On April 16, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the 1996 Child Pornography Prevention Act, a law that outlawed computer-generated images of children involved in sexual acts. The court said the law’s language was “too vague.” Too bad.
The only amusing aspect of the case was the name of the pornographer’s trade group that opposed the law. The group didn’t call itself “Pornographers of America,” the “U.S. Hardcore Defense Fund” or the “United Smut Coalition,” names which would be too revealing. Rather, the group designated itself “the Free Speech Coalition.”
Similarly, when a 3rd District judge ordered the closure of his Midvale sex shop called “Dr. John’s,” freedom fighter John Haltom said, “We were never planning on winning in this court. We want to get into the appeals court, and ultimately the Supreme Court.”
Then Haltom displayed his dignified patriotism, saying, “Someone’s got to protect the First Amendment.”
What rubbish. While Haltom and the Free Speech Coalition will make themselves out to be crusaders for the Constitution, they are much more interested in ensuring the well being of a burgeoning and lucrative industry. Statistics show porn’s profitability: For example, in March 2000, U.S. News & World Report said online pornography sales?people paying to access porn?totaled $1.4 billion. Some estimate that total will soon surpass $3 billion.
So why stop a guy from making an honest buck, especially if it will only affect the viewer? If only that were true.
While no study has ever found a 100 percent link between pornography and crime, deviancy or sexual addiction, scores of studies have established some causal relationship.
Dr. Victor B. Cline, emeritus professor of psychology at the U, has written extensively on pornography. In his work “Pornography’s Effects on Adults and Children,” Cline writes, “As a clinical psychologist, I have treated, over many years, approximately 300?individuals (96 percent male) with sexual illnesses” of all types.
Cline found “With only several exceptions, pornography has been a major or minor contributor or facilitator in the acquisition of their deviation or sexual addiction,” Cline said.
Other researchers have found similar results in clinical settings. A 1988 study by researchers Dolf Zillmann and Jennings Bryant found that after being exposed to “repeated presentations of hardcore, non-violent adult pornography over a six-week period,” subjects developed increased callousness toward women; developed an appetite for more deviant types of pornography; devalued the importance of monogamy and fidelity; and thought of non monogamous relationships as normal behavior.
The list goes on. Studies in Oklahoma County, Cincinnati, Phoenix and Florida found that crime in general, and most notably violent crime (including rape), decreased when sex oriented businesses were shut down in those areas.
Many criminals, including Utah notables Ted Bundy and Gary Bishop, have admitted that porn was a partial catalyst for their violent crimes.
A study Cline conducted in 1991 found that among 932 sex addicts, 90 percent of men and 77 percent of women said pornography played an important role in their addiction.
And the list could continue, tragically arriving at the abuse and exploitation of children.
While most Americans feel Federal pornography laws should be more rigorous?a 1997 Wirthlin Worldwide poll found 80 percent of Americans felt as much?many people will likely continue to support the porn industry.
Some of these individuals would probably agree with sex shop owner John Haltom on another point. The magnanimous Haltom is not only concerned with constitutional freedom, but also with bringing sexual health to Utahns. Haltom told the Deseret News he brought his business from Omaha to Utah “to help the state’s ‘sexually repressed and provincial’ citizens find sexual freedom.”
Don’t talk to Dan Gray about sexual freedom through pornography. Gray is one of seven licensed clinical social workers at the Salt Lake Counseling Center in Murray. The counselors there deal almost exclusively with persons suffering from sexual addiction.
“We work with the whole range of addictions?from viewing pornographic magazines to activities that would incarcerate people, like voyeurism, exhibitionism and prostitution,” Gray said.
During the past year, the “vast majority” of people Gray has worked with are individuals struggling with pornography on the Internet. Many of these people never had problems with porn until it came online. The addiction ravages their lives.
“Some people have lost their jobs because of [viewing pornography on the Internet] at work, and many are at risk of losing marriages and families,” Gray said. “Their lives have become unmanageable because of the obsession.”
Concerning Haltom’s attempt to bring “sexual freedom” to Utah, Gray is especially pointed. “People that come to us are in bondage,” he said. “Sexual freedom is not created by contributing to a compulsive or addictive behavior. It has nothing to do with looking at the sexual acts of others and basically objectifying another human being in order to gratify yourself.”
John Haltom also told the Deseret News, “We will push everything to the border in protest [for rights of pornographers], and I believe it’s still my right to protest.”
Haltom will protest. Opponents of pornography and its effects will have to do the same. If not, Haltom, the Free Speech Coalition and those who earn more by showing more will not only have their day in court?they’ll also have their day in the sun.
Mike welcomes feedback at: [email protected] or send letters to the editor to: [email protected].