80 likes | 220 Vues
This discussion delves into the complex relationship between pornography, women's speech, and the concept of silencing. It examines how various forms of silencing can manifest—whether through outright prevention of speech, miscommunication, or the devaluation of women's ideas. Drawing on historical quotes and perspectives, the argument suggests that just as the government may intervene in the sale of certain materials to protect free speech, it can also regulate pornography in pursuit of the same goal. This analysis invites critical reflection on the implications of these dynamics for women's rights and expression.
E N D
pornography Pornography and Silencing
The Silencing Argument When a diplomat says yes, he means perhaps. When he says perhaps, he means no. When he says no, he is not a diplomat. When a lady says no, she means perhaps. When a lady says perhaps, she means no. When a lady says yes, she is no lady. Otto von Bismarck
Silencing Something literally silences women’s speech when it prevents them from speaking at all. Something scrambles women’s speech when it doesn’t prevent speech, but it does prevent communication. Something devalues women’s speech when it doesn’t prevent speech or communication, but it does prevent the ideas communicated from being taken seriously.
Silencing Something literally silences women’s speech when it prevents them from speaking at all. Something scrambles women’s speech when it doesn’t prevent speech, but it does prevent communication. Something devalues women’s speech when it doesn’t prevent speech or communication, but it does prevent the ideas communicated from being taken seriously.
The Silencing Argument It is permissible for the government to prevent the sale of Bush Specials on the grounds of protecting free speech. Bush Specials are analogous to some forms of pornography. [So] It is permissible for the government to prevent the sale of some forms of pornography on the grounds of protecting free speech.