Raising The Age To Do Porn
Garance from American Prospect’s argument in the Wall Street Journal about raising the consent age to do porn to 21 is interesting but I think problematic. Her reasoning seems a little too much like William Saletan’s or Anthony Kennedy’s that we have to protect women (or young women in this case) from doing things they may regret later.
I know that her rule wouldn’t specify that only women over age 21 could do porn (or whatever you want to call Girls Gone Wild flashing) but I don’t know what is the level of under 21 male exploitation in porn? Maybe there are similar issues but in any case its young women, not young men, Garance is writing about for the moment.
Its not that I don’t ultimately agree with her that probably a lot, if not a majority of women caught on these films are really, really going to regret it. It’s not that I don’t think Joe Francis isn’t scum of the earth. It’s that I think in order to get to a desired result she is guilty of infantilizing women. Because if you accept that 18 year olds can’t flash boobies then how can you argue 18 year olds can get abortions? Or even have legal right to have consensual sex? I’m a little worried that’s the problem her argument draws.
And there’s better legal options besides raising consent laws to 21 to achieve a similar kind of result (or at least a greater level of protection from bottom-feeders like Francis). How about changing the law on getting signed consent forms? You could stipulate that for any filming that involves nudity, a legal consent form can only be signed 48 hours after filming. Meaning that the producer can only get a valid consent release form after giving the subject two days to reconsider her decision to let him film her. (Or to sober up). Not a retroactive, you have two-days-to-retract-given-consent. You have to be reapproached by the filmmaker after 48 hours have passed since filming and only then does a consent form give you legal protection from being sued.
It’s like the mirror image of abortion “waiting periods” isn’t it?
Friday, May 04, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
3 comments:
I think if you are old enough to take a bullet for your country,... then you are old enough to drink alcohol, play in the NBA or get money from a sex tape.
:-jon
http://www.imperium.org/better/
I think it would work with one small tweak.
No, it is not the mirror image of waiting periods. In this issue, the only person hurt by the porn are those that consent to it, i.e., the young girl, and arguably, the viewer. You can make the esoteric argument that society as a whole is hurt as well, as the objectivization of women is an issue. Changing the age from 18 to 21 seems arbitrary to me in a free society, regardless of your views on porn. But any way you slice it, this issue is miles apart from abortion because of the innocent third party, which never seems to factor into pro-aborts' arguments. To say porn and abortion are apples and oranges is an understatement.
Jim in Cleveland
Post a Comment