Australasian Journal of Philosophy 85 (3):435 – 456 (2007)
AbstractRecently, several philosophers have recast feminist arguments against pornography in terms of Speech Act Theory. In particular, they have considered the ways in which the illocutionary force of pornographic speech serves to set the conventions of sexual discourse while simultaneously silencing the speech of women, especially during unwanted sexual encounters. Yet, this raises serious questions as to how pornographers could (i) be authorities in the language game of sex, and (ii) set the conventions for sexual discourse - questions which these speech act-theoretic arguments against pornography have thus far failed to adequately answer. I fill in this gap of the argumentation by demonstrating that there are fairly weak standards for who counts as an authority or convention-setter in sexual discourse. With this analysis of the underpinnings of a speech act analysis of pornography in mind, I discuss a range of possible objections. I conclude that (i) the endorsement of censorship by a speech act analysis of pornography competes with its commitment to the conventionality of speech acts, and, more damningly, that (ii), recasting anti-pornography arguments in terms of linguistic conventions risks an unwitting defence of a rapist's lack of mens rea - an intolerable result; and yet resisting this conclusion requires that one back away from the original claim to women's voices being 'silenced'.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
References found in this work
Citations of this work
Pornography and Accommodation.Richard Kimberly Heck - 2021 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 64 (8):830-860.
Epistemic Injustice in Social Cognition.Wesley Buckwalter - 2019 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 97 (2):294-308.
A Comprehensive Definition of Illocutionary Silencing.Laura Caponetto - 2021 - Topoi 40 (1):191-202.
Similar books and articles
Playing Hide and Seek: How to Protect Virtual Pornographers and Actual Children on the Internet.Audrey Rogers - unknown
The Pornography / Civil Rights Ordinance V. The BOG: And the Winner Is...?Melinda Vadas - 1992 - Hypatia 7 (3):94 - 109.
The Hate That Dare Not Speak its Name: Pornography Qua Semi-Political Speech. [REVIEW]Daniel I. A. Cohen - 1994 - Law and Philosophy 13 (2):195 - 239.
On Pornography: Mackinnon, Speech Acts, and "False" Construction.Mary Kathryn McGowan - 2005 - Hypatia 20 (3):22-49.
Illocution, Silencing and the Act of Refusal.Mari Mikkola - 2011 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 92 (3):415-437.
Pornographic Subordination: How Pornography Silences Women.Lynne Tirrell - 1999 - In Claudia F. Card (ed.), Feminist Ethics and Politics. University Press of Kansas.