Women Uniting For War on Porn

Salt Lake Tribune ^ | Sunday, October 14, 2001 | Mark Eddington

[TexRef]

    At the same time President Bush talked about terror in a nationally televised speech Sept. 20, concerned women met in Provo to discuss what they see as another grave threat to America.
    Smut.
    Members of Women For Decency, a group founded nine months ago, huddled with Utah porn czar Paula Houston at Provo's library to draw up battle plans in their fight against porn.
    If anyone thinks taking on saucy magazines and movies and suggestive lingerie ads in magazines should take a back seat to tackling terrorists, members of the fledgling organization cropping up across Utah suggest otherwise.
    "The parallels between [smut and terror] are uncanny," says Women For Decency Director Janalyn Holt. "Pornography destroys families. It's not a one-time shot like an airplane flying into the World Trade Center. But little by little, blow by blow, it can be just as destructive. We are getting bombarded on all sides."
    As talk turns to tactics in the group's war on porn, Holt sounds positively Bushlike in describing the conflict.
    "This is going to be a long road," says Holt, steeling her "worker bees" for the struggle. "There won't be any quick results because we have waited too long to put our foot down. We are in this for the long haul and will fight this as long as we need to."
    While U.S. bombs rain on Afghanistan, this 400-member cadre of women is besieging targets with e-mail, letters and phone calls.
    But they are polite about it.
    "We don't want to come across as a screaming bunch of citizens; we want to persuade people to uphold community standards," says Lisa Pettys, chairwoman of Women For Decency's Utah County chapter.
    The group is an agreeable bunch, Houston says.
    "They are very professional, very polite and pleasant to talk to," says Utah's official obscenity and pornography ombudswoman.
    John Garfield agrees. The general manager of the Provo Marriott received a letter from one of the porn fighters asking the hotel to stop carrying pay-for-view adult movies -- something it did about two years ago.
    Hampton Inn and LaQuinta Inn also are under scrutiny by the group. So is Better Homes & Gardens magazine, which ran a Spiegel ad of a woman leaning up against a naked man. The anti-porn group also is taking part in a nationwide campaign to cover up covers of Cosmopolitan, In Style and similar magazines displayed at supermarket checkout counters.
    Moreover, group members are hyperalert about racy posters in lingerie stores such as Frederick's of Hollywood and Victoria's Secret. Adult videos carried by the Sam Goody chain are in their crosshairs as well. The women -- men need not apply -- also are joining Illinois Lt. Gov. Corrine Wood's drive to get Abercrombie & Fitch to clean up its quarterly catalog. A&F Quarterly is sold over the counter in most states and by subscription in Utah.
    "When a 200-page magazine has 125 pages of sexual photos and full nudity, you know they have another agenda," Holt says.
    Company spokesman Hampton Carney counters that customers have to show photo ID to prove they are old enough -- at least 18 -- to buy or subscribe. Fun, frolicking, smart, hip, humorous and wholesome are adjectives he uses to describe the magazine marketed to the college crowd.
    "These are beautiful images shot by Bruce Weber, world famous photographer who shoots for Vanity Fair," Carney says of the pictures that show all but the pelvic region. "There is nothing pornographic about them."
    Nonetheless, the spring issue contained an interview with porn star Ron Jeremy and the company was castigated by the Michigan attorney general's office in 1999 after allegedly selling a copy to a 10-year-old. That is why the company now cards customers.
    While putting pressure on magazines, supermarkets, stores and Web sites is an important part of Women For Decency's mission, it is not the only one.
    Members also want to teach politicians and the public about porn's perceived evils and help its victims and addicts. Chapters meet monthly. Each is developing phone and e-mail trees so members can mobilize quickly. Unlike the conservative Utah Eagle Forum, Women For Decency has no plans to lean on legislators or others who do not heed their goals.
    Unless they break the law.
    "Just because we are a nice organization doesn't mean we won't play hardball," Holt vows. "We will be a force to be reckoned with."
    Ted Wilson, director of the University of Utah Hinckley Institute of Politics, says such groups succeed because of many Utahns' inflated views of themselves and their standards.
    "It's not that we are any more moral than any other place in the country, but we think we are," Wilson says.
    His advice to Women For Decency: Stick to persuasion and shun legal wrangles. He says the U.S. Supreme Court interprets the First Amendment broadly, and that groups get into trouble when they try to get a judge to enforce their views of morality.
    Holt says her group does not want to force anyone to do anything. But, she says, the Constitution does not protect obscenity and pornography.
    "It's not an issue of First Amendment rights; it's about right and wrong and what is appropriate."

[SocialMeltdown]

The key phrase regarding porn is "consenting adults".

As long as every individual involved conforms to both of those terms, let them do what they want.

[freeeee]

I think you would be hard put to argue with the founders that they meant to include pornography as freedom of the press. The fact that it is still regulated today should clue you in on that.

When contemplating what the Founders meant, one only need read their plain words:

Amendment I: "Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…"

That is an absolute protection. No law, not some laws. All speech, not some speech. They were intellingent enought to provide exceptions if they wanted, but they didn't. That I submit as proof of my position. The onus is upon you to prove that they didn't mean what is written in the 1st Amendment. What proof have you?

People are always trying to redefine some part of the Constitution they don't like. Some people don't like guns, some people don't like naughty pictures, some people don't think probable cause is needed for searches. Ultimately, the logic is the same: "The Constitution doesn't mean what it says, it means what I want it to say".

No need for that hysterical response. Try not to insinuate things I did not post.

I don't think I'm being hysterical. I was insinuating that you agree with this woman, and would like to ban material you find obscene. Is this correct?

[Redcloak]

really big hooters.

More fine examples of superior American technology.

(And before anyone asks, no, I don't have anything constructive to offer regarding the Porn Czarina. People like her and other "American Taliban" types disturb me more than words can describe.)

[MagnusMat]

Nudity and porno are different just as there is a different between seeing the beauty in women and lusting after women. We need beauty, not porno!

[NeoCaveman]

has she been here yet?

[calmseas]

This is a funny topic for many. And I understand the humor. But to be serious for a minute: Pornography does have the potential to destroy families, in the same manner as does gambling, drinking, doing drugs and other activities that we call vices.

However, in a free society, groups like these would do much more for their cause to work toward changes of heart rather than changes of law. It is only through a change of heart, one individual at a time, that positive changes in the whole culture are affected.

[hobbes1]

Would it surprise you? ....I am sure she must be lurking about....

[dead]

LOL! I'm in (for research purposes only).

[Physicist]

"Pornography destroys families."

Horsehockey. It isn't the porn. If some guy is doing something that his wife doesn't approve of, it's his fault, not the magazine's. If he can't bring himself to please her, he should have married somebody less uptight about it.

This is the Women's Temperance Union all over again. All of society's ills are the fault of demon drink; prohibition is the only solution.

[NeoCaveman]

Furthermore, it helps me to remember all the things worth fighting for: God, Guns, The Constitution and the freedom to ogle really big hooters.

America is beautiful

[ArGee]

I honestly believe that pornography saves a lot of marriages. It gets you through periods of PMS, long business trips and whatever other periods of marital withdrawal you might encounter. I am fortunate enough to be blessed with a wonderful wife who doesn't mind me looking at other women, and can trust me that I would never touch anybody else.

Interesting.

What do you think you would do if she asked you to keep your vow to cleave only unto her, even in your mind. Do you think it would destroy your marriage?

If you think it is yes, do you really attribute the salvation of your marriage to porn?

Shalom.

[Physicist]

But to be serious for a minute: Pornography does have the potential to destroy families, in the same manner as does gambling, drinking, doing drugs and other activities that we call vices.

But in those cases, there are wrecked cars, damaged livers, burned-out brains, drive-by shootings and depleted bank accounts to point to and say, "here is the damage". In the case of pornography, the problem is completely subjective. If a woman doesn't mind whether her spouse looks at pornography, there is no problem.

[K7TNW]

"I see a large woman jealous of the petites..."

Isn't she the "Fat Broad" in the BC comics? Looks just like her.

[Texaggie79]

[CubicleGuy]

The anti-porn group also is taking part in a nationwide campaign to cover up covers of Cosmopolitan, In Style and similar magazines displayed at supermarket checkout counters.

Hey, we prudish Californians are already ahead of these Utah women, Cosmo-covered-up-in-the-supermarkets-wise.

Now, when I'm at the checkout stand at the local Safeway and I'm trying to count (just for my own amusement) how many times the word "sex" appears on all of the checkout stand magazine covers, the covered up Cosmo cover is skewing my count to the low side.

[CubicleGuy]

Maybe she is bitter because she didn't make the " Utah Porn Czar All Nude Review".

I hate to say it, but that's pretty funny.

[StoneColdGOP]

Hey that was a good issue. Plenty of mileage out of that.

[CubicleGuy]

Well, according tho the California Supreme Court in a recent case, the First Amendment protects women that sensuously caress themselves while dancing (san clothing) as long as they aren't doing it in a lewd fashion.

Boy, talk about your fence-straddling California Supreme Court decision...

[dfrussell]

Last I knew, Playboy was run by a woman: Ms. Hefner, and if that's some group's idea of "porn," they don't get out much.

Although the woman in the photo isn't as skanky as Andrea Dworkin, she *certainly* isn't likely to be the object of unwanted sexual attention by someone who just spent an hour reviewing the latest Playboy T&A.

Methinks she doth protest too much.