: Feminist anti‐pornography legislation in the U.S. In Women against censorship, ed. Bursyn, Varda. Vancouver: Douglas and Mclntyre.Google Scholar
Dworkin, Andrea. 1993. Against the male flood: Censorship, pornography, and equality. In Feminist jurisprudence, ed. Smith, Patricia. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Frug, Mary Joe. 1992. A postmodern feminist legal manifesto (an unfinished draft). Harvard Law Review 105: 1045–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunter, Nan D. and Law, Sylvia A. 1987. Brief amid curiae of feminist anticensorship task force et al., in American Booksellers Association v. Hudnut. University of Michigan Journal of Law 21: 467–81.Google Scholar
Keller, Susan Etta. 1990. Review essay: Justify my love. Western State University Law Review 18: 463–70.Google Scholar
Keller, Susan Etta. 1993. Viewing and doing: Complicating pornography's meaning. The Georgetown Law Journal 81: 2195–2242.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Duncan. 1992. Sexual abuse, sexy dressing and the eroticization of domination. New England Law Review 26: 1309–93.Google Scholar
Langton, Rae. 1993. Speech acts and unspeakable acts. Philosophy and Public Affairs 22(4): 293–330.Google Scholar
Longino, Helen. 1980. Pornography, oppression, and freedom: A closer look. In Take back the night: Women on pornography, ed. Lederer, Laura. New York: William Morrow.Google Scholar
MacKinnon, Catharine A. 1987. Feminism unmodified: Discourses on life and law. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
MacKinnon, Catharine A 1993. Only words. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Steinem, Gloria. 1986. Outrageous acts and everyday rebellions. New York: Signet.Google Scholar
West, Robin. 1987. The feminist‐conservative antipornography alliance and the 1986 attorney general's commission on pornography report. American Bar Foundation Research Journal, 681–711.CrossRefGoogle Scholar