Panelists discuss film controversy

Wednesday, Jan. 22, 1997	Panelists discuss film controversy By DANIELLE CHIARA Collegian Staff Writer The controversy that has shrouded the movie also surrounded the topics argued in a panel discussion last night -- "The People vs. Larry Flynt: Hollywood First Amendment Hype or Cover-up of Harms Against Women?"
Michael Johnson, associate professor of sociology and women's studies, speaks at the Roundtable Discussion on the Larry Flynto case in 112 Kern Building. the discussion was held last night. (Collegian Photo/ Tracy Senycz - click for full size image)	The recent release of The People vs. Larry Flynt has sparked debate nationally and in the State College region between feminists and First Amendment rights advocates. Flynt, the founder and publisher of Hustler magazine, was tried in court on the basis that his magazine was obscene and offensive. In a landmark case, Flynt's attorney proved that the pornography in Hustler was protected under the First Amendment. Not only did the three panelists tackle pornography, but they also argued about issues relating to women, censorship and the First Amendment. Moderator Robert Richards, associate professor of journalism and law and founding director of the Pennsylvania Center for the First Amendment, said the evening would provide a forum to introduce the issues and answer questions from the audience. "Pornography has set many legal, social and political boundaries," Richards said. "This movie serves as a springboard in tackling the cultural and legal implications associated with the porn industry." Panelist Shari Roberts, assistant professor of media studies, said the movie handled the issue of pornography in a responsible manner. "The movie did not make (Larry Flynt) into a hero," Roberts said. "It showed how pornography influences society in a negative manner, but it focused more on the First Amendment issue."
A panel of professors sit at a roundtable discussion held about Larry Flynt. The discussion was held last night in 112 Kern. (Collegian Photo/ Tracy Senycz - click for full size image)	The filmmakers had many opportunities to glorify a sex scene in the movie, she said, but did not. Instead of glamorizing strippers with flamboyant light, they used harsh lighting in a strip club scene. Panelist Michael Johnson, associate professor, spoke about women's issues and sociology. Pornography can many times lead to violence against women, Johnson said, which feminists often critique. "There are two major kinds of harm," Johnson said. "Direct harm, which is involved in the production of pornography . . . and indirect harm, though impact such as the sexualization of women's bodies and images depict women as deserving and subordinating." Mass media sometimes has the same effect on society as pornography, he said, referring to a Jordache Enterprises ad campaign which used women's bodies to sell merchandise. Some beer commercials also affect the way men look at women, he said. Different types of pornography exist, Johnson said, such as fetish pornography, which displays women's body parts but not actual sexual acts; depiction of sexual activities that do not involve violence against women, and depiction of sexual activities that lead to the subordination or violence of women. Pornography's effect on sex raises two issues for feminists. One issue is that the way in which women are denied access to sexuality and the right to enjoy sex as much as men. Another concerns violence, harm and the subordination of women, Johnson said. "If you're a feminist and concerned, then you perceive the harm against women and take action," he said. Feminist activists can refuse to participate, not support the pornographic industry with money, educate society about the matter and boycott stores that trade in pornography, he said. "Feminists are concerned about the harm to women," Johnson said. "Every time you open a centerfold think about this." Panelist Clay Calvert, assistant professor of communications, who specializes in First Amendment issues and news media ethics, addressed the issue of pornography under the First Amendment.
CORRECTION:: An article in The Daily Collegian yesterday incorrectly identified two of the three standards material must meet to be considered obscene. The correct standards appear to the right.	In order to decide if material is obscene, a three part test must be completed, Calvert said. First, the material in question, as a whole, according to contemporary standards, must appeal to prurient -- or the "most prurient" -- interests. Then, the material must also be patently offensive under the applicable state law, or what each state considers to be obscene. Finally, it should receive protection under the First Amendment if it has serious literary, artistic, political and scientific value. When dealing with obscenity one needs to know where to draw the line, Johnson said. Under the courts' definition, Hustler magazine is not legally obscene. "The problem with trying to restrict information that is tasteless and offensive is problematic," Calvert said. "The Supreme Court stated that one man's vulgarity is another's lyric."