In this essay, I will examine whether silencing argument proposed by Rae Langton (1993) is sound. To analyse, first, I will explain the silencing argument. I will also explain J. L. Austin’s speech act theory, since Langton has defended and justified the plausibility of silencing argument by drawing on speech act theory. According to Langton, works of pornography impinge upon women’s right to free speech. Second, I will demonstrate that Langton misinterprets the meaning of illocutionary acts, as discussed by Austin. Although Langton (1993) argues that uptake is a necessary prerequisite for an illocutionary act to be performed, this is an exaggerated interpretation of speech act theory. Langton misunderstands the content of illocution, because she fails to distinguish between successful and unsuccessful illocutionary acts. Third, I will introduce Daniel Jacobson’s claim that Langton’s silencing argument posits an unacceptable conclusion. Finally, I will show that Hornsby and Langton (1998) fail to refute Jacobson’s claim, and will conclude that the silencing claim cannot be accepted. …show more content…
On the other hand, if pornography deprives women of the illocutionary force of refusal, as Langton (1993) argues and as supported by Hornsby and Langton (1998), and her saying ‘no’ is not considered an illocutionary act of refusal, it follows that a woman does not refuse sex. Therefore, no act of non-consensual rape can be said to have occurred. Therefore, it is difficult to accept that pornography silences women’s illocutionary