been aired, often in what seems like perpetuity, in the feminist press. What is dif erent about pornography is that the pornographers have used the so-called feminists who defend
pornography to defend it in mainstream forums and in mainstream media. Feminists who oppose pornography are under constant attack from the pornographers, who have their own
magazines, of course, and also tremendous influence with
newspapers, other periodicals, and radio and television producers. Women who defend pornography are picked up by the pornographers and spotlighted. Often, they find that
their careers, including academic careers, are advanced. They
suddenly have available to them many public forums in which
to express propornography politics usefully (for the pornographers) disguised as a mutation of feminism. Some of them take the vast sums of money the pornographers offer and publish attacks on feminists fighting pornography in the pornography itself. They attack feminists opposing pornography for the pornographers in forums opened up to them by the pornographers. They have allowed themselves to become the chicks-up- front through choices they have made.
There are hundreds of thousands of us, only a tiny number
of them. But the tiny number of them tend to be privileged
and well-placed: lawyers, academics, journalists. The
hundreds of thousands of us are women in al walks of life, but
not particularly well-placed. We tend to be poorer. Some of
us have been prostitutes or in pornography or have suf ered
some other form of egregious sexual violation.
We wish that they would stop, of course. One reason is that
the pornographers get so much political mileage out of them.
But another reason is that we feel ashamed for them. They
dishonor women.
The so-cal ed feminist split on pornography would have the
quality of a tempest in a teapot if not for the media exposure
choreographed by the pornographers. We fight the pornographers. Propornography women, calling themselves “feminists, ”
fight us. In and of itself, this is suspect as a practice of feminism.
Since 1968, feminists have been fighting the way the male
world objectifies women and turns women into sexual com82
Pornography and Civil Rights
modities. Since 1970, we have been fighting pornography.
There is no viable propornography feminism. Our legitimate
differences center on
active interference of the pornographers, we would have been
able to resolve these differences—or we might have agreed to
let a thousand flowers bloom. Because of the complicity of the
propornography women with the pornographers, feminism
itself stands in danger of being irrevocably compromised and
the rights of women being hurt by pornography taking second place to public spectacles of what appears to be internecine conflict. The pornographers love it.
Q: What is the role of the American Civil Liberties Union?
A: The ACLU has been very active in defending the pornographers in the media. The ACLU has been very active in defending pornography as a genre of expression that must
have absolute constitutional protection: this they have done
in the courts.
The ACLU has taken money for a long time from the pornographers. Some money has been raised by showing pornography. The ACLU’s economic ties with the pornographers take many different forms, ranging from taking money from the
Playboy Foundation to being housed for a nominal rent ($1
per year) in a building owned by pornographers. Sometimes
