Interpretation of A Feminist View on Pornography Essay -- Critique Reb

Interpretation of A Feminist View on Pornography The article that I leave alone be breaking knock down in the following paper is Pornography, Civil Rights, and Speech by Catherine A. MacKinnon. I believe the best area to start is to briefly describe MacKinnon and her article. MacKinnon is a professor of law at the University of Michigan. The article deals with the affects of dirty word on society. MacKinnon feels that roughly pornography should be illegal. Her reason for this view is not that she finds it offensive, scarce rather that she considers it as a form of cozy discrimination. There are galore(postnominal) different views on pornography ranging from the belief that it is harmless fantasy altogether the way to it being a prime factor of the deterioration for society. MacKinnon says that pornography subordinates women and institutionalizes male supremacy. She even goes so far as to say that it is a political practice. Advocates of pornography claim its ultimate end to be pleasure, just now MacKinnon says that the actual end is power. The article will attempt to prove a correlation between pornography and the violence constrictn against women, as sound as their social and economic inequality. I feel that the article itself is ailing written, but will attempt to make her points a little easier to understand. I feel the necessity to state that the feelings of the paper are that of my views on MacKinnons article. They are not my views and may in fact be, misinterpretations of her views. To spare us the confusion, I will rebut it with my views that pornography is harmless, at the end of the paper.The article starts with a brief passage on sexual equality in society. Her presentation of the argument is to explain it as if she agreed with it, only to refute it by say... ...hy. It is a genre in which men are solely subordinate, and women have all the power. Her article is so weak because it does not come that into account. I know that is only on e case, but we have tell time and again that philosophy must be consistent. If she cannot/does not take dominatrix into account, then her philosophy is inconsistent. To fully explain this article and pornography would gestate a lengthy paper that exceeds the requirements and purpose of this prcis. I will end my paper by saying that I believe everyone has a right to free speech and equality, and I appreciate the article for what it was worth, but I do not feel it is justifiable or applicable to society. She bases her entire argument on an improvable correlation of pornography and sexual discrimination. Not to mention the fact that women also buy pornography. But that is a whole other prcis.