In effect, it proposes a solution to private disputes that closely resembles politics bargaining and compromise. The form is quite different from the rights asserted by gays in the San Francisco bathhouse controversy. In ADR, disputants seek remedies for their problems instead of vindication of their rights. Nevertheless, the remedies are framed in relation to law. The featured players are Andrea Dworkin, Catharine MacKinnon, and other radical feminists who waged an impassioned assault against pornography.
Radicalism is contra-legal.
But, despite this contra-legal attitude, the movement was defined and structured by law. What started out as an expression of rage eventually evolved into a debate as opposition to these radical ideas emerged. Among those opposing the position of the antipornography feminists were those interested in maintaining a rights-based, expansive interpretation of the First Amendment. Hence, the debate eventually turned to subjects such as what constitutes pornography and the limits of free speech. Over time, the radicals moved toward reliance on the state rather than solely expressing opposition to it.