relieved of injury. She hopes for a society in which hate speech rests among dinosaur bones as ancient history.The laws governing what is and what is not rape do need to be changed to suit the needs of true victims of the crime. The proposed changes of Susan Estrich are rational and well thought out. They do not condemn those who are innocent and they empower women to seek retribution for awful heinous acts against them. The ideas of Catharine MacKinnon, however, are not so well grounded. She recommends changes in our Constitution that retroact the ideas upon which our nation was founded. Free speech has long been a cherished aspect of our society. And although it can be used to hurt, it can also be used to bring aid and information to those in need. Imposing limits on freedom of expression would dampen our nations uniqueness and suppress the voice of the people. Her idea that pornography acts as sex and can therefore be banned because it is no longer speech is ludicrous and rash. The repercussions of such an amendment would change our society to one of ultimate government control. The examples that she gives to relate pornography to racism are limited in scope. She suggests that because Henri Matisses The Blue Nude(Matisse) portrays an unclothed female that a man may, in her words, get off on,(MacKinnon 58) it should be banned. The line between art and explicit pornography is not one that the government should be able to draw. The government should, however, protect victims from physical acts of rape as Susan Estrich describes. ...
