[< Back]     [Start]    [Up]     [Next >]

[*Page 250 continued]

C. Child Pornography Law and Mainstream Pedophilia

If prohibition produces or escalates desire in the realm of sexuality generally, is there anything about child pornography law that would make it particularly vulnerable to this perverse dynamic? Sociological literature suggests the answer is yes: The social climate of anguish over child sexual abuse, and the expanding laws of child pornography that

[*251]

express and reflect this anguish, have made children all the more sexually alluring.

The classic sociological work on the nature of taboo and transgression is Kai T. Erikson's Wayward Puritans: A Study in the Sociology of Deviance. [230] Erikson writes that "deviant behavior [seems] to appear in a community at exactly those points where it is most feared." [231] Explaining the paradox by which "many of the institutions designed to discourage deviant behavior operate in such a way  as to perpetuate it," [232] he writes:  

Any community which feels jeopardized by a particular form of behavior will impose more severe sanctions against it and devote more time and energy to the task of rooting it out. At the same time, however, the very fact that a group expresses its concern about a given set of values often seems to draw a deviant response from certain of its members. There are people in any society who appear to "choose" a deviant style exactly because it offends an important value of the group... . [233]  

Erikson's theory indicates that the heated anxiety we have exhibited about child pornography makes it more inviting to criminal violation. As he explains, deviant behavior manifests itself in perfect symmetry to social fears, lending a "self-fulfilling prophetic" quality to the community's apprehensions. [234] An early history of Puritan culture explained the self-generative quality of fear: "Their troublers came precisely in the form and shape in which they apprehended them." [235]  

Reconsider in this context the scandal over the Calvin Klein "kiddie porn" advertising campaign of August 1995. Prior to the release of the campaign, public

concern over children's sexual vulnerability had

[*252]

reached a frenetic pitch: Knox v. United States had been decided the previous year. Senator Orrin Hatch had just introduced the legislation that was to become the Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996. [236] Congress had just passed the Communications Decency Act - since declared unconstitutional - aimed to protect children from the dangerous sex available on the Internet.  

In July 1995, Time magazine featured a frightening and much criticized cover story detailing the sexual threat to America's children posed by new technology. [237]

(Commentators assailed the magazine for giving in to cultural hysteria; Time printed a retraction the following week.)

Also in July 1995, the FBI made news when it began investigating a ring of child pornographers on America Online. [238] At the very height of this panic, in August 1995, Calvin's Klein's new multimillion dollar "kiddie porn" jeans campaign emerged on buses and TV ads.  

The campaign looked like fetish photographs of a pedophile. In one image, a  pubescent girl spreads her legs to reveal white cotton panties under her short skirt. In the TV ads, the teenagers seem to be tricked into auditioning for a part in a pornographic movie. [239] A critic called it "the most profoundly disturbing campaign in TV history."  [240]  

Klein withdrew the ad campaign amid public outcry, an unfulfilled threat of prosecution for child pornography, [241] and general media

[*253]

frenzy. It was a staggering success. The campaign dramatically increased sales of Calvin Klein jeans. [242]

The cancelled ads became hip collectors' items. Amidst all the government and media focus on child pornography, it seems as if such an ad campaign were predestined; it searched out and violated the hottest taboo. After all, jeans sell the image of the sexual outlaw. Like a cool teenager, Calvin Klein sold the swagger of saying nothing scared him, certainly not the sexual threat that preoccupied policymakers. He defied authority and gained instant credibility with rebellious kids. [243]  

How did this come to be? How did a "kiddie porn" advertising campaign - so extreme that it sparked an FBI investigation, and so mass-market that it appeared on the sides of buses - arise in an era of increased regulation of child pornography?

Strange as it may seem, the Calvin kiddie pornography campaign exemplifies a recent pattern.

A cultural critic writes of the "ubiquitous eroticization of little girls in the popular media and the just as ubiquitous ignorance and denial of this phenomenon." [244]

For example, fashion celebrates the "waif look" to the point where even a mainstream magazine like Vogue was accused in the popular press of peddling kiddie porn.
Pop star sensation Britney Spears rose to fame by dressing up as a naughty schoolgirl and dancing provocatively in her uniform. [245]

The Village Voice describes the increasing demand for models who look like little girls: The modern ideal has "the face of a child, while her engorged red lips suggest readiness for penetration. Her boyish body heightens the illusion of the fuckable child." [246]

Not only fashion, but even network news uses sexy children. Three years after the death of six-year-old JonBenet Ramsey, her preternaturally sexual figure still minces eternally on prime time television in full makeup and a revealing outfit. Decrying the seemingly endless - not to mention needless  footage that aired "every, every night" for months after the murder, CBS news anchor

[*254]

Dan Rather condemned the TV industry for repeatedly airing pictures that "border on kiddie porn." [247]  

The child as sexual subject has emerged as a major force in artistic culture. [248] Best-selling, high-art photographer Sally Mann takes erotic nudes of her  prepubescent children. A recent photograph of Mann's daughter entitled "Venus After School" pictured the naked child languorously spread on a divan in the precise position of Manet's famous portrait of a prostitute. [249]

One of the most disturbing and well-known art photographers, Larry Clark, who documents the lives of drug addicted and violent teenagers, takes photographs which, one could argue, easily meet the definition of child pornography. [250] For example, the title of the close-up photograph "Prostitute Gives Teenager His First Blow Job" speaks for itself.

Ironically, at the same time Sally Mann and Larry Clark are so vulnerable to censorship, [251] it is essential to note their commercial and critical success. Mann's shows sell out. Larry Clark has been embraced by the film industry. [252] Mann's and Clark's renown, coupled with their legal vulnerability, suggests the complex relationship between legal prohibition and artistic popularity.  

The highly eroticized use of children in fashion, television, and advertising is now the "soft porn" of child pornography. [253] As the crisis over child pornography mounts and the legal proscriptions multiply, the sexual allure of children does too. A cultural scholar reports that "there [now] circulates more disguised kiddie porn than at any other period in history ... . The late twentieth century has seen children emerge as the principal incitements to desire ... ." [254]

As rhetoric rises about the threat of sexual abuse, as we insist more than ever on the natural innocence of children, as we expand the definition of what constitutes child sexual conduct, the seductive child beckons to us in advertising, fashion, pop culture, and art.

In fact, some scholars argue that modern society is perverse and pedophiliac, that pedophilia has become "such an everyday

[*255]

part of our lives that we hardly notice it." [255] Some feminists have gone so far as to argue that given our culture, we should no longer label the person who sexually abuses children as a pervert; rather such a person is behaving according to "normal" masculine sexual culture. [256]  

In this sense, child pornography law seems like a partial failure. Perhaps the law has been successful in reducing the circulation of hard core child pornography, although given the difficulty of measuring the existence of child pornography and the claims that it is a rising tide, the law may have failed even at that. [257]

Yet, even if we assumed that child pornography law has succeeded at this task, it seems that its target has mutated and gone mainstream. Whatever the law's success in stamping out the "low-profile, clandestine industry" of kiddie porn, child pornography law has presided over a period in which the sexualized marketing of children has stepped into the light of day. [258] Given what we know of desire, sexuality, and deviance, the law may have unintentionally fueled this trend.

[< Back]     [Start]    [Up]     [Next >]