GUEST COLUMN: "Internet Pornography"

Author and journalist Jonathan Rauch quoted a U. Penn "administrator" in the May 1995 issue of Harper's Magazine on the environment of campus prejudice. The administrator said "We at the University of Pennsylvania have guranteed students and the community that they can live in a community free of sexism, racism, and homophobia." Yet Penn also provides uncensored computer services which contain pornographic material degrading to women. Anyone with a Penn ID has access to the Internet's Usenet, the set of computer discussion groups in which these images appear. A survey conducted by student Martin Rimm at Carnegie-Mellon University found 83.5% of all images posted on the Usenet to be pornographic. While pornographic images alone do not create sexists, the two are closely intertwined. Feminists originated the idea that in addition to being a form of expression, pornography encourages males to treat women in a more hostile manner. It seems a contradiction that a school that gurantees freedom from sexism offers its students technology that transmits images which encourage that prejudice. The administration has several choices. They could ignore the problem (or deny it exists), acknowledge the problem and choose to censor the offensive newsgroups, or acknowledge the problem and reconcile it with the school's goals. The first option is the cowardly way out. It leaves a contradiction of policy and seriously questions the administration's sincerity in wanting to provide a sexism-free (and other-isms free) campus. Ignoring and denying the problem fall in the same category because decision-makers can hide behind the authority of their positions. Trying to find the appropriate people to ask simple questions about the issues can be almost impossible at Penn. The second option is censorship. This is an extremely touchy matter, especially when concerning the new, uncharted territory of cyberspace regulation. Currently, it is possible for the overseeing subscriber (in this case, the University of Pennsylvania) to choose not to allow certain Usenet groups to appear. The University could choose to edit out the groups that specialize in pornographic imagery. Unfortunately, this could encourage the University or any other group in power to edit out any material opposed to their own views. This is a very useful tool for high schools and parents who wish to protect children from the inappropriate (and often illegal) material, but not for universities who are dealing with lawful adults. Censorship also brings up the issue of freedom of speech. Calling pornographic images 'speech' is a stretch of the definition, but pornography is a form of expression. The First Amendment has traditionally been stretched to protect reasonable freedom of expression, for example: the freedom to express ideas in writing. Pornography also expresses ideas, if questionable ones. This issue is only applicable to the Internet, not the other forms of expression that the University controls. Television wiring is also controlled by the University, and can contain pornography. But the difference is that television is an established form of media that the people have already encountered and the courts have dealt with. The the Internet is new to mainstream culture, and firm guidelines have not been set for its use and restrictions. Three weeks ago, the Senate passed the Communications Decency Act in an attempt to remove "obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy or indecent" materials from computer networking. In the meantime, as the House deliberates, it is up to individuals to make their own judgements. Essentially, it should be left up to students to decide if they want to be part of online pornography. This follows the philosophies of lawfully permissive states, which 'allow people to be stupid.' If someone wants to satisfy their urges through dirty, secretive photography, that is their own choice. The wisest choice would be for the University to acknowledge the potential for a problem and take non-invasive action to deal with it. Most of the University's concern will be to reconcile school goals with the reality of life. Sexism will exist on and off campus whether or not there is pornography on the Internet. But the administration needs to recognize that the material can promote sexism, and condemn it. If the University makes it clear that the option is there but not with the administration's approval, then the school can not be held liable for promoting an activity that encourages sexism.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.