obscenity
-
What is obscenity?
Obscenity is a legal term characterizing certain materials, especially sexual ones, as offensive to public decency. Modern obscenity law emerged in response to the printing press in the 15th century, which allowed for the wide distribution of sexually explicit material.
Defining obscenity has been challenging, as what is considered obscene is often subjective. In Miller v. California (1973), the U.S. Supreme Court created a three-part test for obscenity: (1) whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find the work appeals to prurient interests; (2) whether the work depicts or describes sexual conduct specifically defined by state law in a patently offensive way; and (3) whether the work lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
3 Britannica SourcesCreated from Britannica articles using AI. AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles. -
How does the law define obscenity?
Obscenity is a legal term for material, particularly of a sexual nature, that is considered offensive to public decency. A precise definition of obscenity remains elusive because it is often based on individual perception.
In Miller v. California (1973), the U.S. Supreme Court established a three-part test for obscenity:
1. Whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work appeals mainly to prurient interests.
2. Whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law.
3. Whether the work lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.The definition of obscenity has narrowed since the 1980s, and so-called vulgar words may not be punished.
2 Britannica SourcesCreated from Britannica articles using AI. AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles. -
Why do governments have laws about obscenity?
Governments have laws about obscenity to regulate and suppress sexually explicit material, especially to protect children and public morals. Obscenity laws arose with the printing press, enabling wide distribution of explicit material.
However, obscenity is hard to define legally. In the U.S., the Supreme Court has struggled to create a clear definition, with Justice Potter Stewart famously saying, "I know it when I see it". The definition of obscenity continues to evolve, reflecting changing social attitudes and legal interpretations.
2 Britannica SourcesCreated from Britannica articles using AI. AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles. -
What is the Miller Test for obscenity in the United States?
The Miller Test, established in Miller v. California (1973), is a three-part standard used in the United States to determine whether material is obscene and, therefore, not protected under the First Amendment.
According to the test, a work is considered obscene if:
- The average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to prurient interests (i.e., has an excessive interest in sexual matters).
- The work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law.
- The work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
If a work meets all three criteria, it can be deemed obscene and denied protection under the First Amendment within a community. The application of "community standards" has been debated, especially in the context of the internet.
2 Britannica SourcesCreated from Britannica articles using AI. AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles. -
How does free speech relate to obscenity laws?
The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects freedom of speech; however, this freedom is not absolute. Obscenity, as defined by law, is one of the categories of speech that can be restricted.
The legal definition of obscenity has varied, but a key case, Miller v. California (1973), established a three-part test: (1) whether the average person, applying community standards, would find the work appeals to prurient interests; (2) whether the work depicts or describes sexual conduct specifically defined by state law in a patently offensive way; and (3) whether the work lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. To be considered obscene and unprotected by the First Amendment, a work must fail all three parts of this test.
The application of "community standards" has been challenged, especially in cyberspace, where communities exist outside geographical boundaries. While obscenity laws have been relaxed in many countries, depictions of minors are an exception, with stricter laws against child pornography.
4 Britannica SourcesCreated from Britannica articles using AI. AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles. -
What challenges do courts face when deciding if something is legally obscene?
Defining obscenity is challenging for courts because what one person considers obscene, another may not. U.S. courts have struggled to develop an adequate definition, as illustrated by Associate Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart's remark, "I know it when I see it".
In Miller v. California (1973), the Supreme Court created a three-part test for obscenity:
1. Whether "the average person, applying contemporary community standards," would find that the work appeals primarily to prurient interests.
2. Whether "the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law."
3. Whether the work "lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value".The public's permissive attitude toward sex and marriage has made prosecutions difficult, and material considered obscene by some may be considered to have social merit by others.
2 Britannica SourcesCreated from Britannica articles using AI. AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles.
obscenity, legal concept used to characterize certain (particularly sexual) material as offensive to the public sense of decency. A wholly satisfactory definition of obscenity is elusive, however, largely because what is considered obscene is often, like beauty, in the eye of the beholder. Although the term originally referred to things considered repulsive, it has since acquired a more specifically sexual meaning.
Early restrictions
Legal restrictions on the content of literature and works of visual art have existed since ancient times. Traditionally, however, governments were much more concerned with sedition, heresy, and blasphemy, and it was not until relatively modern times that sexuality became a major preoccupation of political and religious authorities. One of the first systematic efforts to regulate literature was undertaken by the Roman Catholic Church, which banned heretical works as early as the 4th century. By the Middle Ages the list of banned works had grown dramatically. In 1542 Pope Paul III established the Sacred Congregation of the Roman Inquisitionâthe precursor of the modern Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faithâone of whose responsibilities was the suppression of heretical and immoral books. In 1559 Pope Paul IV published the Index Auctorum et Librorum Prohibitorum (see Index Librorum Prohibitorum), a comprehensive list of forbidden books that went through numerous editions before it was abolished in 1966. Immoral works also were suppressed in Protestant countries such as England, where, prior to the 18th century, restrictions were applied almost exclusively to antireligious or seditious acts or publications, rather than to obscene material in the modern sense.
Obscenity laws in the 18th and 19th centuries
Modern obscenity law emerged as a direct response to social and technological changesâparticularly the development of the printing press in the 15th centuryâthat permitted the wide and easy distribution of what was then considered sexually explicit material. By the 17th century such books and prints had become widely available throughout Europe; governments and church authorities responded by arresting and prosecuting publishers and distributors. A similar sequence of events occurred in Japan, where the development of colour woodblock printing ended up soon creating a sizable industry in erotic pictures. In 1722 the Japanese government introduced the first of several edicts against unlicensed materials, whether erotic or political.
In the early 18th century the temporal courts of England failed to pass judgment on defendants charged with obscenity because there was no law against the publication of such material. The offense of obscene libel subsequently developed to enable the prosecution of people of âwicked and depraved mind and dispositionâ for publishing materials that corrupted the morals of society by creating âlustful desires.â In the 1720s bookseller Edmund Curll became the first person to be convicted on a charge of obscenity in England in the common law (as opposed to the ecclesiastical) courts, for his publication of a new edition of Venus in the Cloister; or, The Nun in Her Smock, a mildly pornographic work that had been written several decades earlier; his sentence, a fine and one hour in the pillory, was delayed because no punishment was then specified in the law. Thereafter obscenity was recognized as an indictable misdemeanour under common law. (Because the charge of obscene libel applied only to publications, obscene acts were prosecuted on the charges of conspiracy to corrupt public morals and conspiracy to outrage public decency.)
Not surprisingly, it was often difficult to draw a sharp distinction between the suppression of published materials for moral reasons and for reasons of political control or repression. Thus, the 18th-century English laws that regulated indecent or suggestive materials were also used to suppress criticism of government ministers and other favoured political figures. In the 1760s the journalist and politician John Wilkes, a leading government critic, was charged with seditious libel for his periodical North Briton and with obscene libel for his poem An Essay on Woman, a parody of Alexander Popeâs An Essay on Man. Prosecutions for obscenity in other European countries also betrayed a merging of moral and political concerns. Perhaps the most celebrated obscenity trial in 19th-century France was that of Gustave Flaubert, who was charged with âoutrage to public morals and religionâ for his novel Madame Bovary (1857). Although the book was indeed sexually frank by the standards of the day, the prosecution, which was unsuccessful, was motivated primarily by the governmentâs desire to close down Revue de Paris, the magazine in which the work first appeared.
By the mid-19th century the spread of Victorian notions of morality resulted in harsher legislation against the publication and distribution of sexually explicit material. In Great Britain such material was prohibited on purely sexual grounds for the first time by the Obscene Publications Act of 1857. The legislation, which failed to define obscenity, faced strong opposition but was passed after the lord chief justice guaranteed that it would be used to prosecute individuals for works âwritten for the single purpose of corrupting the morals of youth and of a nature calculated to shock the common feelings of decency.â A legal definition of obscenity was subsequently established in Britain in Regina v. Hicklin (1868), in which the court held that obscene material is marked by a tendency âto deprave and corrupt those whose minds are open to such immoral influences and into whose hands a publication of this sort may fall.â It was understood that this test could be applied to isolated passages of a work, and the ruling made it possible to label a work obscene not on the basis of the intended readership but on how it might influence anyone in society (e.g., women and children). This perspective later formed the basis of antiobscenity laws in legal systems influenced by British law, particularly in countries that were at one time part of the British Empire.
Beginning in the 1820s, state governments in the United States began passing obscenity laws, and in 1842 the federal government enacted legislation that allowed the seizure of obscene pictures. The most comprehensive federal legislation of the era was the Comstock Act (1873)ânamed for its chief proponent, Anthony Comstockâwhich provided for the fine and imprisonment of any person mailing or receiving âobscene,â âlewd,â or âlasciviousâ publications. The act became notorious as the basis for the widespread suppression not merely of pornographic books and pictures but also of publications containing legitimate medical information about contraception and abortion, as well as contraceptive devices themselves.

" height="20" alt="HEW Logo">