Search Results

Novels of the eighteenth century often treat sexuality in highly explicit terms, by the standards even of our own time, and certainly by Victorian standards. This chapter addresses the topic of sexual explicitness, looking at the role of law in regulating artistic expression in our period. It argues that we tend today to think of a legal doctrine of obscenity as quite natural, regardless of whether we like the doctrine as it exists. However, the doctrine did not exist at all until the eighteenth century and did not have any real bite in English law until the publication of John Cleland's Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure in 1748. The chapter traces the origins of the obscenity doctrine in English law in order to show, among other things, that it was not a meaningful part of either English or American law until well after the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was enacted. Looking at the nonregulation of highly explicit literature by law informs us about our legal concepts, past and present.

This chapter examines the use of obscenity doctrine to address hate speech. It first considers the U.S. test currently used for obscenity, set forth by the Supreme Court in the 1973 case Miller v. California, along with criticisms against the Miller test. It then discusses the three prongs of the Miller test in order to adapt it to hate speech: appeal to the prurient interest; patent offensiveness and statutory definition; and a material's lack of serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. It also explores the Supreme Court's ruling in the 1974 case Hamling v. United States, in which it tackled the mental state required for a person to be guilty of a violation of obscenity laws.

This chapter examines the use of obscenity doctrine to address hate speech. It first considers the U.S. test currently used for obscenity, set forth by the Supreme Court in the 1973 case Miller v. California, along with criticisms against the Miller test. It then discusses the three prongs of the Miller test in order to adapt it to hate speech: appeal to the prurient interest; patent offensiveness and statutory definition; and a material's lack of serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. It also explores the Supreme Court's ruling in the 1974 case Hamling v. United States, in which it tackled the mental state required for a person to be guilty of a violation of obscenity laws.

This book explores hate speech and what is wrong with it using the concepts of obscenity. It traces the history of how societies have accepted pornographic depictions or have rejected those depictions through lists of banned books or antiobscenity laws. It examines what bans on obscenity, or other reactions to pornography, have been all about, along with the factors that make a word or phrase acceptable or unacceptable. The first part of the book discusses the history of how societies have treated sexual images while the second part focuses on the legal test for obscenity and how it is applied to incidents of potential hate speech. It also analyzes the obscenity doctrine that finds objectionable material presented to children that might be acceptable for adults in the context of racist, sexist, and homophobic speech. In this introduction, a clarification is made regarding the nature of obscenity and how it differs from pornography.

This book explores hate speech and what is wrong with it using the concepts of obscenity. It traces the history of how societies have accepted pornographic depictions or have rejected those depictions through lists of banned books or antiobscenity laws. It examines what bans on obscenity, or other reactions to pornography, have been all about, along with the factors that make a word or phrase acceptable or unacceptable. The first part of the book discusses the history of how societies have treated sexual images while the second part focuses on the legal test for obscenity and how it is applied to incidents of potential hate speech. It also analyzes the obscenity doctrine that finds objectionable material presented to children that might be acceptable for adults in the context of racist, sexist, and homophobic speech. In this introduction, a clarification is made regarding the nature of obscenity and how it differs from pornography.