"A First Amendment Junkie" is an article by Susan Jacoby that outlines why the restrictions to pornography are a violation of the First Amendment. The author commences the article by reviewing instances where the feminist movement has shown support and those that they have abdicated support utterly. Her argument on legalizing pornography rights forms one of the areas that the feminist movement has utterly abdicated support. Jacoby points out that the feminist movement feels threatened in case any form of pornography is assented to as they conclude that it will disastrous effects on women. However, Jacoby asserts that the feminist movement forgets to factor the First Amendment proposals in their argument. The author openly avows her support for the First Amendment, which indicates that she does not second the ideas advanced by the feminist movement. Firstly, Jacoby indicates that “Kiddie Porn” should not feature among the arguments against pornography, as it is not part of the First Amendment, which forms the basis of her argument for pornography. Jacoby also indicates that pictures of a nude woman are not obscene as they are a form of expression. The author points out that the motivation behind censorship is because “…They want to use the power of the state to accomplish what they have been unable to achieve in the marketplace of ideas and images. Jacoby concludes her article by raising a concern regarding how parents allow their children to watch movies and programs that do are not suitable for their age. She indicates that parents should be on the forefront in the fight against child pornography as they can limit the content accessible to their children.
This essay provides a critical response to Jacoby’s article A First Amendment Junkie.
Firstly, the author is successful in stating the problem in her article. Jacoby points out pornography as been the main issue that feminist do not agree with. Jacoby keenly scrutinizes their argument regarding pornography and notices the feminist’s lack of concern for what the First Amendment advocates (Gaines and Miller, 112). The author uses this as the basis of her argument while at the same time comparing the argument advanced by feminists’ with other argument such as the one abounded by some Jews in order to withdraw their support from American Civil Liberties. This is a successful comparison as it aids a reader to get the point that the author advances. The author employs this tact severally in her article, and she uses it to counter the feminists’ argument regarding preventing the use of the constitution to validate speech that is odious. Jacoby is particularly discontent with the feminists’ indication that the porn shops on 42nd street are disgusting to women, which she equates to Neo-Nazi’s match and the extermination survivors.
Secondly, the author is successful in her use of language to advance her point as she avoids words that can raise animosity from different quarters (Barnet and Bedau, 65). For instance, the author raises several points advanced by the feminist movement regarding pornography. The author touches on how the feminists are not convinced with the constitution assenting to odious speech. Jacoby is quick to point out that the feminist movement has a valid point, which she does not individually support. This proves her tact in advancing her point compared to employing words that constitute libel in analyzing her opponent’s arguments. The author also employs tact in dealing with the feminists’ argument regarding female pictures that constitute pornography. Jacoby points out how she sorts the judgment of several women regarding pictures in Playboy and Penthouse Magazines. From the responses she received, the author is keen to indicate that feminists like everyone else “…seldom have rational reasons for their preferences in erotica”. This deduction from language analysis is acceptable, as it does not stereotype feminists entirely.
Thirdly, the author concludes her article with an indication of how it disgusts her when parents allow their children to view content in the media that are not suitable for their age. This is a success on the point of the author as she brings out the class that is most vulnerable concerning matters of pornography. Through this, the author educates the feminist movement on who should be taken care of regarding matters of pornography (Congress, 153). She also proves that she does not support the idea concerning equating sex and death. The author also addresses successfully the issue concerning “kiddie Porn” in relation to the constitution. In as much as she does not support banning pornography utterly, she advances that individuals who use children for pornography should be incriminated, but the blame should not be placed on pornography as it depends on individual choices. Arguably, the author has employed much keen in addressing her counter-argument on points raised by the feminist movement, but she has being categorical to depict instances that should be used to censor or disagree with pornography.
Notably, the author does not forget to mention the current world in her argument (Tandon, 75). This is another success in her arguments is it helps substantiate her opinion. Jacoby points out that the feminist movement should advance their arguments while factoring the current trends. This is a critical point raise by the author basing on the fact that nowadays people get information by the click of a button. Reference to the current situation educates the feminist movement to form their arguments rationally and not blame pornography entirely as there are myriad factors involved.
In my opinion, I recommend the article as it employs a rational approach concerning pornography. The author fascinates me when she talks about naked women in relation to art. That tactical approach leaves the feminist movement with no points to advance for censorship of some content in the media. The author is also tactic in addressing the issue on child pornography. This is a sensitive issue, which the author addresses successfully by pointing out that the culprits who employ children in such inhumane activity should be blamed. Jacoby further proves her prowess on the matter by indicating her bad taste for parents who encourage their children to watch content from the media that does not suit their age.
In conclusion, the article provides the author’s argument regarding feminist’s notion of how pornography depicts women and why it should be censored. The author counters their argument by indicating that they ought to factor the First Amendment in their argument. The author’s success in the article is viewed from various dimensions. These include the way she employs the use of language in addressing her points, which does not raise animosity from different quarters. Secondly, the author employs tact through comparison of arguments raised by the feminist movement with other significant occurrences, which aid a reader to get the point advanced. Thirdly, the author does not forget to include time in her argument. She mentions that the feminist movement should factor the current trends in their argument. This supports her points significantly basing on the fact that currently information is available through many channels, and it is received by a click of a hand. In my opinion, the author successfully coveys her point regarding pornography and the feminist movement. In as much as the feminist movement wants to censor pornography, it is essential that they consider things such as art and time.