| The feminist argument that pornography is harmful lacks
adequate support. |
This conclusion is a little less sweeping than "the
argument has no merit," which makes it easier to support. It also
avoids getting into other issues like what should be taught in college. |
| First, the feminist argument typically alleges that
pornography increases men's willingness to rape women, or at least
to think of them only as sex objects. |
This sentence points out exactly which part of the argument
is being discussed, which helps keep the reader oriented. |
| But this argument ignores the fact that the print pornography
industry alone earns more money each year than the entire "legitimate"
bookselling industry. For that to be true, there must be many, many
men and women who read pornography regularly. And yet crime statistics
suggest that not many men rape women. |
This section of the argument does appeal to "what most
people do," but not in the same way as the bandwagon or hasty generalization
did. The author doesn't assume that his or her personal experience
is necessarily relevant or generalize from a few people he or she
knows; instead, he or she refers to "crime statistics." |
| Furthermore, most men today believe in women's equality,
as a study by Dr. Knowitall and her research group, of the Institute
on the Status of Women, demonstrates. |
If Dr. Knowitall is a reliable source, this is a legitimate
use of authority, not an appeal to authority or bandwagon. |
| Feminists acknowledge that scientific studies have failed
to show that porn harms women. If there had been only a few such studies,
or if we had reason to believe they were unreliable, we should conclude
that nothing has yet been shown about whether porn harms women. But
I think that when reliable studies have repeatedly failed to show
a relationship, that fact constitutes some evidence that the relationship
doesn't exist. So it seems unlikely that porn is harming women in
the way the feminist argument alleges. |
This section of the argument avoids the appeal to ignorance
and instead talks directly about what we should do when studies don't
show anything conclusively. |
| In the absence of positive evidence from studies, we
have to rely on common sense. Can people distinguish between the sometimes-degrading
scenarios they see in porn and real life? I believe they can. I think
pornography is a lot like television and movies--it presents images
that, while they certainly do have some impact on us, we all realize
are nothing more than fiction. Young children may have difficulty
distinguishing between fantasy and reality, but they are not often
exposed to pornography. Men and women who look at porn should know
better than to think that it gives a realistic picture of sexual relationships
between men and women. |
This section of the argument uses a fairly strong analogy
between porn and other types of media, like TV and movies. The more
relevant traits two things share, the stronger an analogy between
them is likely to be. |
| If porn cannot be shown to harm women as a class by
making them more vulnerable to sexual violence or causing men to think
of them as inferior, how else might it be harmful? |
This sentence assumes there are several possible ways,
instead of setting up a false dichotomy. |
| Feminists have often argued that the porn industry is
harmful to the women who work within it--that many of them are abused
and exploited. I agree with them that if an industry is mistreating
people, it needs to be reformed, and they are doing a public service
by pointing out such abuses. |
By discussing areas of agreement with opponents, the
arguer avoids ad hominems and shows that she is not fanatically devoted
to proving that her position is right about everything and that feminists
are wrong about everything. |
| But what sort of reform are feminists proposing? |
Again, this question is open and doesn't set up a false
dichotomy. |
| One suggestion I know about has been made by Catharine
MacKinnon and Andrea Dworkin, who argue that there should be a civil
rights statute that allows anyone who has been harmed by porn to seek
civil damages from pornographers. |
This is a fairly accurate characterization of the opponent's
position, not a straw man; again, the author attributes ideas to specific
people--MacKinnon and Dworkin--rather than making assumptions about
what all feminists believe. |
| My concern about this proposal is that although it
will not legally be censorship, since the law would not empower the
government to stop anyone from producing material based on the ideas
it contains, the civil rights statute will have the same effect as
censorship. Pornographers may be so afraid of facing lawsuits that
many of them will stop producing porn--and a situation where people
are afraid to put forward certain kinds of writing or pictures because
they will face legal consequences seems to violate the spirit, if
not the letter, of the first amendment. |
This might be considered a slippery slope, as the arguer
is predicting dire consequences that might or might not follow from
something. But notice that the prediction is qualified by "may" (as
opposed to "will") and "many" (as opposed to all), and that the consequences
predicted are not especially far-fetched. |
| Porn, like books, may express certain ideas about men,
women, and sex, and those ideas may have political ramifications--but
just as controversial books are protected, porn should be. It may
even do more good than harm by provoking thoughtful discussion and
debate about men, women, and sexuality. |
A fallacy-free argument isn't necessarily a great one,
of course: there are a number of obvious and plausible objections
to the argument we've just given. The strength of an argument depends
not just on avoiding fallacies, but also on the truth of the premises,
the completeness of the author's knowledge, the quality of the evidence
used, and so forth. |
