Cranky crusades by highly-placed conservatives have moved a long way since Ronald Reagan's 1980 election and the rise of the religious right. As discontent sweeps Middle America, widespread conservative alliances are rapidly changing the nature of one of the world's most liberal nations. It is against this background that Nadine Strossen's book, Defending Pornography, has been published to a storm of protest. Her attempt to link the women's movement with right-wing ascendancy has not only got up feminists' skirts but the fact the president of the American Civil Liberties Union chooses to do it while defending the indefensible has sent shockwaves through the country. Strossen has faced a barrage of abuse for knocking hell out of feminists who are fighting to restrain pornography. Her book has been lambasted as an appalling attack on her sisters, scape-goating two in particular, Catharine MacKinnon and Andrea Dworkin. But the author, a professor at New York Law School and noted human rights activist, firmly insists the book, her first, neither advocates nor opposes pornography. Rather, it defends the right of all consenting adults to look, or not look, at pornography as they choose. So much as wolf whistle these days and the sex police will be after you, she bristles. The pro-censorship lobby's problem, according to Strossen, is that their fight is based on speculation that pornography may lead in the long run to discrimination or violence against women. She believes there is a lack of evidence to substantiate their fears. More chillingly for Strossen, in 1983 MacKinnon and Dworkin came up with a model anti-pornography law which declared pornography to be the practice of sex discrimination and which offered civil lawsuits to combat it. Their model law has been considered by many states. She argues passionately that it is essential to derail this anti-sex juggernaut before its impact on public perceptions and policy becomes even more devastating. Viewing sexually-oriented expression as inherently dangerous does profound damage to human rights in general and women's rights in particular. If speech conveying sexist ideas can be restricted then racist, heterosexist and other 'biased' ideas can also be contained, she fears. There is no reason, Strossen feels, 'to believe force or violence are endemic in the sex industry, or more prevalent there than in other sectors of our society'. Society's wariness towards sex is highlighted by contrasting it with the greater tolerance towards violence, a dichotomy which is especially vivid in the media and mass culture, she points out. Besides, Strossen says, pro-censorship feminists obsessed with pornography and with a 'women-as-victims' orientation ignore the fact most rape victims are men - a substantial number of whom are likely to go on to attack women. What makes the pro-censorship viewpoint worse, she believes, is that men's accountability for crimes of violence against women is diluted by blaming their actions on pornography. The focus should be on the individuals who used violence, fighting back mainly by using criminal laws. The porn-made-me-do-it concept is seriously flawed, a legal excuse to commit violence against women. Punish the rapist, not anything or anyone that might have caused it, she says. Pro-censorship feminists are accused of seeking cheap solutions, diverting attention and resources from addressing problems in society at which censorship is aimed. Pornography is not a central cause, let alone the central cause of sexism and violence, Strossen says. At the same time, Strossen's defence leads to some extraordinary justifications. Boredom, criminal inclinations, shyness, isolation, disabilities - pornography may offer solutions to a panoply of ailments. As pro-censorship feminists themselves have demonstrated, she says in a piece of oddball logic, pornography can serve as an important tool to galvanise public concern about problems of sex discrimination and violence. If censorship makes such images less visible, the protest against sexism will be weakened. Strossen seems to be advocating a total gloves-off policy as the only way forward, which leaves you wondering if she has ever seen anything racier than Playboy. Despite this, Defending Pornography is a brave attempt to open up debate on a contentious issue. It has not taken long for feminist beliefs to become entrenched and largely untouchable. Like any ideological movement, the anti-pornography camp must account for itself, justifying its beliefs and its increasing influence on our lives. DEFENDING PORNOGRAPHY Nadine Strossen Abacus $136
