Student Publications
University of Houston
151C Communications Bldg
Houston, TX 77204-4015
713.743.5350

©1991-2007
Student Publications,
All rights reserved.

Last modified:

Contact:
ktruitt@uh.edu

Opinion

Porn actress's book miffs mayor

Guigi Carminati
Opinion Columnist

Bigotry and ignorance have no limits. This week a book by porn actress Jenna Jameson, How to Make Love Like a Porn Star: A Cautionary Tale, was confined to the closed stacks of the Houston Public Library by Mayor Bill White. One complainant came from Jessica Rodriguez, a mother, who said she'd rather her three-year-old son not come across the book: 

"I don't think it needs to be on the stacks with everybody pulling it and going oh, OK!" Rodriguez told ABC13. 

Leaving aside that she herself has not even opened the book in question, her defense for her actions and the subsequent effects are disgraceful. That she thinks the book does not "need to be on the stacks" should not mean her opinion of what is appropriate should be imposed on all of us. It is absolutely and unequivocally unacceptable for that argument to even be made. 

My freedom of speech is hindered if I cannot access any and all books freely. It is a disgrace to the U.S. Constitution that a book can be abruptly locked up by the mayor himself -- who bypassed standard procedure for such actions -- because the book was deemed unfit.

The First Amendment's right to free speech was created precisely so no one could arbitrarily decide appropriateness for the rest of the community. If Rodriguez does not want her three-year-old son coming across that book, she should keep an eye on him, not force us to make the library a "toddler-friendly" zone. 

The icing on the cake is that those complaining did not bother to see whether the book was offensive. That a porn star is automatically put in the closed stacks without anyone paying attention to the content of her written material is a testimony to the level of bigotry reached by our fellow Houstonians. That elected officials followed suit is an embarrassment. The book itself has no pictures of full frontal nudity. A handful of pictures display nipples, but most of the pictures are actually of the actress as a child (hence the Cautionary Tale). How can these restrictions be acceptable to anyone who truly respects our Constitution? Free speech means free speech. What will happen when someone decides to complain to her city councilwoman that sex education books are offensive to her toddler? Will those be placed in closed stacks, too? The point is not whether you find the content offensive -- the point is that free speech is a cornerstone of our Constitution. 

Some might reply that arguing over Jameson seems frivolous. I have this to answer: The First Amendment was not made to protect the mainstream, which needs no protection. Free speech was included in the Constitution to protect speech that is far from mainstream, which some might even find offensive. That is probably the sole reason speech might, and does, need protection. It is the racy, frivolous and disturbing speech that needs to be protected from closed stacks. 

Toddler material rarely needs protection -- except if it happens to be purple, carry a handbag or be a large yellow sponge in square pants. Books by porn actresses need protection because they are anything but mainstream. If we don't stand up for the odd ball -- the individual who stands out from the crowd -- then are we protecting speech at all?

Carminati, an opinion columnist for The Daily Cougar, 
can be reached at giugi.carminati@gmail.com