When Good Men Do Nothing, Part 2: Disturbing Realities of Porn Production and Consumption in Sex-Obsessed America

When Good Men Do Nothing, Part 2: Disturbing Realities of Porn Production in Sex-Obsessed America

By David Metcalfe

August, 20, 2017

Passively Suggested That They Stop

In the spring of 1989 in the small town of Glen Ridge, New Jersey, the weather was finally warming up, the final bit of snow melting, and the kids were back to playing outside. A young lady left her house to go play basketball at the local park by the high school she attended. This particular young lady, although well meaning and kind hearted, was very unpopular at school. She wasn’t pretty, smart, or especially good at anything, and she came across socially awkward to her peers. When she arrived at the park, a group of boys from school were playing baseball. One of the boys approached her, and with a smile on his face, invited her to come to a party that evening. She initially refused, but the boy said that if she came to the party, his brother (whom she had a crush on) would go on a date with her. She almost never got invited to parties, and had liked this boy for quite a while, so she agreed to go.

Upon arriving at the party, she was led down into the basement, where there were 12 high school guys from the park hanging out. After chatting for a bit, one boy began to undress, and the girl responded by removing her shirt. While she undressed, it was obvious what was going on, so six of the boys left. The seven remaining boys proceeded to rape her one by one, multiple times. At one point, part way through, one of the boys passively suggested that they stop. But they didn’t stop. They continued until they had defiled her to their perverted heart’s content, and they threw her outside. She stood outside the house, waiting for the date that she had been promised. After a couple hours, she walked home in tears.

Now, you might be thinking, how was this girl so stupid? She was offered this deal by a guy she barely ever talked to, that if she goes to his party, his brother will go on a date with her. That’s not how dating works. When she was led to the basement and there were 12 guys, all guys, waiting for her, shouldn’t that send alarm bells? And finally, when the boy started removing his clothes, why did she respond by taking her clothes off as well? Unfortunately, as if this story isn’t already tragic enough, the girl was mentally retarded (Lefkowitz, 1997).

And they didn’t just rape her, they bragged about it later at school, which is ultimately how they were found out (The New York Times, 1989). They had even considered doing it a second time so they could film it. These guys are terrible, disgusting people, and more than deserved the 15-year jail sentence they got. But actually, I’m not here to talk about them. Lots of articles and even an entire book (“Our Guys”) have been written about them. If you’ll remember, this article is not called “When Terrible Men Do Something”, but rather “When Good Men Do Nothing”. What I’m interested in, and most deeply disturbed by, is not the perpetrators themselves, but the good men who did nothing, and allowed it to happen. The six boys who left obviously had a conscience. They knew it was wrong, and chose not to participate. But why did they allow it to happen? And even worse, during the rape, one of the boys realized that it was wrong, and passively suggested that they stop. Passively? What kind of person suggests that someone stop doing a horrific act “passively”?

Legal Approach Basics: Sex, Coercion, and Consent

In United States, the law as to what is considered rape has changed over time. Even now, although there is a federal definition, specifics are determined by each state. To sum up the current definition of rape in the United States criminal code, it is basically: any sexual activity in which there is coercion on behalf of the perpetrator, and a lack of consent on behalf of the victim (Legal Information Institute, 2017). Read the definition a couple times so you’ve got it, because it’s important for what I’m about to say.

The basic way that a court case works is that there is a certain definition of what a crime is, and the prosecution tries to convince the judge that the event in question does indeed meet that definition. Let’s start with an easy one: the Glen Ridge Rape from earlier.

Was there sexual activity? Yes. The victim, perpetrators, and witnesses all testified that some kind of sexual activity occurred in the basement that evening.

Was there coercion on behalf of the perpetrator? Yes. Social coercion under false pretenses was used initially to get the victim to the basement, and further social coercion was used leading up to, during, and after the crime.

Was there a lack of consent on behalf of the victim? Yes. Since she was mentally retarded, she did not have adequate understanding of what was being done to her, and therefore the conduct fell short of what is considered a voluntary agreement (Legal Information Institute, 2017).

Since the event in question satisfies all three criteria for the definition of rape, we can conclude that it was, in fact, rape.

Girls Gone Defiled

Florida beaches in the summer are a happening place. Thousands of people spend their vacations taking part in the various beach activities and parties that occur every evening, often late into the night. That was the plan for four young high school girls one summer. They went out to Panama City Beach to enjoy a party that was happening there. After drinking large amounts of alcohol, a few older men began chatting with them. After a few minutes, the men invited them to come with them to a nearby hotel. The girls agreed, and they walked to the hotel together.

When in the hotel room, one of the men took out a camera, and told the girls to take off their clothes. They initially refused, but the men encouraged them, offering to give them money or gifts, saying they should just “have fun” and not be so “uptight”. After taking off their clothes, the men encouraged more and more sexual acts from them. After the men had gotten all they wanted, the girls were made to get dressed and leave. The videos were then put up on the “Girls Gone Wild” website where they were available for millions to see (Navarro, 2007).

When we consider back to the definition of rape, this absolutely fulfills the requirements. It is sexual activity, there is coercion, and the girls are not only too drunk to consent, but they are below the legal age of consent. What kind of awful people would create a business from this?

Well, this is how Joe Francis makes a living. In fact, it’s more than a living. He is a multi-millionaire, and he has done it by filming girls performing sexual acts. He founded “Girls Gone Wild” in 1997, and got away with doing this sort of thing for six years, until this particular case in 2003. Francis didn’t expect the authorities to do anything. He had been filming under-aged drunk girls for years and making huge profits. Girls were normally too ashamed to report the occurrence to anyone after the event. Fortunately, in the Panama City Beach incident of ’03, one of the girl’s father found out, and contacted the county sheriff. This had happened countless times before, and every time, a team of high paid lawyers representing “Girls Gone Wild” would simply make the charges go away. But this time, there was Lee Sullivan.

Lee Sullivan was the mayor of Panama City Beach at the time, and was not a fan of “Girls Gone Wild”, to say the least. Every year, Joe Francis would come to Panama City Beach and rape young women and girls on camera, but they never had enough evidence to convict him for it. This was their chance, and Sullivan made sure that they would take advantage of it. They had the film, they had the girls as witnesses, and the community was in support of locking up Joe Francis. The felony charges against Francis, for the use of minors in sexual performances, carried a maximum total of 40 years in prison if convicted. But instead of being locked up in prison, Joe Francis went home free back to his mansion in Los Angeles. The judge had ruled that the obtaining of the tapes was done without proper search warrants (Emerald Coast, 2006). Without the tapes, the prosecutors didn’t have enough evidence to do anything, and the charges were dropped (Fox News, 2007).

The Panama City Beach incident served as a precedent for future charges. People were outraged that this guy was getting rich by raping young girls. People were inspired, and lawyers became confident in taking him on. Since ’03, more than 40 charges have been put against Joe Francis and the “Girls Gone Wild” franchise. He’s paid tens of millions of dollars in legal fees, and has been in and out of prison several times. Yet no matter how much he pays in legal fees, and no matter how many charges get put against “Girls Gone Wild”, Francis still seems to get back on his feet. Despite “Girls Gone Wild” being well known to commit horrific violations of women’s rights, millions of people still view the content. He currently lives in a mansion in Mexico, so that he can avoid law suits, since it is very difficult to file a law suit internationally (Galloway, 2013).

Action Reaction Dissonance

You may be wondering why I decided to include the first story about the Glen Ridge Rape in an article that is addressing pornography. I think it highlights some very interesting concepts within American rape culture. I think that the Glen Ridge Rape and the Panama City Beach Rape are, in many ways, the same thing, yet were treated very differently. The Glen Ridge victim was mentally retarded, which is equivalent, in terms of ability to consent, to the Panama City girls who were drunk. In both cases, similar methods of coercion were used: incentivization, social acceptance, and not taking the initial “no” for an answer. Although the actual rape was more brutal in the case of Glen Ridge, the Panama City girls were exploited further by being put online, so the emotional degradation and feelings of shame were likely similar. However, the response from others was nowhere near the same.

The Glen Ridge Rape has gone down in infamy. It happened in 1989, and it’s still talked about to this day. There were books and countless articles written about it, even a movie. It is taught in sociology and law courses in universities all over North America as an example of the horrifying consequences of the worst of juvenile delinquency. People unanimously agree that it was an awful act, and should not be supported in any way. The Panama City Beach rape, on the other hand, is not well known at all. I had to do a lot of digging to find that story. In the articles I did find, many of them downplayed the importance of the incident. And what’s shocking is that many people still support “Girls Gone Wild”, even after all of these horrific incidences!

I Don’t Care, They’re Just a Bunch of Sluts

One day, just this last January, I had shown up early to class. So early, in fact, that me and some other students had to wait in the hallway for the other students to finish the previous class. There were about five of us guys all chatting in a group. Somewhere in the conversation, the guy across from me mentioned that new “Girls Gone Wild” content was going up on the website this week, so he was excited for that. The other guys nodded in agreement, saying things like, “yeah, that’ll be awesome”. I had just recently been reading up on the illegal and immoral practices of Joe Francis and the “Girls Gone Wild” franchise, so I explained it to them, something like, “The girls in those films are getting drunk or drugged to the point where they can no longer consent, and then getting coerced into performing sexual acts. They are literally raping girls on camera, and when you watch and buy their stuff, you are supporting that.” To which the guy to my right responded, and I quote, “I don’t care, they’re just a bunch of sluts.”

If you would like to go to this guy’s house and punch him directly in the face, his address is 298- lol I’m kidding but seriously that guy is an idiot. What’s even more interesting, is that this guy had been in a previous class with me, called “Sociocultural Aspects of Sport”. The theme book for that course, is, of course, “Our Guys: The Glen Ridge Rape and the Secret Life of the Perfect Suburb”. The guys who committed the rape were all football players for the high school team in Glen Ridge, so the book analyses how things around football and sport culture, such as entitlement, masculinity, and community support may have contributed to it. During that course, this same guy who said he doesn’t care about the horrific practices of “Girls Gone Wild” had repeatedly condemned the Glen Ridge Rape during class discussions. But they are the same thing! So, where does this dissonance come from? I think it is two main things: slut shaming, and a failure to consider the ethics of online pornography.

Setting the Stage: Agency or Agony?

In 2006, just after Joe Francis had been put in jail for his first extended stay (Navarro, 2007), Karen C. Pitcher, a PhD student at the University of Iowa, published an article in the Journal of Critical Studies in Media Communication called, “The Staging of Agency in Girls Gone Wild”. It’s a fantastic article, and gives insight into the manner of coercion that occurs in pornography production. Because of the explicit content, however, I generally don’t recommend it to people. It delves into the way that “Girls Gone Wild” videos make it seem like the girls are consenting when they really aren’t. It is important to acknowledge, however, that not all of the girls are doing it against their will. Many report feeling “empowered” and that they were just “having fun” (Duam, 2004). I’m not looking to argue against girls who genuinely want to expose themselves for their own reasons. I don’t personally think it is a good thing for them to do, but I defend their right to do it if they so choose. That’s the key: if they so choose. My problem with porn production is that a lot of it, perhaps majority of it, appears to be non-consensual.

Racism and Slut Shaming: Justifying Mistreatment of “Lesser” People

If that guy from my class had responded by saying something like, “I disagree that the girls on there are getting raped. I think that “Girls Gone Wild” is a credible and moral organization that has high standards for gaining consent from their performers.” I would have said, “Oh, that’s interesting, do you know the story of Panama City Beach?” and on the conversation would have went. The issue is not that the guy disagreed with me, the issue is why he disagreed with me. His statement implied that he accepted that it was indeed, rape, but that it didn’t matter to him, because the girls were “sluts”. In this messed up culture that we live in, proving that something is rape is not enough on its own to get people to condemn it. You also have to prove that people matter. If the person is viewed as “lesser”, then the crime is considered less severe. When black women were considered inferior in the United States, it was legal to rape them (Maschke, 1997). Many people believe the same thing about promiscuous women.

There is certainly a prevalent idea that if a girl is enough of a “slut”, then it is more acceptable to rape her. United States federal law strongly disagrees with that. Under the “Violence Against Women Act” of 1994, there is a law preventing the use of reputation and character evidence against the victim as being used to demonize the victim in an effort to downplay the severity of the rape (Rape Shield Statutes, 2011). Basically, in a lot of court cases prior to that, the defense would say, “well, since she had sex with a lot of guys, it’s not that bad that he raped her” or “preceding the rape, the woman was wearing a low-cut top”. But that doesn’t matter. It’s the same crime no matter who it is against, whether they are black or white, or whether they are promiscuous or not. A young woman who dresses and acts provocatively will inevitably increase her chances of being raped, but she is no less valuable than any other human being, so ultimately, the severity of the crime is the same.

Predicting Pornography Prevalence is Puzzling

I don’t really trust the statistics on individual porn usage. There seems to be a lot of problems in the methodology. For one, most of the companies that do research on it are incredibly biased. If the name of the company is “Covenant Eyes” or “Church Militant”, you can bet they have an agenda. Secondly, it’s unlikely that people would be totally honest about how much they actually use porn. Chances are, whatever statistic you get from a survey, it’s probably a lot lower than the actual amount. And third, there is a serious lack of consistency. You’ll find all kinds of conflicting statistics that change based on the questions asked, the group surveyed, etc. But let’s face it, whatever the numbers are, we know it’s incredibly high. If you own a computer, you’ve probably been exposed to porn at some point. Pornhub gets billions of views a year. I have never met a man who has never looked at porn. At Bible studies when we talk about porn usage, even the freaking Pastor will often share about their struggle with porn.

By this point, I have hopefully convinced you of a few things:

1) A large amount of pornography production is actually rape

2) Many consumers of pornography attempt to justify rape

3) Pornography usage is very prevalent

I will now propose two solutions to this problem. What I propose is that in order for us to have increased ethics in pornography production and consumption, we need to first consider the individual, then the collective society.

1) Dictate Demand

The Customer Is Always Right

Malcolm Gladwell gave a fantastic TED talk a few years ago, where he talks about the making of Diet Pepsi. The makers needed to know how much aspartame to put in it to make the best drink possible. They knew that the sweetness range should be somewhere between 8 and 12 percent, so they made thousands of drinks of various sweetness going from 8.0, 8.1, 8.2, and so on, and gave them to various sample populations. They expected the results to be kind of a bell curve, where a certain sweetness would be most greatly desired. Whatever that most commonly liked sweetness was, was what Pepsi would begin using for all of the Diet Pepsi they make. But the results were not even close to a bell curve! They were completely scattered at all different percentages! Since the people didn’t communicate a clear decision as to what they wanted, Pepsi just chose a random percentage and went with it (Gladwell, 2007).

The quest for the ideal sweetness in Diet Pepsi is the same as the quest for consent in internet pornography. Porn producers will make whatever people want. They know there is a certain range of what is generally desirable, and they look at what is the most highly viewed as to what they should produce in the future. Based on the statistics of porn watching, we have shown no level of discrimination between consensual and non-consensual pornography production. If the statistics showed a bell curve that peaked at consensual pornography, porn producers would no longer make porn without the performer’s consent.

Existence of Ethical Efficacy

Getting rid of rape in pornography production would be a good first step towards more ethical pornography. But when we get rid of rape, there are still more ethical considerations beyond that. Things such as: psychological and physical harm to the performers, devaluing humans as sexual objects, creating an unrealistic fantasy that creates sexual dissatisfaction with a real partner, the potential for addiction, etc., to name a few. So the question is: does ethical pornography exist?

There are actually tons of articles out there that propose an idea of ethical pornography. Sorry to insult those writers, but all of them are incredibly uninformed and seem to not understand porn at all. They’re honestly so stupid that they are difficult to read. Ones from “The Guardian”, “Cosmopolitan”, “Adequate Man”, “GQ”, etc. illustrate well-meaning, but tragically poor thinking to the point that I’m not even going to spend time critically analyzing them. The best one I could find was an article from “ABC News” called “Ethical porn- does it exist and who makes it?” by Kellie Scott. There’s a link to it in the references. It just proves the point that in order to have what they consider “ethical pornography”, you have to make a million considerations that not only fail to solve the ethical problems, but make for terrible porn. For example, they say that they don’t want to give a “fantasy” to the viewer, since that leads to dissatisfaction with real sexual relationships, so instead they will just show “normal” people. This supposed “solution” would have them show every age, every body type, various disabilities, etc. If that was the case, what do you think the bell curve is going to do? Yeah, it’s going to peak at whichever performers are the most sexually attractive, in which case, since demand dictates supply, these “ethical” porn producers will just end up getting more and more sexually attractive performers, and we’re back to square one. And if you can believe it, the example I chose is actually the most viable one. The rest aren’t even worth considering, in my opinion (Scott, 2016).

So no, completely ethical pornography does not exist, and will never exist. However, there are more and less harmful kinds of pornography, for both the viewers and the performers. As long as there are pictures and a way of sharing them, and people have sexual desires, pornography will always exist. As individuals gain greater recognition of the harm of pornography, they will likely respond accordingly. If people think that rape is wrong, and are made aware that certain companies commonly use rape, they are less likely to support those companies. That’s why education and awareness are the most important ways for individuals to become more ethical consumers, and decrease the amount of harm imposed.

A Counter-Intuitive Approach to Pornography Usage

Over the last year, I’ve heard probably 100 people share about their struggles with porn, either as a user of it, or as someone in a relationship with a user of it. One trend that I have noticed among young women is that they hate it when their boyfriend uses porn. It makes them feel terrible about themselves. Majority of young women that I’ve talked to have said that it’s actually a deal breaker for them. Now, as an aspiring ladies man, I have started to realize this unique opportunity to get babes to go out with me.

Here’s the thing: my guess from all of the people I’ve talked to, is that about 90% of guys use porn, at least some of the time. Probably at least half are legitimately addicted to it. Since many girls, especially Christians, view this as a deal breaker, it automatically puts me and the rest of the non-users into the top 10% of eligible bachelors! I’m not even joking. I swear to sweet lord baby jesus that if you go to a Bible study and make a comment about why pornography is a terrible thing, girls have an overwhelmingly positive reaction. Like yeah, you shouldn’t look at porn cuz it’s harmful and exploits women and leads to dissatisfaction and whatever the heck else, but it will make girls like you way more, and the real thing is way better.

That’s the other aspect of dictating demand, just not using it at all. If Diet Pepsi’s sample population had all said that they’d rather just have regular Pepsi, Diet Pepsi would have been discontinued. So too, if we all say that we would rather have real sex in real relationships, internet pornography will be discontinued. To sum up this section: it’s better to not use porn at all, but for those that do, try to be more ethical about it.

2) Porn on Trial: Legislation and Enforcement of Ethical Pornography

Law As Inherently Moral

I hear a lot of people confidently proclaim things like, “We shouldn’t legislate morality!”, to which I respond, “Is murder a moral issue? How about theft? Cheating? Lying?…etc?” After a second to think, they generally clarify, “well, we shouldn’t legislate issues of personal morality that have no effect on anyone else”, to which I respond, “can you give me some examples?”. The most common example I get is abortion. They say something like, “the government shouldn’t tell a woman what to do with her body!”, to which I respond, “and why is that?”. They typically say, “Because it is her right to choose!”, to which I respond, “and are human rights a moral issue?”. Boom. I legit crush some fools on that one, and I have had this exact conversation probably more than 10 times in the last year. The fact is, whatever law you make, there are moral implications. And whatever law you don’t make, there are moral implications. Every law that exists is inherently based off of a moral idea. Morality is simply the concept, while law is the application. All that to say, if there are ethical considerations to be had in pornography production and consumption, there are legal obligations to apply those moral concepts.

Fine With Illegal Porn

In February of 2001, Buffnet, an Internet Service provider in New York, was convicted of knowingly allowing access to child pornography. For this transgression, they were fined $5,000. No, I didn’t miss a zero. They allowed access to child porn, one of the most heinous crimes in existence, and were fined such a small amount that they didn’t even notice. I’ll bet the children who were harmed because of that noticed. This is not an isolated or “out-there” example, but rather an indicator for a broader trend, which suggests that the American people, and especially authorities, are fine with illegal porn (Scheeres, 2001).

The current illegal things in pornography are basically just child porn and rape. The level of acceptable obscenity in society has long been determined by something called the Miller Test, where there are three standards that it must fulfill in order to be considered obscene, and therefore illegal to be distributed to the public. It’s based on the standards of the general community, so it gives the community the ability to define for themselves what they want and don’t want to be acceptable. This is state to state, so certain porn may be legal in California where it is not legal in Nebraska, for example (Three Prong Obscenity Test, 1997). But this has posed problems in the age of the internet, since porn can be made in one state and distributed in another very easily. Because of this difficulty, the Miller Test has not really been used.

The law that makes sure that child pornography cannot be made is defined under the United States Criminal code, under Title 18, 2257. It states that all producers of sexually explicit materials must keep record of the age of all of their performers, in order to ensure that all of them are above the age of consent (Legal Information Institute, 2017). However, the United States Department of Justice has not really enforced this law. Since the law was passed, some retired FBI agents conducted a few inspections, but it has not resulted in any prosecutions.

Basically, there is a law to prevent child porn from being made, but it’s rarely enforced to the intended extent. The other illegal aspect of porn, rape, has no such law at all to make sure it doesn’t happen. There was a brilliant article written in 2008 by Ann Bartow, a professor at the University of South Carolina School of Law, called, “Pornography, Coercion, and Copyright Law 2.0”. She first acknowledges the horrendous legal and moral issues implicit within porn production, and then goes on to propose a law in which porn producers would need to gain written consent from all of their performers in order to obtain copyright. Without gaining copyright, it would be nearly impossible for them to actually make money from it, in which case they would not bother producing it (Bartow, 2008). I am convinced that if this law were passed and enforced, terrible companies like “Girls Gone Wild” would either stop raping girls, or go out of business. And from what I’ve read, it seems as though they would have to change their business a lot. But not just them. If you can believe it, “Girls Gone Wild” is actually one of the better porn companies. There are so many far worse ones that exist, and would be effectively shut down if such a law were to pass.

This law has not passed, however, due in large part to the cultural apathy that surrounds it. No one cares enough. Remember how appalled you were at those six boys who did nothing to stop the mentally retarded girl from being raped? If you know about the evils occurring in pornography, but don’t do anything to stop it, are you any different than them?

I myself would like to become a lawyer someday, and if I do, I have a huge list of things I would like to make happen. And you better believe one of those things is getting consent dependant copyright law passed. Watch out porn companies, cuz I will legit crush you.

Conclusion

Human life is a precious and valuable thing. Girls are more than what you see on a screen. They are mothers, sisters, daughters and wives. They have dreams, passions, hopes, and they also have hurts, difficulties, and brokenness. Sexual desire is a wonderful way to express love to someone that you care about, but it is also a way to ruin lives, for both the victims and the perpetrators, when it is abused. From the available data, and countless testimonies, it appears that pornography is an abuse of sexual desire. But unlike traditional rape, the rape that occurs in pornography production appears to be widely accepted and even supported by much of American culture.

Do we have people who are willing to stand up against this abuse? Can we as individuals realize the harm it’s causing and act accordingly? Can lawyers, politicians, and policy makers serve to protect the rights of women?

This is not a woman’s issue. This is not a man’s issue. This is a people issue. Be educated, be empowered, and go out and show real love to people.

References

Bartow, A. (2008). Pornography, coercion, and copyright law 2.0. Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment and Technology Law. Retrieved from https://works.bepress.com/ann_bartow/31/

Daum, M. (2004) Why have these girls gone wild? Glamour

Emerald Coast Variations. (2006). Girls Gone Wild Catches Break. Retrieved from https://web.archive.org/web/20081223235308/http://travel.emeraldcoast.com/springbreak/news/article.showarticle.db.php?a=4968

Fox News. (2007). Judge Drops Most Charges Against ‘Girls Gone Wild’ Producer Joe Francis. Retrieved from http://www.foxnews.com/story/2007/01/05/judge-drops-most-charges-against-girls-gone-wild-producer-joe-francis.html

Galloway, S. (2013). Convicted Girls Gone Wild Mogul Joe Francis Breaks Silence: ‘Retarded’ Jury ‘Should Be Shot Dead. Hollywood Reporter. Retrieved from http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/girls-gone-wilds-joe-francis-527322

Gladwell, M. (2007). Choice, happiness, and spaghetti sauce. TED Talk. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIiAAhUeR6Y

Lefkowitz, B. (1997). Our guys: the Glen Ridge rape and the secret life of the perfect suburb. University of California Press.

Legal Information Institute. (2017). 18 US Code 2241- Aggravated Sexual Abuse. Cornell Law School. Retrieved from https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2241

Legal Information Institute. (2017). 18 US Code 2257- Record Keeping Requirements. Cornell Law School. Retrieved from https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2257

Maschke, K. (1997). The Legal Response to Violence against Women. Gender and American Law.

Navarro, M. (2007). Gone Wild and Gone All Wrong. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/16/fashion/16francis.html?mcubz=3

Pitcher, K. (2006). The staging of agency in “Girls Gone Wild”. Critical Studies in Media Communication. http://dx.doi.org.login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/10.1080/07393180600800759

Rape Shield Statutes. (2011). Retrieved from http://www.ndaa.org/pdf/NCPCA%20Rape%20Shield%202011.pdf

Scheeres, J. (2001). ISP guilty in child porn case. Wired. Retrieved from https://www.wired.com/2001/02/isp-guilty-in-child-porn-case/

Scott, K. (2016). Ethical porn- does it exist and who makes it? ABC News. Retrieved from http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-21/ethical-porn-does-it-exist-and-where-do-you-find-it/8091266

The New York Times (1989). “5 Youths Held in Sex Assault On Mentally Impaired Girl, 17”. Glen Ridge (Nj): NYTimes.com. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/1989/05/25/nyregion/5-youths-held-in-sex-assault-on-mentally-impaired-girl-17.html?pagewanted=1

Three Prong Obscenity Test. (1997). US Supreme Court: Miller vs. California. Retrieved from http://courses.cs.vt.edu/cs3604/lib/Censorship/3-prong-test.html

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s