Radical Womanhood

Porn in Public Libraries

A few months ago, I received this letter from my friend, Pam. It concerned a shock she received at a local public library--a new facility in Montgomery County that is a hit with all the moms of young children in our area. I asked permission to share it with my blog readers because I was curious as to what other people had experienced.

As most of you know, I am not one to go all hysterical, but I am so dumbfounded by what happed to me today, that I thought I should share it with you.

I was at the Rockville Library (without my son, gratefully), when I looked over and saw a young man watching pornography on one of the library's computers. I will spare you the details, but suffice to say it was very explicit and nobody with any sense of sanity would say what I was viewing was open to interpretation.  When I complained to the librarian I was told that by law--because of his right to freedom of speech and right to information--this man had the right to watch porn on the library's computers, and that all they could do was go give the man a privacy screen.  A privacy screen will block the view from the sides but still allow someone standing directly behind him to see what was on the screen.  I should add that there was a group of younger teenagers sitting within sight of this computer as well.

I had a lengthy conversation with the head librarian.  I asked for the library's policy in writing, and she gave me a copy of a policy paper that the American Library Association put out about internet access and the use of filters on library computers.  (The ALA is against them.) While sympathetic in tone, she stated that there was nothing she could do. As I was leaving the library, a second librarian told me that at another library in Montgomery County, the library was forced to reprimand a security guard who forced a patron to stop viewing porn on the library's computer. The guard thought he was doing the right thing (imagine that!)--that patrons were not allowed to view porn at the library--but it turns out he was wrong. When the patron complained, the guard was reprimanded.

Yes, we live in a world that has some how made what is right wrong, and what is wrong right. Maybe you all knew this already, but I pass this along because I don't want your kids to see anything that that they shouldn't. I am mulling over whether there is any additional course of action I might be able to take, as this seems so insane that parents cannot do anything about this. If anyone has any suggestions for me, I would be grateful to receive them.

Pam says she appreciates this library and certainly isn't trying cause any trouble personally for the librarians there. But she is deeply concerned about this policy. Afterward, she learned through some rudimentary research that the Supreme Court ruled in 2003 that public libraries do not necessarily infringe on First Amendment rights of free speech if they put filters on their computers, as long as they
are willing to turn the filters off if an adult patron asks. The protection of children was seen as a "compelling interest," she says.

About a month after this experience, she wrote a lengthy letter to the director of Montgomery County Libraries. A few weeks later, she received a response from a library staffer, addressing specifically the issues in her letter.  The library staffer indicated that they are "evaluating" their current policy and talking to other jurisdictions to see how well (or not so well) filters work in other community libraries. She didn't really indicate that the county would be changing its policy, however. "I am hoping to convince other people to write to the director of the library, as well," Pam says. "The response that I received left me with the impression that they are open to input, but I could be wrong on this."

I have to confess I have little reason to be in libraries these days, thanks to the 'Net, so I was unaware of this issue. However, it appears to be a growing problem. One librarian was recently fired from her job for reporting a man watching child pornography. A California man was arrested for viewing child pornography and police found candy, ropes, and duct tape in his car. And an investigative report by KGO-TV in San Francisco found "multiple incidents of people performing lewd sexual acts in public view at a San Jose library while viewing porn." Fortunately, I also discovered that there is an organization called Family Friendly Libraries that has taken on this issue and provides guidelines for communities that want to take action.

Is this an issue in your community, too? I've opened the comment function on this post for a few days to hear from you all on this topic. I would especially appreciate hearing from the librarians. (Comments will be moderated and, due to my schedule, will only be posted for a few days.)

Women Against Pornography

(The following is an unedited excerpt from my forthcoming book, Radical Womanhood: Feminine Faith in a Feminist World. It is from a chapter that traces the reasons for the female raunch culture that we live in today. This excerpt is about the brief period when Christians and feminists were in agreement--about the issue of pornography. Caution: This blog post is not appropriate for younger eyes...)

Hugh Hefner launched Playboy from the kitchen of his Chicago apartment in 1953. He sold more than 53,000 copies for 50 cents each—the beginning of a multi-million dollar enterprise. Playboy reached the height of its U.S. circulation in the early ‘70s, shortly after it came under scrutiny by the Commission on Obscenity and Pornography, which was established by President Johnson in 1968. The commission published its report in 1970, stating that it found no evidence that pornography caused crime or delinquency among adults and youths. While it supported laws prohibiting sales of pornographic materials to children, it also recommended eliminating all legal restrictions on the use by consenting adults of sexually explicit books, magazines, pictures, and films.

At the same time, a serial killer named Ted Bundy began a horrifying murder spree across the country. From at least 1974 to 1978, he sexually assaulted and murdered dozens of young women in five states, dismembering and defiling their corpses in unmentionable ways. Some say he was responsible for more than 100 such murders. He was sentenced to death in 1979 and spent ten years on death row before he was executed in 1989. He was one of the most notorious criminals in the 20th century—as infamous for the extent and severity of his crimes as he was for his law-student smarts and boy-next-door good looks.

While Bundy was on death row, another national commission on pornography was formed under President Reagan in 1985. Led by Attorney General Edwin Meese III, and informally known as the Meese Commission, this commission invited several prominent Christian leaders, including Focus on the Family’s founder, James Dobson. In the 16 years between these commissions, society and technology had changed. The VCR had introduced porn films to private homes, but the Internet was not yet commonly available. Even so, there was a distinct difference in the way society viewed pornography from the 1970 commission to the Meese Commission:

By this time, society had changed in several ways. Pornography had become even more available; a new generation of social science studies suggested a link between exposure to violent or degrading pornography and male aggression against women in laboratory settings; and new conservative and feminist movements were joining hands to attack pornography. In addition, the membership of the new commission was decidedly more conservative than that of the 1970 commission. Not surprisingly, the Attorney General’s Commission on Pornography, also known as the Meese Commission, reached strikingly different conclusions than did its predecessor. In its 1986 report, the commission concluded that violent pornography and degrading pornography (pornography showing the “degradation, domination, or humiliation” of women) cause violence and discrimination against women and an erosion of sexual morality.

Here’s the unusual twist: The language in this report of a “decidedly more conservative” commission bore a striking resemblance to many leading feminist statements of the time. What fascinates me personally is that I clearly remember this period myself. I had recently graduated from college when the Meese Commission was formed. In my women’s studies classes, I was taught the feminist position that pornography degrades women. I have forgotten many things about college, but the lecture about pornography is still clear in my mind.

The Porn Wars

Women Against Pornography coalesced in the late ‘70s out of several organizations, and was loosely led by feminist author Susan Brownmiller, who wrote Against Our Will: Men, Women, and Rape, and the militant feminist Andrea Dworkin, among others. Dworkin made headlines in 1980 for collaborating with feminist and legal scholar Catharine MacKinnon on behalf of Linda Lovelace, star of the X-rated movie, “Deep Throat,” whose civil rights they were convinced had been violated. Dworkin campaigned frequently on the subject, helping to draft a law in 1983 that defined pornography as a civil rights violation against women. The law was later overturned by an appeal court as unconstitutional.

Dworkin even testified before the Meese Commission and a subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee, as reported in a 1979 TIME magazine article:

Perhaps the basic question is whether pornography really incites men to violence against women, or does the opposite—lets them sublimate their aggressive sexual fantasies in a relatively harmless way. The 1970 report of the President’s Commission on Obscenity and Pornography implied that it did indeed serve as a useful social outlet. But since then, at least one of the study’s authors is having second thoughts. Says University of Pennsylvania Sociologist Marvin Wolfgang: “The weight of evidence [now] suggests that the portrayal of violence tends to encourage the use of physical aggression among people who are exposed to it.” Backed by such support, Brownmiller and other feminists have every intention of stepping up their fight, hoping to recruit still more converts to their cause.

Serial killer Ted Bundy could have been their poster child. In the final hours of his life before his execution in 1989 in Florida, Bundy gave a controversial video interview to Meese Commission member James Dobson. In it, he stressed over and over the influence of violent media and pornography on his thinking, and on the thinking and impulses of the other men in prison with him:  “I’ve lived in prison for a long time now and I’ve met a lot of men who were motivated to commit violence, just like me. And without exception, every one of them was deeply involved in pornography—without question, without exception. Deeply influenced and consumed by an addiction to pornography. There’s no question about it. The FBI’s own study on serial homicide shows that the most common interest among serial killers is pornography.”  Bundy claimed he wanted to make this warning about pornography his final message because he had seen the mainstreaming of porn and he was concerned for future generations.

Opposition to pornography was the link between two groups that typically had little else in common: the Christian Right and feminist activists. For a brief period in 1980s, they found themselves on the same page.

***********************************************************************************************

I've embedded a segment of that video conversation between James Dobson and Ted Bundy. It's direct, but not graphic. During this interview, Bundy talks about how you can find stuff on cable TV that you couldn't even see in X-rated theaters years ago. And this was 1989 -- nearly 20 years ago! Now we have Law & Order: SVU depicting sexual violence each week on broadcast TV. If ever I'm flipping through channels and come across this show even briefly, I am horrified at what they portray.

It's a significant conversation. Unfortunately, sin is nowhere mentioned. That would have made a stronger video, in my opinion. Bundy was a master manipulator, so his motives for granting this interview are questionable. But even if he was looking to clean up his reputation by shifting blame to the influence of pornography, I think he still raised some valid points about the mainstreaming of porn and sexual violence. And all this was said before the rise of the Internet and third-wave feminism's "porn-positive" ideals.

A Sneak Peek at Modesty

It's spring! (For those of us in the northern hemisphere, I should clarify.) Everything is popping out -- flowers, trees, bushes, and lots and lots of skin. Yes, it's time for the perennial topic of modesty.

If you aren't old enough to remember life before the Internet, you are probably unaware that women used to go to work with a lot more fabric on. Seriously. In fact, in professional settings, no one ever showed their cleavage, their bellies, or their lower-back tattoos. It was common to have office dress codes that specified closed-toe shoes, pantyhose, and actual suits. (For the one or two of you who have to still dress this way--and you know who you are there in DC!--you have my sympathies.) Back then, women wanted to be taken seriously for their aptitude, not their assets. But don't get me wrong: I am not arguing for a return to sweating in pantyhose in muggy July weather. Ugh. 

What I am saying is that we have to realize that fashion has evolved this way because of the "pornification" of our culture in the last 15 years or so. There are specific values being cultivated and advertised through fashion--and that means women in the church are affected, too. We might not consciously know or agree with the "porn positive" ideology that courses through our culture at present. But rest assured, we are no different from the women addressed in New Testament churches who sought attention with their clothing and opulent hair styles. The fashions may be different, but the heart issues are the same. So in humility, each year it's good to evaluate how far we've drifted from biblical standards toward other patterns.

This year, we have the assistance of a chapter titled "God, My Heart, and Modesty" from the forthcoming book, Worldliness: Resisting the Seduction of a Fallen World. In it, C.J. Mahaney says: "I write this chapter as the father of three daughters, now grown. I write as a pastor with a growing concern for the erosion of modesty among Christian women today. I write because God’s glory is at stake in the way women dress. I write about modesty because God has first written about it in his eternal Word."

Check out the first of seven parts on the Sovereign Grace blog.

Ethiopia: Portraits of Hope

Next week, Lord willing, I take off for an extended trip that includes a visit to Ethiopia. While I'm there, I'll be interviewing Doug Hayes of Covenant Mercies about a new AIDS orphans program that Covenant Mercies has established in conjunction with our church, Covenant Life Church of Addis Ababa. I'm excited to make my first visit to Ethiopia!

Until then, I'm also eager to promote what Covenant Mercies is doing through its Portraits of Hope evening. In celebration of this new Ethiopian program, Covenant Mercies is offering a collection of forty-five limited edition prints featuring the beautiful people of Ethiopia as captured through the lens of award-winning photographer David Sacks. All proceeds from the auction will go directly to support the ministry of Covenant Mercies to needy people around the world. 

Those who live near Philadelphia can enjoy an elegant evening this Friday, April 25th--and the rest of us can participate online.

First, whether or not you are interested in what Covenant Mercies is doing, you can watch an inspiring video of images from Ethiopia set to native music. Sescond, if you'd like to own a print and support the ministry, you can also preview a limited number of the prints and place pre-auction bids.

Finally, I know that Doug would appreciate your prayers for the orphaned children in Addis, as well as the outreach of the church there.

Thoughts on Worship

I put this in the book review category, but it's not a true book review because I haven't had the time to read the whole book yet. But I already know I can confidently recommend it. It was one of the free books given out at the Together for the Gospel conference and so now I have it in my possession. (Those of us who worked at the conference were able to scoop up any leftover books, like bottom feeders in the aquatic food chain. And I was happy to have that status!)

I'm referring to Bob Kauflin's new book, Worship Matters: Leading Others to Encounter the Greatness of God. I can recommend it without fully reading it because I've been the beneficiary of Bob's teaching on this topic for many years. He often leads Sunday worship in my home church and is also the director of worship development for Sovereign Grace Ministries. Though it is written primarily for those who serve in the worship team/music ministry capacity, there is much to glean for all of us.

You can get an idea of the teaching and tone in this book by watching one of four brief videos from Bob on the topic of worship.

Here is "The Task":

Here is "The Leader":

Here is "Healthy Tensions":

And finally, here is "Right Relationships":

Run--Do Not Walk--to See 'Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed'

I've been waiting quite awhile for the release of Ben Stein's Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed. It opened nationwide today and I was at the first matinee performance in my area. (It's good when you can combine book research with a reason to watch a movie!) I was eager to see this film both for its subject matter--the academic opposition to the theory of intelligent design--and because I wanted to support its theatrical release. Expelled will have the largest U.S. opening of any documentary film ever, according to WorldNetDaily:  

Scheduled for release in 1,000 theatres, "Expelled" will be hotter than "Farenheit 9/11," which debuted on 868 screens, and much more convenient to see than "An Inconvenient Truth," which I was surprised to find opened on only four screens nationwide despite all the hype, peaking at 587 before its appeal melted.

If you're not familiar with this documentary, it is fundamentally about a loss of freedom of inquiry and freedom of speech in scientific, academic and legal circles. It focuses on how those who have even minimally questioned neo-Darwinism in favor of intelligent design have lost jobs, grants, and credibility. But it broadens this focus to look at what it costs our society to have unquestioned support for evolution and staunch opposition to intelligent design. As Ben Stein pointed out in an interview with Bill O'Reilly, Darwinism was "a brilliant theory in the middle of the 19th century. It's the 21st-century, there are a lot of questions being raised about it. Nobody had any idea the cell was so complex. We would just like to ask some questions." (This is in reference to the evolutionist idea that all life arose from a single cell--and how biologists now see how complicated a single cell is, but aren't allowed to question this very basis of evolutionary theory.)

I was glad to see that Expelled showed how neo-Darwinism gave rise to eugenics (which both Planned Parenthood's Margaret Sanger and Adolf Hitler embraced). I was also surprised that intelligent design opponents such as Richard Dawkins were willing to grant interviews. Now, working in video, I know how easy it is to edit someone in such a way as to distort their original point in the interview. But I was honestly floored to hear celebrity atheist and Oxford biologist Richard Dawkins say he thinks we were "seeded" from alien life forms who designed us. This is my summary from memory so I may be a bit off, but you'd have to do a lot of creative editing to manipulate this idea if he didn't actually say something so outrageous. And this is less of a fantasy than the existence of God?!

As documentaries go, this one was produced well. It made complicated ideas easily understood, added large doses of humor with intercut movie references, and yet still kept track of the bigger picture without getting lost among all the details. My only quibbles were the bobbing scenes when the cameramen would walk with the subjects (bouncing footage on the large screen is nauseating) and the parsimonious use of titles. With so many interview subjects, it was hard to keep track of the players. I would have preferred to see the subjects identified several times. (For those of you who have seen the documentary, The Privileged Planet, you will recognize some of the scientists from that film in Expelled.)

I have several video clips to recommend to you. Each is worth watching, in my opinion. Here are several trailers for the movie (embedded in the player below) but I think the "super trailer" is the best representation of the content and approach of the film:

Here is a round-up of interviews from the film in a clip called "Darwinists and Religion." You don't see Dawkin's famous alien statement here, but some of his other provocative thoughts are featured:

Finally, here is an extended interview that R.C. Sproul did with Ben Stein earlier this year.

I suggest that you watch these videos and then see Expelled in your local theater, if at all possible. I'm normally not a fan of watching theatrical releases because I prefer watching films at home, on my own schedule, in superior comfort, and for much less money. But sometimes a vote with the wallet at the box office can be quite meaningful. In the case of Expelled, it is not only a vote for a diversity of film topics, it is also a vote for the preservation of free speech and scientific inquiry.

T4G Conference Reflections

Just got home from Louisville and T4G. Won't see that city again for another month, when we all descend once again for the New Attitude event over Memorial Day!

The last thing we did before running to the airport was upload this video--a compilation of comments and reflections from some of those who attended the event. You gotta watch this video to see the person who speaks last. If this isn't an encouragement about the rising generation, I don't know what is! I'm still in awe that he was there.

Big thanks to my "entourage"--the guys who really did the hard work toting cameras, shooting on the fly, and editing way into the night. I'm blessed to work with such a godly and talented group: Andrew Gallo, David Altrogge, and John David Maresco.

The Effect of Free Books

Here's a brief video about the books available at Together for the Gospel--both the importance of the massive bookstore and the amusing effect of free books on the pastors assembled!

I'm posting this just after John Piper participated in a speaker panel. In it, he mentioned why he appreciates strong women in the church--women who know the Word, love the Word, and disciple other women in the Word. It was a "whoop! bring it on, brother!" moment. If I am able, I'll get the video clip for you. If not, check out the audio when it's available on the Sovereign Grace site. (The messages are free.) These comments will be about halfway through the session.

Your comments are welcome.

When Preachers Get Discouraged

Here's an excerpt from one of the many panel discussions that occurred during T4G. In this segment, C.J. Mahaney says that there's a difference between being discouraged and dissatisfied with your preaching. That leads to a funny and illuminating discussion about times when the men have felt dissatisfied with particular sermons. I appreciate the zinger R.C. Sproul gets in there, which leads to a series of quips back and forth between the men.

Comments are open.

More Speaker Highlights

Here are a few more highlights from Together for the Gospel. First, we have Mark Dever's opening remarks as the conference started yesterday as he addresses the "togetherness" among the conference founders. Then we have a selection from Ligon Duncan as he talks about why doctrine matters--and applies it briefly to marriage. (Ladies, this is an exceptionally encouraging segment!) And the comments function remains open on these clips.