|
News & Commentary: Abu Ghraib and Pornography 5/11/2004 Are the photos life imitating ‘art’ or ‘art’ imitating life? Either way, porn is a factor.
Warning: Sexual content
The photos coming out of Abu Ghraib prison depict conduct very similar to a genre of deviant and violent pornography available on countless professional and amateur porn Web sites. I’ve seen them.
A Google search on May 11 for “rape porn” yielded 423,000 hits. “Torture porn” yielded 28,900 hits. “Military porn” yielded 80,000 hits with many featuring men in combat fatigues. “Prison porn” yielded over 9,000 hits, some of which are articles about the problem, but many are hard-core porn sites.
Adult Video News (AVN), the trade publication for the porn industry, rates porn videos. A search for “military” videos produced 388 hits. An October 2000 review of Hell, Whores and High Heels, given a “AAAA” rating, includes the following description of scenes:
(Most scenes start fairly focused with two or three players, then expand almost formlessly as more bodies are added). … Each of its five segments are visually thrilling turn-ons. The opener, for instance, has a rubber-clad, very bedeviling couple mauling a fallen angel. …Hyde saves the best for last, however, an interrogation fantasy set in a Russian military prison in which a male prisoner, helpless in a suspended leather swing, is violated with a variety of hardware wielded by fetching uniformed female guards and a beautiful grand inquisitor.
An article published on avn.com, May 4, titled, “GI Rape Photos Came From Porn Sites, Used For Propaganda,” cites a World Net Daily report. AVN acknowledges that two porn Web sites were used as propaganda against the U.S. war in Iraq, and that one of the sites published the Abu Ghraib photos:
A published report says graphic images of American GIs raping and sexually abusing Iraqi women were actually produced by U.S. and Hungarian adult Web sites¯who may not have known the images had been picked up and used as propaganda by at least two Arabic-language Web sites protesting the U.S. war in Iraq.
World Net Daily said that two sites, Albasrah.net and a site by the Committee for the Defense of Saddam Hussein posted in Tunisia, posted the images in addition to the now-notorious images of American troops abusing Iraqi prisoners of war. “Iraqi sources told WND that while they now understand the rape photos are fake, they fear incidents of sexual assault and rape by coalition troops may have occurred or could occur,” wrote free-lance reporter Sherrie Gossett May 4.
"The Tunisian site described the photos as the 'unedited' versions of actual events and Albasrah ran the photos under the heading ‘The Abu Ghraib Prison Photos,’ indicating they had received the photos via e-mail,” WND said. But the news Web site said they discovered the rape and sex abuse images actually came from Iraq Babes, based in the U.S., and Sex in War, based in Hungary, with the Iraqi women depicted portrayed by actresses.
Dr. Donna M. Hughes, an internationally recognized expert in sex trafficking and a professor at the University of Rhode Island, asked a penetrating question in her article, “Not Unfamiliar Images of Sexual Abuse and Humiliation in Abu Ghraib,” published on National Review.com, May 6.
Why are we shocked by these images from Abu Ghraib, but when the victims are women (or gay men) the images are called pornography or “adult entertainment”? Why can we easily see the violations of human beings in one set of images, but miss it in others? What if the Iraqi men had been forced to smile, could we be convinced that there was a newly formed “publishing and film production” company in Baghdad instead of sexual abuse and humiliation being perpetrated?
The Tagabu Report says “credible evidence was found that Iraqi detainees had been subjected to acts such as:
Rich Lowry, editor of NROnline.com, also recognizes the impact of pornography and the hypocrisy surrounding some of the reaction to the photos. He wrote in “Abu Ghraib and Us,” May 10:
Then, there is the very fact of the pictures. The American jailers, who live in a country where pornography is a $10 billion-a-year business, became amateur pornographers. They videotaped themselves having sex with one another. One of the officers disciplined at Abu Ghraib allegedly took pictures of a female soldier showering. The Americans sexually humiliated Iraqi prisoners, forcing them to masturbate, to wear women's underwear, and to commit (or feign committing) unnatural acts, and captured it on film. If they had done this stateside in different circumstances, they might be very rich and perhaps even up for an Adult Video Award.
Pornographers, their allies and fans will argue that there’s a difference between “acting” in pornography and the forced degradation and abuse pictured in the Abu Ghraib photos. The difference between victims and actors is duly noted. And those convicted of involvement in prisoner abuse depicted in the Abu Ghraib photos should be punished accordingly and the victims should be compensated appropriately.
The porn industry, however, cannot be allowed to hide behind the First Amendment and “art imitating life.” This is an industry making billions by creating degrading images that “imitate” a reality that is rightly condemned. Tragically, many who join in expressing condemnation and outrage at the Abu Ghraib photos find no harm in the imitation. Pornography is named by our enemies to “justify” their hatred of America and our military.
There is little doubt that regularly viewing pornography desensitizes and makes viewers more likely to imitate “art.” Porn-viewing doesn’t excuse the conduct—it helps to explain it. Pornographers call it “turn-ons.”
CNSNews.com reported November 30, 2003, about the consequences of showing porn videos to prison inmates in South Africa:
Late-night soft porn and “adult” films on television shown to male prisoners at Pollsmoor Prison in Cape Town frequently result in violent orgies of rape and sexual molestation, say former inmates. … “The gangsters grab whatever inmate they want and force him to have sex.” Young first-time male offenders were forced to walk naked around the overcrowded cells and were taunted by prison gangsters, who called them women’s names, such as “Britney Spears” and “Whitney Houston.” Former prisoners … said that while the adult movies were being screened, the men grabbed other inmates and forced them to have sex with them, often three or four of them at a time.
President Abraham Lincoln showed wisdom and common sense when he issued an executive order during the Civil War prohibiting the use of the U.S. mail to send pornography to Union troops.
President Bush should order the Department of Defense to prohibit our military to visit brothels, sexually oriented businesses, and to use any government facility or equipment to view pornography. The “Military Honor and Decency Act of 1996” forbids the sale of porn in any military PX. It was upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, in General Media Communications v. Cohen, and the Supreme Court denied review.
We don’t need any more “turn-ons” like Abu Ghraib. War is Hell enough. |
|
Concerned Women for America 1015 Fifteenth St. N.W., Suite 1100 Washington, D.C. 20005 Phone: (202) 488-7000 Fax: (202) 488-0806 |
Feedback / Questions? || Problem with this page? || Archives
