Mirkin Harris
Department of Political Science, University of Missouri-Kansas City, Kansas City, Missouri 64110, USA.
J Homosex. 2009;56(2):233-67. doi: 10.1080/00918360802623198.
This article examines the construction of the concept of child pornography, developed in several Supreme Court decisions. New York v. Ferber (1982) separated child pornography from adult obscenity, and soon thereafter almost all pictures of nude children became illegal. These images had been common in art and usually signified innocence, although they often had an erotic component. The assumption that images of nude youths can only be viewed erotically is a significant change. The justification-that children were hurt in producing child pornography, and that distribution (even no-cost distribution) and private possession contributed to that harm-does not hold up under analysis. It is statistically flawed and inconsistent with other Court decisions. Justice Kennedy's decision in Ashcroft v. The Free Speech Coalition supports the argument that the images are forbidden because they challenge the ideology of the innocent child. Since erotic images of adults are common, understanding the different treatment of youths is important for understanding contemporary sexual politics.
本文探讨了在最高法院的几项判决中形成的儿童色情制品概念的构建。纽约州诉费伯案(1982年)将儿童色情制品与成人淫秽物品区分开来,此后不久,几乎所有裸体儿童的图片都变得非法。这些图像在艺术中很常见,通常象征着纯真,尽管它们往往带有色情成分。认为裸体青少年的图像只能从色情角度观看的假设是一个重大转变。其理由——即儿童在制作儿童色情制品时受到伤害,以及传播(即使是免费传播)和私人持有都助长了这种伤害——在分析中站不住脚。它在统计上存在缺陷,并且与最高法院的其他判决不一致。肯尼迪大法官在阿什克罗夫特诉自由言论联盟案中的判决支持了这样一种观点,即这些图像被禁止是因为它们挑战了无辜儿童的意识形态。由于成人的色情图像很常见,理解对青少年的不同对待对于理解当代性政治很重要。