In How to Have a XXX Sex Life the authors actively encourage women to copy dialogue straight from pornographic films. They are also rather blunt in declaring the sexual appeal of the degradation involved, explaining that: “When most people think of ‘talking dirty’ they think of using nasty, even degrading language to make it hot. When it works, it works well” (Anderson and Berman, 2004, p. 49, my emphasis). For useful examples, readers are directed to watch the pornographic film Swoosh because “the talk is raunchier, with lines ‘Is that what you want, you filthy fucking whore?’ Or ‘Take it bitch’” (Anderson and Berman, 2004, p. 49).
In a further cross over between pornography and sex therapy, similar advice on ‘dirty talk’ is given by the renowned Australian sexologist Gabrielle Morrissey in her popular sex self-help book Urge: Hot secrets for great sex (2005). Morrissey states that dirty talk is “designed to arouse”, and to support this contention she offers the scenario of a man telling his female partner to: “Bring your wet cunt over here, I want to fuck it good …” (Morrissey, 2005, p. 442). It is not made clear if Morrissey believes this statement to be arousing to men, women, or both, but she does acknowledge that in non-sexual contexts women may find such a statement deeply offensive. She notes: “A woman in the bedroom may find it horny for her man to shout ‘Fuck you’re a nasty bitch yeah’, but if he growled anything like that in the kitchen, he’d probably receive a walloping …” She further explains: “Tone, intent and context are everything” (p. 424). The context is important because, according to both sex therapists and the pornographers, the degradation and subordination of women is acceptable as long as it is sexual. While Morrissey claims women should not be degraded or verbally abused in the kitchen, the bedroom is placed beyond claims of respect and equality.
Which returns us again to the problem of basing sex advice on a model of sexuality that is not about women’s sexual pleasure but about women’s sexual subordination. While sex therapy has long afforded pornography some form of legitimacy, the processes of pornification seem to have fuelled this to a point where porn stars are now becoming understood as the ultimate sex experts. As pornography and sex therapy continue to provide mutually reinforcing understandings of what sex should be, it makes it increasingly difficult for women to step outside this model and make claims to a sexuality which is based on equality and respect, one that fundamentally rejects pornography as an authority on sex. But while it may be increasingly difficult to challenge this model, it is also increasingly important that we try.
Bibliography
Anderson, Dan and Maggie Berman (with The Vivid Girls) (2004) How to Have a XXX Sex Life. Harper Collins, New York.
Attwood, Feona (2005) ‘Tits and Ass and Porn and Fighting: Male heterosexuality in magazines for men’ International Journal of Cultural Studies 8 (1), pp. 77–94.
Baker, Jo-Anne (Ed) (1999) Sex Tips: Advice from women experts around the world. Allen and Unwin, London.
Barry, Kathleen (1995) The Prostitution of Sexuality. New York University Press, New York.
Black, Jules (2006) ‘The Joy of Erotic Massage: Review’ Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 21 (1), pp. 117–118.
Davies, Guy and Anthony Wonke (13 July, 2000) ‘We Want Porn’ The Guardian, London.
Dines, Gail (2010) Pornland: How Porn Has Hijacked Our Sexuality. Beacon Press, Boston, MA; Spinifex Press, North Melbourne.
Dworkin, Andrea (1981) Pornography: Men possessing women. The Women’s Press, London.
Eberwein, Robert (1999) Sex Ed: Film, video and the framework of desire. Rutgers University Press, Piscataway, NJ.
Farley, Melissa (Ed) (2003) Prostitution, Trafficking and Traumatic Stress. Harworth Press, New York.
Häggström-Nordin, Elisabet, Ulf Hanson and Tanja Tydén (2005) ‘Associations between pornography consumption and sexual practices among adolescents in Sweden’ International Journal of STD and AIDS 16 (1), pp. 102–107.
Heiman, Julia and Joseph LoPiccolo (1992) Becoming Orgasmic: A sexual growth program for women. Revised ed. Fireside, New York.
Jeffreys, Sheila (1990/2011) Anticlimax: A feminist perspective on the sexual revolution. The Women’s Press, London; reprinted and available as e-book from Spinifex Press, North Melbourne.
Jeffreys, Sheila (1997/2008) The Idea of Prostitution. Spinifex Press, North Melbourne.
Lane, Frederick (2000) Obscene Profits: The entrepreneurs of pornography in the cyber age. Routledge, New York.
Lovelace, Linda (1980) Ordeal. Citadel Press, Secaucus, NJ.
mediabistro.com (7 April, 2007a) ‘Spin’s Newest Hire? The ‘Madame of Punk Rock Porn’ of Course’,
mediabistro.com (19 July, 2007b). ‘FHM Hires Adult Film Star To Write Weekly Sex Blog’,
McElroy, Wendy (1995) XXX: A woman’s right to pornography. St. Martin’s Press, New York.
Monet, Veronica (2005) Sex Secrets of Escorts: What men really want. Alpha Books, New York.
Morrissey, Gabrielle (2005) Urge: Hot secrets for great sex. Harper Collins, Sydney.
Paul, Pamela (2005) Pornified: How pornography is transforming our lives, our relationships and our families. Times Books, New York.
Pike-Johnson, Heidi (2005b) ‘The New Devil in Miss Jones – Review’ Adult Video News (December),
Ramone, Mike (2005b) Jenna Loves Pain – Review’ Adult Video News (November),
Rich, Frank (20 May, 2001) ‘Naked Capitalists’ The New York Times, New York.
Royalle, Candida (2004) How to Tell a Naked Man What to Do. Fireside, New York.
Sinclair Intimacy Institute (2007a) ‘Movies: Sinclair Select’,
Sinclair Intimacy Institute (2007b) ‘Better Sex Kits: Smart Maid Kit’,
Sinclair Intimacy Institute (2007c) ‘Better Sex Kits: Tie Me Up, Tie Me Down’,
Striar, Sharna and Barbara Bartlik (1999) ‘Stimulation of the Libido: The use of erotica in sex therapy’ Psychiatric Annals 29 (1), pp. 60–62.
Strossen, Nadine (1995) Defending Pornography: Free speech, sex and the fight for women’s rights. Scriber, New York.
Tydén, Tanja and Christina Rogala (2003) ‘Does pornography influence young women’s sexual behavior?’ Women’s Health Issues 13 (1), pp. 39–43.
Tydén, Tanja and Christina Rogala (2004) ‘Sexual behavior among young men in Sweden and the Impact of Pornography’ International Journal of STD and AIDS 15 (9), pp. 590–593.
Tyler, Meagan (2008) ‘Sex Self-Help Books: Hot Secrets for Great Sex or Promoting the Sex of Prostitution?’ Women’s Studies International Forum 31 (5), pp. 363–372.
Zillbergeld, Bernie (1993) The New Male Sexuality. Bantam Books, New York.
Renate Klein
Big Porn + Big Pharma: Where the Pornography Industry Meets the Ideology of Medicalisation1
Introduction
As the pornification of culture continues to engulf our daily lives, so too does the normalisation of medicalisation. Increasingly, all aspects of our health are deemed in need of medical scrutiny and ‘personalised’ attention. We are checked, screened and tested from before birth to old age and when (invariably) found deficient and straying from the ‘holy’ average (which, in fact, changes quite frequently), we are plied with a bewildering array of ever more tests, drugs and procedures. In 2006, global revenues for ‘Big Porn’ w
ere reported to be approaching US$100 billion, and ‘Big Pharma’ has projected profits of US$1000 billion (1 trillion) by 2013.2 These 2 industries are linked in many ways and it is some of these connections that I will examine in this article. I include the cosmetic and reprogenetic industries under the rubric of Big Pharma and will discuss the medicalisation of (porn)sex, the need for bodies to conform to pornsex, the medical hazards of pornsex, reproporn, and lastly, what to make of the new disease ‘porn addiction’.
1 The Medicalisation of (Porn)Sex
Pornsex portrays women as horny ‘hos’ with an insatiable appetite for oral, anal and vaginal penetration, and men as domineering studs whose erections need to be bigger and ‘last longer’3 so as to fill female orifices and spill their ‘cum’. These portraits create anxieties for many ‘ordinary’ women and men who feel ill-equipped to live up to porn industry standards.
‘Luckily’, Big Pharma has come to their rescue by, first, creating new diseases of sexual dysfunction and, second, offering a cure for them. For men with less than pornsex erections in size and duration, Viagra (meaning ‘tiger’ in Sanskrit) brings salvation. Initially prescribed for ‘erectile dysfunction’ – but now also used as an ‘enhancement drug’ easily available online for any man who wants more prowess in his ordinary, pornographic, or prostitution sex – Pfizer’s little blue pill has raked in close to US$2 billion since 1998.4 Viagra works by increasing blood flow to the penis, but carries the short-term risk of possibly fatal stroke and heart attack.5
Diagnosing – and ‘curing’ – female sexual dysfunction (FSD) has proven a far greater challenge for Big Pharma. To repeat the commercial success of blue Viagra for men, pink Viagra, and later Cialis (manufactured by Eli Lily), seemed a lucrative answer. But in order to attract female customers, women first had to be convinced they suffered from FSD. The republication of earlier findings in a 1999 article in the Journal of the American Medical Association did just that (Laumann et al., 1999). Seven survey questions were asked of a group of 1500 US women, including: did they lack interest in sex? did they not have an orgasm? were they anxious about their sexual performance? – even if it was only once in the past year. A ‘yes’ response to just one of these questions branded the respondent as suffering from FSD. Adding up these one-time events, the researchers concluded that a whopping 43% of US women suffered from female sexual dysfunction.6
Viagra, Cialis, testosterone patches, and more recently, the fast-acting anti-depressant Flibanserin, were all Big Pharma dreams to cure FSD (and one of its sub-disorders, hypoactive sexual desire disorder or HSDD). But unfortunately for Big Pharma, female sexuality does not follow the male hydraulic model. Pumping blood into women’s genitals does not do the trick. Even research projects sponsored by pharmaceutical companies did not come up with increased sexual satisfaction when compared with placebos.
Moreover, since 2000, well-publicised grassroots activism against pornsex by New York University feminist psychiatrist and sex therapist, Leonore Tiefer, is gaining ground. Tiefer argues that the ‘corporate-backed idea of sex-as-function’ needs to be replaced with a ‘humanistic vision’ of sexuality which she puts forward in her New View Campaign7 (Kaschak and Tiefer, 2002; see also Moynihan, 2010, p. 148). In a similar way, the 2011 film Orgasm Inc.: The Strange Science of Female Pleasure, directed by Liz Canner, reveals the manufacturing of the ‘disease’ FSD by profit-hungry pharmaceutical companies (see Laureano, 2011). Nevertheless, encouraging as these critiques of Big Pharma’s union with Big Porn are, it would be naïve to conclude that the pharmaceutical quest for a miracle pill or patch for this elusive ‘disease’ has come to an end; new drugs are in the pipeline and the magic number ‘43%’ continues to haunt women and to ‘normalise’ FSD.
2 Pornsex Needs Pornready Bodies
The continuing hypersexualisation of women and girls demands that their bodies fit the ideology of pornsex and a male-centred model of sexual activity. Their breasts need to be augmented, any real or imaginary wrinkles Botoxed, and their hairless labia and vaginas surgically redesigned. ‘Pornochic’ has become the norm of the beauty industry.
Injuries and death from breast augmentation have long been noted by feminist writers.8 Adverse effects from silicone breast implants have led to hundreds of product liability litigation cases (Cohen, 1994). Notwithstanding such documented damage, the pornification of women’s lives has normalised breast augmentation surgery as a way to attain the required ‘ho’ look.
A case in point is the death of German porn star, Carolin Berger, during her 6th breast enhancement surgery at age 23 in January, 2011. Her heart stopped during the operation and she sustained severe brain damage. Bloggers expressed sadness over Carolin’s death on the Website JustBreastImplants.com which describes itself as a ‘Breast augmentation patient education resource’ where you can locate a surgeon. One post reads: “Oh how sad! My heart goes out to her loved ones” followed, however, by the same woman writing “5’1 almost at 5’2, 103lbs, 350 mod+ saline, started as 34aa, now a 34c or a 32d!!!!” Other bloggers post their own revealing photos with augmented breasts and a full list of enhanced body parts, followed by the name of their cosmetic surgeon. The postmodern ideology of bodies-as-text, here to be inscribed, meets the demands of a pornified society for medically enhanced women’s bodies.
The same ideology was reflected in a 2009 Channel 4 TV Program in the UK. Four hundred teenagers from 14 to 17 had been surveyed. A group of boys from Sheringham High School in Norfolk was shown photographs of 10 pairs of breasts. All said that the most attractive breasts were those that had been surgically enhanced. As TV presenter, Anna Richardson, commented: “Alarmingly, a posse of their female classmates says the same thing. Both sexes are unimpressed with normal breasts, which – unlike porn stars’ silicone-boosted chests – are often not symmetrical and sit down, not up.” And 45% of girls from Sheringham High School were unhappy with their own breasts, and almost a third said they might consider surgery (The Guardian, 30 March, 2009).
The Guardian report continues:
When the programme makers show boys and girls a woman opening her legs to reveal hair, there are gasps, some born of disgust. In porn, females are always shaved down below. Girls admit that they are starting to shave their lower regions and that boys expect them to do so. The pupils’ reaction shows how their expectations of what bodies should look like are framed by watching porn. Freakish ideas of physicality are mainstream.
Indeed, there is now a seemingly non-negotiable demand to be hairless and ‘pert’ in the vaginal department. Unruly vaginal lips and body hair are frowned upon by men who like their (porn) women to look like little girls: clean, and definitely hairless. Hence the commercial success of celebrity surgeon David Matlock’s trademarked procedures at his Institute in Los Angeles: the ‘Designer Laser Vaginoplasty®’ (“for the aesthetic enhancement of the vulvar structures”) and ‘Laser Vaginal Rejuvenation®’ (“for the enhancement of sexual gratification, vaginal tightening”). Other must-have surgeries include ‘Brazilian Butt Augmentation’ demonstrated by Dr Matlock himself in a video on his Website to, as he puts it, “artistically enhance your buttocks to give it a more rounded, toned, lifted, athletic look that compels people to look and admire” (
Leonore Tiefer and colleagues call such procedures FGCS (Female Genital Cosmetic Surgery) and compare them to FGM (female genital mutilation, see
As pornography critic, Gail Dines, observes:
Something has shifted so profoundly in our society that the idealized, pop culture image of women in today’s pornified world is no longer a Stepford Wife but rather a plasticized, scripted,
hypersexualized, surgically enhanced young woman. The media world we live in today has replaced the stereotyped Stepford Wife with the equally limiting and controlling stereotype of a Stepford Slut (in Rivers, 2010. See also her comment on ‘sluts’ in Griffin, 2011).
3 Medical Hazards of Pornsex
In addition to the damage from cosmetic surgery, there are daily health risks from engaging in increasingly violent pornography acts – be it as paid ‘porn stars’ or as Stepford Sluts in the privacy of millions of homes. For potential porn recruits the Website of the Adult Industry Medical (AIM) Healthcare Foundation (
Joined by an equally friendly and non-threatening male doctor, the pair then goes through some of the 25 sexually transmitted infections (STIs) that awaits you in your new ‘profession’ including chlamydia, syphilis, gonorrhea (including of the throat), hepatitis A, B and C (A is transmitted by faeces from anal to mouth). You are told to avoid sharing razors, and also needles, with others, to avoid hepatitis C. HIV is another infection you might contract during your professional porn performances, and Dr Mitch particularly cautions about HIV in breast milk “for those milk movies.” Genital warts are talked about at length – where to spot them, how to treat them – and novices are instructed to have regular pap smears. Women as well as men are strongly urged to get the 3-shot HPV vaccine Gardasil at $400 – without any warnings as to its serious adverse effects.9
Big Porn Inc: Exposing the Harms of the Global Pornography Industry Page 16