ENG110 Paper #1
It is interesting to know that feminists want pornography to be censored just because it is disgusting to them although they normally support the First Amendment, which gives them freedom of speech. In her essay “A First Amendment Junkie,” Susan Jacoby argues that pornography should not be censored just because someone finds it offensive because the censorship is a violation of the First Amendment. Her purpose in this essay is to persuade the audiences to agree that many arguments by the feminists for censorship of pornography are invalid and accept her thesis. She supports her thesis by appealing to the authority, using ridicule, an example, and statistics, and anticipating opposition’s arguments.
The first method the author takes is to appeal to the authority to make her thesis rational and credible. She quotes what Justice Hugo L. Black said: “the Federal Government is without any power whatsoever under the Constitution to put any type of burden on free speech and expression of ideas of any kind.” This quotation is from someone who has much greater power on making a decision of the way in which, the First Amendment should be applied to pornography, so it has an effect of clearly showing that the person with authority, in fact, supports her thesis that any type of censorship of pornography is wrong. Most people have nature that makes them tend to follow what the authority says. Therefore, this first method leads the audience to believe what the author will say from now on will be very rational and credible, and also supports her thesis directly.
After she gets credibility, she supports her point by using comparison and ridicule. Her point is to show that it is unreasonable to believe in the feminists’ argument that pornography “pose a greater threat to women than similarly repulsive exercises of free speech pose to other offended groups.” To prove this, the author compares pornography to women with a march of neo-Nazis to survivors from the threat of Nazis, and states that “it is ridiculous to suggest that the porn shops on 42nd street are more disgusting to women than a march of neo-Nazis is to survivors of the extermination camps.” When the argument by the feminists proves to be unreasonable, her audience thinks that an argument opposite to what the feminists say seems more reasonable to believe in. Therefore, her second method of comparison and ridicule strengthens her thesis because it is an argument that opposes the feminists’ one.
Because the author gets credibility on her essay and proves that the feminists’, or her oppositions’, argument on censorship is absurd, she is, now, able to use statistics taken by the author herself. Although Susan Brownmiller says pornography is “the undiluted essence of antifemale propaganda,” Jacoby argues that pornography is not necessarily obscene. She uses her statistics of five women’s reactions to one picture in Penthouse to prove that there is something between art and trashy, and “got responses that ranged from ‘lovely’ and ‘sensuous’ to ‘revolting’ and ‘demeaning’.” The statistics show that different persons have different views on what they see, and an opinion that not all pictures of naked women are obscene is accepted by not only the author but also by people in general. If each person has his/her unique perception on one picture, then is it possible to censor any picture of naked women? Jacoby would say “No” to this question.
Three methods described above show that the author uses technique of shepherding her audience’s attitude. First of all, she appeals to the authority to get credibility on her argument because what the authority says is generally the most reliable source. Second, she brings up irrationality of her oppositions’ argument to make the audience believe that they are unable to make their argument logically. Then, she uses her own statistics, which are helpful to her thesis. Through those methods, her audience unconsciously becomes more and more likely to think that her opposition’ argument is not worth taking seriously, and believe that what she argues is much solider. This technique is hidden from most of her audience, and is the most supportive to her thesis.
I never thought about censorship of pornography until I read an essay “A First Amendment Junkie” by Susan Jacoby. She develops her thesis by using many different methods that are very effective. Especially, her ability to shepherd the audience’s attitude amazed me so much that I got goose bumps all over when I realized how effective it was. Over all, she makes an excellent argument and is successful in persuading her audience to move toward or accept her thesis. “The First Amendment is its own antidote.” Yes, that’s right!
© Rakuten Group, Inc.
