45).
Conclusion
The research showed that there has been increasing attention paid to what is considered legally obscene over the past century and a half, and many of the same factors that controlled the court's decision in the 19th century were incorporated into the controlling precedents set down in the 20th century. The research also showed that simply defining what is legally obscene has been a challenging enterprise because of the standard established in the Roth case concerning how the "average person" would consider such works. In the Age of Information where citizens are bombarded with increasingly lurid images on television and other popular mainstream media, together with the explosive growth in online resources in recent years, these legal standards will undoubtedly continue to try to adapt to these changing social forces as well. While it might not stand up in court, in the final analysis, it would be reasonable to assert that what could be regarded as "obscene" would involve choice. In Holland and Japan, pornographic materials that would likely be outlawed in the Midwest are offered right next to mainstream newspapers on the street, but people who do not want to view such materials simply do not purchase...
When people are forced to view, listen to, or otherwise subject themselves to something they do not want to endure, it could be considered obscene. Therefore, if someone has a choice, then it is not obscene.
Works Cited
Black's Law Dictionary. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing Company, 1991.
Hixson, R.F. (1996). Pornography and the Justices: The Supreme Court and the Intractable Obscenity Problem. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
Kidd, Dustin. (2003). "Mapplethorpe and the New Obscenity." Afterimage, 30(5):6.
Platt, Leah. (2001, August 27). "Not in Front of the Children: 'Indecency,' Censorship, and the Innocence of Youth." The American Prospect 12(15):45.
Rigney, J.T. (2003). "Avoiding Slim Reasoning and Shady Results: A Proposal for Indecency and Obscenity Regulation in Radio and Broadcast Television." Federal Communications Law Journal, 55(2):297.
Regina v. Hicklin, L.R.3Q.B.360, 1868.
Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476, 485, 1957.
Saunders, Kevin W. Violence as Obscenity: Limiting the Media's…
