Determine Whether or Not the Consumption of Pornography Would Be Morally Permissible

Introduction

Humans are all born through the same procedure, which is the only natural way to be born. But we are all different in behavior, color, thoughts, paradigms of society, culture, and norms, which make us different. Even if two brothers from the same parents behave oppositely in major cases, it is very rare for them to behave the same way; they will still be different in some traits. We all have different rules, and our rationale determines the good and bad we can see in our lives. Some would like to flirt and feel it is fine for themselves and is a regular thing, but some will consider it prohibited due to religious beliefs, social nourishment, or their own rationale.

Pornography is one of the booming industries in beauty shaping after cosmetics beauty. Pornography is an industry based on developing sexual content using visual, audio, and written material with the only motive of arousing sexual excitement. Also, we can see different statistical reports for the utilization of this industry, and there is a big debate in the world about whether it is moral or immoral. In many moments, people are fighting to make it legal and somewhere illegal. Still, it is banned in many countries, but it is accessible with one click to everyone nowadays, and youth are partially using it too much. It is breaking debate in a different field on porn-watching because it is mostly seen that people use to see more than listen to audio or read erotic books or novels.

There are two famous philosophical schools of thought, i.e., Utilitarianism and Kant’s 2^nd formulation of the categorical imperative. Under this, we will try to identify whether it is moral or immoral and whether the government should legalize it (Wood and Hughes).

Discussion

Utilitarianism theory

This theory belongs to normative ethics and can be said to be another form of consequentialism that originated with Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart, English philosophers of the 19^th century. It is one of the most historically influential moral theories that are still practiced while always facing criticism. It originated with changes but still seems to be the critical component in the theological perspective of moral study. It says that every action is right if it spreads happiness and every action is wrong if it gives unhappiness to anyone. This theory assesses wrong or right by the resulting outcome, not by the motives behind it, and it considers human happiness more than anything else. They also believe the effect is on the wider circle, not the individual, and they are against egoism, where a person goes with their self-interest; it has to be looked at for everyone.

Under this theory, there are different debates, but what matters for us to highlight our topic under this statement is to go further by asking these questions of ourselves from a wide perspective. Does pornography give happiness to us? Does it have a good impact on our lives? Is there a benefit to developing a sustainable life? All can be YES and NO because we all think differently, but let’s see it from a wide perspective. Utilitarianism fully considers watching porn a moral act because it gives happiness to many people, helps them in their mode of sexual excitement, and helps them to know about sex and different techniques which can help them to strengthen their sexual relationship with their partner. While child porn and animal abuse in porn can be immoral, some categories involve torture of male and female porn stars, like Fetish, Gangbang, etc., because they are not a natural way to conduct this activity. Let’s look at the matter of legalization. Utilitarianism will support it because everyone has the right to happiness and their choice of what gives them pleasure. Everyone can avoid what they do not like or feel bad about and should not do. While utilitarianism mostly decides the activity’s effect, if health issues increase, it would support banning it and making it illegal (Sandin).

Kantian 2^nd Formulation of the Categorical Imperative

Now, looking at Kant’s 2^nd formulation of the Categorical Imperative, which was initiated or presented by Immanuel Kant, a German philosopher who gave the idea of universal morality, it rejected and prohibited all kinds of punishments, thefts, and murders considered illegal. Kantian theory asks you to act on something if you are satisfied with answering questions, so you should act on that thing. Firstly, will everyone act as I propose? The second one is: Does my action respect the goal of a human being I am using for my purpose? The 2^nd formulation of the categorical imperative in Kant’s Theory says we should not be using a person as an object but should respect them for their value. Besides instrumental values, we should focus on inherent values.

If we see pornography under this theory, it is considered an immoral act, and we will not even support legalizing it because if we take it as a universal behavior, the majority do not like to go for it. They consider it unhealthy for their children and other humans. There are side effects highlighted; people who watch porn movies are also viewed as having some health deficiencies in which they lose their sexual control over themselves. So, under this theory, it would be immoral and illegal to be conditioned by the government (Reynolds and Bowie).

Conclusions

Porn is not a solution to sexual excitement. We cannot say it is immoral because everyone has the right to enjoy their life in their way. Such content should be limited, and things like child porn should be banned because it is child abuse, as children are unable to consent to that activity. Also, touching women or activities like this should be banned because they can increase the marital rape ratio.

Works Cited

Reynolds, Scott J., and Norman E. Bowie. “A Kantian Perspective on the Characteristics of Ethics Programs.” Business Ethics Quarterly, vol. 14, no. 2, Apr. 2004, pp. 275–92. Cambridge Core, doi:10.5840/beq200414214.

Sandin, Per. “Virtual Child Pornography and Utilitarianism.” Journal of Information, Communication, and Ethics in Society, vol. 2, no. 4, Nov. 2004, pp. 217–23. emeraldinsight.com (Atypon), doi:10.1108/14779960480000254.

Wood, Michael, and Michael Hughes. “The Moral Basis of Moral Reform: Status Discontent vs. Culture and Socialization as Explanations of Anti-Pornography Social Movement Adherence.” American Sociological Review, vol. 49, no. 1, 1984, pp. 86–99. JSTOR, doi:10.2307/2095559.

Editorial Staff

Academic Master Education Team is a group of academic editors and subject specialists responsible for producing structured, research-backed essays across multiple disciplines. Each article is developed following Academic Master’s Editorial Policy and supported by credible academic references. The team ensures clarity, citation accuracy, and adherence to ethical academic writing standards

Content reviewed under Academic Master Editorial Policy.

• Editorial Staff

  Trademarkia And The Future of Intellectual Property
• Editorial Staff

  A new UK trade agreement with Pacific countries can prevent Britain from rejoining the EU
• Editorial Staff

  Aluprof MB SkyLine Panoramic Sliding Doors
• Editorial Staff

  Online Freedom, Security, and Anonymity – All in One