Newswise — Janet Jackson's Super Bowl bust out turned the family-friendly football telecast into a broadcasting controversy and societal debate. While some experts believe her "performance" was hardly more offensive than anything else we see on an average night of television, it still raises the question: Could Americans to an agreement on what constitutes indecency?
No, but that won't stop the debate, says Dr. Galdino Pranzarone, professor of psychology at Roanoke College in Salem, Va.
"The problem is one of definition," he says. "Consensus is lacking on the very definition of the terms pornography, erotica and obsenity."
"Defining what is pornographic among the millions of images [available both online and in television and movies] containing sexually explicit materials is problematic," says Pranazarone, who has written a research article, "Pornography Defined Etymologically: Lovemaps Define Erotica, Obscenity or Neutrality as Seen in Cyberporn Site Variety," which has yet to be published. "Additionally, what is erotica and obscenity, or indecency, and how do they differ from pornography?"
They're not interchangeable terms, though often used that way, he says.
"Pornographic, erotic and obscene have been used interchangeably, ambiguously, and imprecisely for labeling the very same sexual image, narration or performance, with a resulting confusion in meaning and connotation to the detriment of sexology, the feminist movement, the law, and the behavioral and social sciences. Filtering software designed to block access to pornography nonselectively blocks sexually explicit material of educational, sexological and medical significance."
Pranzarone suggests defining pornography by its single common thread " that money is being made.
"Sex as commodity -- whether in image, sound or real-time interactivity -- is therefore by definition pornography," he says. "The original meaning of pornography was literally 'the writing about the institution of prostitution.' Our new definition restores to pornography its original meaning."
"If it is sexual, if it is commercially produced and marketed, then it is pornographic," he explains. "Pornography thus defined is neither good nor bad. It is not either erotic, neutral or obscene."
The judgments for those terms, he says, are based on individuals "lovemap" specifications. "A lovemap is the developmental representation in the mind depicting the idealized lover, the idealized love affair," he explains.
"'Erotic' for any individual is anything that pleasantly turns them on, 'obscene' is what offends them. And 'neutral' is the response of most Europeans to the same nipple display that affected the American population so diversely," he says. "There can never be a universal standard."
"The law does attempt to restrict only 'obscenity', not simply what is pornographic " as would be the widely sold and profitable upcoming Sports Illustrated special swimsuit edition."
RSS