Excerpt from :

...... In Aristotles opinion, people sometimes needed certain things to keep them distracted and to purge away their harmful emotions. Most probably, the same thing happens when one watches pornography, with his lust being eliminated after the abuse. One can almost claim that being against pornography meant that you would take a Platonic position. Quite the opposite happens when one adopts an Aristotelian position by considering porn to be harmless.[1]
The court case of MacKinnon and Dworkin refers to the instance in which anti-pornography radical feminists Andrea Dworkin and Catherine MacKinnon along with other members of the feminist anti-pornography movement proposed a series of local ordinances, called the Antipornography Civil Rights Ordinance, which qualified pornography as being a violation of womens civil rights. The ordinances could not be accepted by city officials because of the fact that they seemed absurd and because they contradicted with the freedom of speech protections in the Constitution
In the case of Linda Boreman, the pornographic actress that claimed to have been obliged to play in the movie Deep Throat, anti-pornography supporters believe that pornography has proved to be harmful. However, it is not pornography that hurt Linda Boreman. The real criminal behind the case

Need this essay? If it's not quite what you're looking for there are over 50,000 more to search from, so you can find the term paper or essay that meets your needs.