Critical Analysis: ôLet's Put Pornography Back in the Closetö
Susan BrownmillerÆs essay, ôLetÆs Put Pornography Back in the Closet,ö makes a compelling case for taking pornography out from under the cloak of the First Amendment and exposing it for the offensive antifeminine agenda that underlies it. BrownmillerÆs point is that although she fully supports First Amendment rights and is not in favor of censorship, there is a limit to the types of material that should be defended under the aegis of the first amendment; pornography is not one of them. As she aptly puts it:
No, the feminist objection to pornography is based on our belief that pornography represents hatred of women, that pornography's intent is to humiliate, degrade and dehumanize the female body for the purpose of erotic stimulation and pleasure. We are unalterably opposed to the presentation of the female body being stripped, bound, raped, tortured, mutilated and murdered in the name of commercial entertainment and free speech (49).
Brownmiller addresses an issue that has all too often been overlooked in arguments that claim the First Amendment as their justificationùthat the First Amendment is intended to protect peopleÆs freedoms, but not at the expense of other peopleÆs freedoms. It therefore cannot be employed in defense of any type of subject matter that enslaves, demeans, or destroys people. Her answer to Justice William O. DouglasÆs comment that ôno one is æcompelled to lookÆö is, as she asserts, ôhardly trueö (Brownmiller 49). It is impossible to avoid seeing the images unless, as is now the case in grocery stores, store managers are compelled to conceal a portion of the magazine covers that display them.
BrownmillerÆs argument is the clearheaded and considered response of one who has given much thought to the issue and looked at both sides before deciding, not the impassioned diatribe of someone with a pre-existing agenda that sh...