Can a Naked Mannequin In a Store Window Be Obscene?

Can a Naked Mannequin In a Store Window Be Obscene?

In Miller v. California, the United States Supreme Court said that obscene material is not protected by the First Amendment.

The court in Miller developed what is known known as the 3 pronged obscenity test. The Miller Test, breaks the questioned display or gesture into three categories:

Whether “the average person, applying contemporary community standards,” would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest, whether the work depicts or describes sexual conduct specifically defined by applicable state law in an offensive way, and whether the work lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.

In Beatrice, Nebraska, a naked mannequin caused quite a stir.

Beatrice Police say they tried to contact the store’s owner, Kevin Kramer, about covering up the mannequin, but were unsuccessful.

Officers then taped paper over the area of the window where the mannequin was, to cover it up.

Tobias Tempelmeyer, city attorney, said that the main issue in the debate is whether or not the display was obscene.

“We’re currently looking at whether or not it was obscene,” Tempelmeyer said Friday. “The U.S. Supreme Court and State of Nebraska have a system to determine if something is obscene. At this point, I’m not willing to say one way or another.”

Despite claims that the display was not obscene, as of Friday morning, the store owner had dressed the mannequin in a candy bikini along with a toy assault rifle. The clothed picture of the mannequin is at the top of the post, which, could in fact be considered more objectionable than a naked mannequin.

Do you think a naked mannequin is obscene?