Skip to main content
Log in

Pornography and community standards in Hawaii: Comparisons with other states

  • Published:
Archives of Sexual Behavior Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This first statewide study, using random phone interviews, found a community standard for the acceptance of sexually explicit material. Research shows respondents are conservative in voting for the death penalty and against the legalization of those drugs presently illegal, even marijuana. In other regards, Hawaiians think abortion should be only for the women to decide and that adults should not be denied access to explicit material that shows other adults in consensual sexual acts. The majority of those interviewed had themselves seen erotically explicit materials, often obtaining it themselves. Only a minority found the material offensive. A review of studies on sexually explicit material elsewhere in the country shows these findings to be consistent with all other communities investigated; none would restrict adults from access to sexually explicit material.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alker, H., Jr., Hosticka, C., and Mitchell, M. (1976). Jury selection as a biased social process.Law Soc. Rev. 11: 9–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Jurisprudence. (1965).Trials: Obscenity litigation, Vol. 10, The Lawyers Co-operative. Bancroft-Whitney Co., Rochester, New York, pp. 165–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Americans for Constitutional Action. (1986). Standards.Playboy April, p. 43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Attorney General's Commission on Pornography. (1986)Final Report, Vol. 1 and 2, U.S. Department of Justice U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, R. A. (1977). Determining community standards.Am. Bar Assoc. J. 63: 1202–1207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benson, D. K. (1987). Standards.Playboy April, p. 43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berning, D. (1986). Prosecutor's phone survey shows support for adult video.Adult Video News, December 1, p. 1.

  • Brecher, E., and Editors (1984).Love, sex and aging: A Consumers Union report Consumers Union, Mount Vernon, NY.

    Google Scholar 

  • Catterall, L. (1988). Feds set to wage smut war.Hon. Star Bull. Jan. 12, pp. A1,A6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallup, G. (1985). A Newsweek Poll: Mixed feelings on Pornography.Newsweek, March 18, p. 60.

  • Hawaii. (1988). Hawaii Supreme Ct., 8 Jan., Hawaii v. Kam, No. 11861 and Hawaii v. Cohen, No. 11949.

  • Hawaii Revised Statute. (1981).HRS 712-12-10 (1). Re: Community means the State.

  • Herman, M. S., and Bordner, D. C. (1983). Attitudes toward pornography in a southern community.Criminology 21: 349–374.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keir, G. (1988). Majority oppose ban on porn.The Honolulu Advertiser, Feb. 19.

  • Kinsey, A. C., Pomeroy, W. B., and Martin, C. E. (1948).Sexual Behavior in the Human Male. W. B. Saunders, Philadelphia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinsey, A. C., Pomeroy, W. B., Martin, C. E., and Gebhard, P. H. (1953).Sexual Behavior in the Human Female W. B. Saunders, Philadelphia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kish, L. (1965).Survey Sampling Wiley, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maine. (1986). Attorney General's Office, Personal communication Re: Obscene materials referendum of June 10.

  • Miller v. California. (1973). 413US. 15.

  • Schreiner, T., and Lempinen, E. (1986). Special bay area poll on sex, drugs, politics.San Fransisco Chronicle, September 29, pp. 1, 4.

  • Scott, J. E. (1989). What is obscene? Social science and the contemporary community standard test of obscenity.Inter. J. Law and Psychiat. 12(4).

  • Scott, J. E., Eitle, D. J., and Skovron, S. E. (1990). Obscenity and the law: Can a jury apply contemporary community standards in determining obscenity?Law Hum. Behav. 14.

  • Seldin, C. (1984). Vote rejecting cable measure by a 3-2 ratio.Salt Lake Tribune, November 7.

  • Siegel, S. (1956).Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Science McGraw Hill, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, T. W. (1987). The polls—A review: The use of public opinion data by the attorney general's commission on pornography.Public Opinion Quart. 51: 249–267.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sowers, C., and James, V. H. (1985). Arizonans back right to see adult films at home but support porno crackdown.The Arizona Republic, May 12, pp. A1, A12.

  • State v. Kam. (1986). No. 11016. Haw., filed Oct. 9th. Appelate Court of Hawaii.

  • U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. (1980).Census of Population. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. News and World Report. (1989). Taking the last mile slowly. Jan. 30: 81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walonick Associates. (1986).StatPac Gold: Statistical analysis package for the IBM Author, Minneapolis, MN.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weinberg, M. (1986). University of Indiana, Department of Sociology, Personal Communication.

  • Yankelovich, C. S. (1986). Pornography: A poll.Time, July 21, p. 22.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

This is a publication of the Pacific Center for Sex and Society.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Diamond, M., Dannemiller, J.E. Pornography and community standards in Hawaii: Comparisons with other states. Arch Sex Behav 18, 475–495 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01541674

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01541674

Key words

Navigation