ABSTRACT
A succession of ‘moral panics’ has dictated the form and focus of much pornographic research. The pattern has typically been one of violent dispute between those for whom pornography constitutes a fundamental threat and those who seek to combat censorship and repressive legislation in the name of rights and freedoms of expression. The committee rejects both the widely publicized claims of the moral camp, as well as the less familiar case that defends pornography because of its alleged beneficial or cathartic effects: in both cases, they conclude, the evidence is insufficient. While conceding that it may not be possible to demonstrate satisfactorily the harmful effects on individuals, they argue that the damaging conse-quences of pornography are real enough. Inasmuch as pornograhic materials articulate and express demeaning, antagonistic, and violent attitudes to women, they serve both to diffuse beliefs and to legitimate actions which are unjust and practically damaging to the interests of women.
