This is Pornography Awareness Week. Like Americans could possibly be more aware of porn – every week, every day, whether you like it or not is overflowing with porn awareness.
Americans do need more awareness of how corporations with which they do business, or in which they invest, traffic in porn. Hotel chains such as Marriott and Hilton reap hundreds of millions from in-room pay-per-view porn. Satellite television systems such as Echostar and General Motors’ DirecTV, and cable channels such as AT&T’s Hot Network rake in hundreds of millions more. Visa, MasterCard and American Express facilitate billions of dollars in online smut shopping.
A new report, “The Porn Ring Around Corporate White Collars: Getting Filthy Rich,” by CWA Chief Counsel Janet LaRue (available at Concerned Women For America) documents corporate porn trafficking. Much of the smut these corporations peddle is actually illegal obscenity, exposing them to asset forfeiture and potential racketeering prosecution.
Mrs. LaRue writes: “It is incomprehensible that any of these corporations would ever show their ‘adult’ videos at the company Christmas party or annual stockholders’ meeting, or permit employees to view the videos on the job. How strange to market a product that if displayed on corporate premises or at corporate functions creates the potential for losing millions of dollars to sexual harassment and hostile work environment claimants.”
Americans also need more awareness that this fight is about harm – not taste. Just two days ago, ABC reported on research at the University of Missouri showing that just a minute or two viewing “advertisements featuring stereotypically thin and beautiful women” can increase the signs of depression in women. One of the researchers remarked: “What is really, really striking to me is that it took such a short time” for consuming those images to have such an effect.
Last week, an expert from New York University who appeared on NBC’s “Today Show” warned against exposing children to coverage of the Washington, D.C., sniper case. Dr. Judith Reisman wrote in WorldNetDaily in June about research showing that porn consumption can actually change brain chemistry and structure.
What we consume affects us, whether it’s broccoli at dinner or porn later that night.
If a minute or two of underwear ads can make women depressed, think of what years of porn consumption can do to men or children. Hardly surprising, really, to read an Associated Press report in September that the man who murdered a nun in Oregon had just left a strip joint.
Or the Jan. 17 Boston Herald report that young girls posting nude pictures of themselves on the Internet say they were influenced by e-porn.
Or the Associated Press report last December that a father stabbed his 12-year-old son for refusing to perform a sex act minutes after downloading Internet porn.
Or the account in the Spokane, Wash., paper that a pedophile with a backpack full of child porn assaulted a child in the library.
Get the point? What we consume affects us.
Americans need more awareness of how courts have turned the First Amendment into an altar on which to sacrifice children. Porn fighters tell me that few industries are more responsive than the smut trade to changes in the legal environment. Like noxious gas that quickly expands to fill every available space. It only took a few weeks for the Supreme Court’s decision legalizing virtual child porn to bear vile fruit.
A pedophile convicted in 1996 on hundreds of counts of possessing and displaying child porn wants a new trial. The Associated Press reported on May 7 that 65-year-old David Cobb was “encouraged” by the Supreme Court’s ruling. Oh, by the way, for those who still believe that porn does not affect its consumers, Mr. Cobb was also convicted of attempting to molest a 12-year-old boy.
Just a month after the decision, an Illinois judge declared that state’s child-porn law unconstitutional. As a result, a 24-year-old man who had pleaded guilty of possessing nearly 2,600 images of child porn walked free. Those images, by the way, were of children engaged in sex acts with other children, adults and animals.
And more recently, a federal judge in New York threw out a guilty plea for receiving child porn because the defendant had not, in light of the Supreme Court decision, specifically admitted to knowing the kids were real.
Corporations are trafficking in material that is often illegal and is always harmful. Now you are more aware.