Judith Reisman, Ph

Judith Reisman, Ph.D. History of Work in Erototoxic Studies

Background and credentials · Professional television "entertainment" credentials 1. PBSTV, CBSTV, NBCTV, ABCTV 2. Captain Kangaroo, computer eye pupil tracking · Professional academic credentials 1. Student pornography production 2. GSR test of verbal vs. non verbal porn effects ('76) 3. NY Review of Law & Social Change, brain dominance ('78) 3. Pornography: A Sociobiological Attempt at Understanding ('8-) 4. Dpt Socio/Ed Haifa University, Kinsey, Israeli media ('80-'82) · Professional credentials 1. Playboy/Kinsey connect to rape, 1964 2. Infectious spread to rapist's little brother 3. Reagan on how the legal system favors offenders, '81 · Findings in Israel of cross-cultural visual language · Series of lsraeli articles on visual dominance · Lecture at Israel-Global Sex Conference on Kinsey · Release of PR on Kinsey child sexual abuse protocol · Time magazine aborts report. Buchanan show on Kinsey in USA · Free Press-Irwin Glikes, Penguin · From Shirley Temple to Pretty Baby, the Journey of the Child, · Kinsey, Sex & Fraud, Gabriele Pantucci (with Do J) · US DoJ grant $800,000 to study mainstream Erototoxins/Kinsey link ('83-'85) · Training tape for FBI Behavior Science Unit on pornography · 7-11, Southland drops PPH, citing only my DoJ findings · Censorship, study sabotage, political intrigue, 1. Biden, Specter, Kennedy versus Oliphant/Humphrey, etc. 2. Press plants, "whirlitzer" .· Effect of study on Playboy child images .... · Law suit against Kinsey institute, deposition · DOJ threatens lawsuit for report on child pornography · Full documentation available (Rutherford) · Gray & Co Washington PR firm · Develop Tobacco Industry PR defense · Same attack for Reisman, Same pornography PR defense * Academic Blacklist, Left/Right -- Key Legal Cases · Oakes v Mass (Mass. AG: James Shannon won) · Mapplethorpe trial (Motion in Limine re what constitutes "the whole". Brain appeal, won) · Osborne v Ohio (brain appeal, won) · South Africa (brain appeal, won) · USA v Knox (brain appeal, won) · Stefan v. Perry (Naval Aviation Foundation won) · Playboy v Reisman/Dutch TV (we won on child pornography charge) · Future RICO, class action and/or QUI TAM lawsuit alleging "Conspiracy" to defraud the State and the people of the USA. · Ties between pornographers, Gray & Co, political influence and sex education leaders, Planned Parenthood, SIEICUS, classroom pornography and American publishing and broadcasting system (like tobacco) proving QUI TAM, Federal False Claims Act, can retrieve all expenses incurred in !aw suit and investigation, if we win. · Prior market research on brain/mind control · Surveys on what the public knows and wants to happen to its national mind · Experiments to test hypotheses

1 am working on drafting SOME OF my hypotheses and the possible tests for each. I am exploring the idea of using brain scanning technology, basic science, to operationalize the Miller "test" for its real, that is, cellular structure.

The current legal definition of obscenity is found in the 1973 case of Miller v. California. "According to the Miller case, material is obscene if all three of the following conditions are met:

1) The average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interests. 2) The work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state (or federal) law, and 3) The work taken as a whole, lacks serious, artistic, political or scientific value. 4) (See my March 4, 1991 letter from the Cincinnati prosecutor stating that my testimony about each image being "the whole" "ensured a favorable ruling for the State.")

Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, {3 1996, 1998 MICRA,/nc. 1) However, in the USA the "average person" is a woman of middle age (need to get precise demographic info). Statistically, scientifically, any jury adjudicating issues on pornography and obscenity harms should be dominated by such "average persons." 'R' AND 'X' RATED MATERIALS AND THE HARM FACTOR.

The following is a brief summary of a submission by Judith A. Reisman Ph. D, delivered to the Australian Senate Committee on Community Standards Relevant to the Supply of Services Utilising Telecommunications Technologies in April 1992.

Pornography is "anti-democratic and subversive of family ... liberty and civility".

There are widespread costs associated with pornography that can be labeled "the pornography harm factor".

The distinction between non-violent erotica and violent erotica is fallacious as "anything which degrades a person, or a class relative to another person or class is "violent" by definition."

Pornography contributes to a degrading view of women, and thus places women at risk of harm. This undermines women's equal rights to the advantages of society.

Soft-core pornography or violence shown on television "may communicate more subtle false information about women's reaction to sexual aggression and thus may have a more potent effect on viewers who are not "forewarned" by the label "X-rated" or "pornographic"."

Psychophysiology, is the study of the relationship between psychologic and physiologic processes. A four tier psychophysiological model has been developed to illustrate the effects of pornography.

Pornography blurs "the distinctions between child and woman and animal and [thus] dehumanises the individual women, the class woman- and child."

"Neurologists suggest subliminally distorted images - whether photos, cartoons or illustrations - are processed by the human brain as real and thus warp reality, the grounding of human sanity and the civil society.

Evidence shows that people react differently to pictures than they do to words. Pictures are inadvertently, instantly processed by the brain as "truth" while words are open to debate and interpretations..

"Materials which are sexually exciting can stimulate aggressive behaviour".

"People might not be aware of why or how particular material will influence their behaviour."

Many polls in the United States have found the public believe pornography encourages violence against women.

Television violence leads to an increased acceptance of rape. Television violence harms children and causes violence in society. The entertainment industry claims that hours of violence on television has no impact on behaviour, yet a thirty second commercial has sufficient impact to sell a product.

"Child magnets" in pornographic literature are concerning.

"Sexually explicit material dramatically changes attitudes towards normal sexuality, gender roles, marriage relationships and effective child rearing." Pornography desensitises people to violence and deviate behaviour.

Due to pornography "youngsters are seeing sex and love as the same experience". This could have serious repercussions for society.

"Just as it has taken some time for the courts to understand the role of pornography in harassment of women on the job, courts will have to begin to recognise the role of pornography in harassment of women and children in the home.

There is a correlation between the increasing availability of pictorial pornography and increased marital discord and divorce, as well as increased violence and incestuous abuse, by and of children.

United States, Danish and Swedish statistics establish that rape (more than other crime) has increased in each of these three nations post pornography.

There are numerous economic costs borne by victims and by society as a result of pornography. These include the costs of law enforcement for crimes related to pornography.

A recent Canadian Supreme Court decision balanced women's civil rights to equality against the rights of pornographers to "free speech".

"Pornography mitigates against women's ability to pursue their equal right to safety, to work, to play, to live, to liberty and the pursuit of happiness, as it violates women's self-esteem and restricts the vision and the freedom of movement of girls and women due to the fear of sexual predators..."

"At some point the rights of the victim should limit the rights of the pornographer".

Summary prepared by:

David Pertin State Member for Bulleen [Australia]