First of all, let me say it isn’t easy to take a stance against something like a ban on pornography. We are a hypocritical society, especially so in matters related to sex. For instance, it is safe to assume that most men and several women consume pornography. However, few admit they consume it and come out publicly against the ban.
However, the purpose of this article is not to defend pornography. Porn can, in some instances, have harmful effects. Overexposure to porn can desensitise and degrade one’s attitudes to sex, harm one’s ability to form intimate relationships, increase objectification of women and lead to motivation and self-confidence issues.
That said, over one-fifth of the world’s internet traffic is porn. It is clearly a mass product consumed by billions, satisfying some regular need. The billions of people consuming it seem to be going about their lives in a fairly normal manner.
At least on five counts – morally, legally, socially, practically and politically – a ban on porn makes no sense at all in a free society. These arguments should not be seen as encouragement to watch porn, but to understand why we should avoid arbitrary state-mandated bans.
Morally, we have a negative attitude towards sex and any form of sexual pleasure. In common Indian parlance, euphemisms for sex are ‘bura kaam’, ‘gandi baat’, ‘dirty thing’. Hence, it is no surprise that proponents of the ban consider anything related to porn is awful.
However, truly awful are several Indian men’s attitude towards sex. In my empirical study, i have yet to meet an Indian girl who has not been leered at, brushed past against, groped, molested or made uncomfortable while she was growing up. Brutal rapes might be rare, but no Indian girl is spared from the unwanted, non-consensual advances of an Indian man. That is what is bad. That needs to be banned.
Sex isn’t bad. Non-consent is. There is no ‘buri baat’ in two consenting adults having sex. But it is a ‘buri baat’ if a man passing a woman in a sleeper train brushes past her to get a cheap thrill. Preventing people in their private rooms watching a movie made by adults having consensual sex won’t solve anything. In fact, it is immoral to interfere in other people’s private lives.
Legally, Article 21 of the Constitution lays emphasis on individual freedom. Telling people what not to watch seems to be a clear violation. Sure, some of our archaic laws may be brought into play, but do we have to? Do we have to impose a regressive, control freak legal regime?
The argument on societal welfare is also specious. The level of sexual frustration amongst Indian men is enormous, partly because our so-called Indian culture denies natural instinct and forces repression. This is what leads to uncles molesting nieces, and women having body parts squeezed in buses or trains. Porn may reduce some of that frustration and prevent repression spilling out on our streets. Banning porn will only make frustration levels and crimes against women worse. Do we really want more hidden cameras in trial rooms?
Politically too it is not a wise move. BJP loves pleasing its most regressive, orthodox and perhaps loyal constituency. However, it is the new, more progressive generation that helped BJP come to power. Virtually all supporters of BJP on social media watch porn. To deny them is only going to make BJP unpopular.
Finally, at a practical level, even if you wanted to, you cannot ban porn by blocking websites. I remember VHS days – porn was rampant when the internet did not even exist. You block some sites; mirror sites pop up or porn gets sold at mobile repair shops in memory cards at every street corner. It’s idiotic to believe a ban on porn can be implemented.
A question that arises from all the anti-ban arguments is this: should nothing ever be banned? The answer is no. Certain things that cause immediate and grave harm to society have to be banned or criminalised. A drug like heroin, for instance, can destroy families quickly. A perversion like child pornography, which by definition involves criminal activity in making the film itself because it involves children below the age of consent, should clearly be banned.
We need to grow up if we want the world to take us seriously. The key to becoming an awesome nation is individual liberties. We need to believe that our citizens are not stupid and can choose what is best for them in what quantity. A republic of bans assumes people are inept and unable to choose, so the state has to decide for them. With a mentality like that, where a state doesn’t believe in its own people, what hope is there for the world to believe in us?
The government could spend its time better in growing our GDP or improving our education, healthcare, infrastructure and law and order. Yes, protect us from crime and substances that will kill us or exploit our children.
However, for the rest, believe people have the right to choose. After all, it is the same choices that brought this government to power. So believe in that power of choice, not in bans.
August 8, 2015 ()