Kristina Bogdan
University of Vienna
J. Saul is objecting the theory of R. Langton stating that pornography is speech. She argues that only utterances in context can be speech acts. According to her Langton sees pornography as merely an illocutionary force. In short Saul’s argument is that only utterances can have illocutionary force and that illocutionary force changes depending on the context – both of these claims cannot be applied to pornography. If pornography is not an utterance, it is also not a speech act and therefore it cannot have an illocutionary force because perceiving pornography requires the context it is used in. Furthermore pornography is also not an authoritative illocutionary act of subordination. One of Saul’s points is that although Langton names conditions under which the illocution of pornography presumably has a subordinating force, she does not name the timing when this force unfolds.
In defending C. MacKinnon’s argument that pornography is a subordinating act Langton sets up a theory that pornography can be viewed as a speech act. On that account pornography can be evaluated on a locutionary, a perlocutionary and an illocutionary level. The connection of the illocution to the locution is the use of the utterance to perform an act. The illocutionary act goes beyond the semantic content and determines a pragmatic dimension. An illocution can be successfully obtained in a certain context and when certain ‘felicity conditions’ are met. Depending on the context the pornographic illocution of subordination is authoritative. The conditions unfolding the illocution of subordination are ranking, legitimizing discrimination, and depriving the affected of important power. In addition Langton and C. West extended the original theory and show that pornography as speech is part of the language scorekeeping game. They defined what exactly pornography is and in which way (explicit or implicit) pornography tell us something.
In my paper I will show that the objections of Saul concerning Langton’s theory are not valid and that pornography is not only an illocution but can be viewed as speech. Langton gives us specific clues according to which the subordinating force of the illocution of pornography becomes apparent – I name a time when the illocution of subordination unfolds.
Chair: Sven Eichholtz
Time: September 7th, 10:00-10:30
Location: SR 1.006
SOPhiA 2026 