Sexual Fantasy and Pornography: Two Cases of Girls Brought Up With Pornography
Sexual Fantasy and Pornography: Two Cases of Girls Brought Up With Pornography
Sexual Fantasy and Pornography: Two Cases of Girls Brought Up With Pornography
5, 1982
INTRODUCTION
0004-0002/82/1000-0395503.00/0 © 1982PlenumPublishingCorporation
396 Luria
CASE #1
two sisters had special bonds because they were close in age and were
surrounded by older brothers and younger male cousins. Each had a peer
group of children of her own age, in which she was well integrated. But in
the family and the extended family group, their gender brought them
together.
Until 4 years before Anna's first interview, the family was involved in
the publication and distribution of pornographic materials. Both parents
and some cousins worked in the business. Anna recounted tales of relaxed
dinner discussion about the pornographic magazines. Every now and then
she saw some magazines. Her father used names that Anna or her older
sister, Janet, invented for titles of new magazines. With some pride, the
father would then show the girls the magazines, printed with the names each
had chosen. Anna recalls that by age 6 (at the latest) she and her sister
regularly visited the warehouse where the books, magazines, and
paraphernalia were housed.
Anna's reaction to the magazines was neutral: "It was just what Dad
did. He sold magazines of naked women." Anna's mother had concerns
about the children viewing the magazines, but no effort was made to keep
the home empty of the pornographic material. None of the children in
Anna's large family saw their father as doing anything wrong. Everyone in
the family, regardless of age or sex, had access to the pornographic
material.
The pornographic material the girls saw was primarily "the girlie
magazines" of the early 1960s, with one woman on a page with exposed
genitalia. The poses recalled were "her hands on her thighs, her behind to
the camera, or lying on top of a bear skin rug with the animal's head tucked
neatly in her groin." Anna, in particular, was conscious of the women's
large nipples.
Neither woman recalls seeing magazines with pictures of men only.
Instead, "Men were in the magazines when coupled with women. Always,
the men were very erect or well on their way to being there. The idea of
intercourse seemed always to be suggested by the close proximity of both
people's genitalia." The magazines contained no transvestism.
Sadomasochism was suggested, but was muted. The girls saw
photographs of men holding whips, but neither woman recalled any case
where the whip hit or had hit the woman photographed. The girls thought
that the woman who was threatened and/or about to be beaten was a maid.
The reason for the children's association appears to be lost to the two
women. The photographed woman's helplessness was transformed by them
into her being of a lower class, subject to a male employer's whim. Only
Anna sought out and read narrative material for arousal. She reported
excitment while looking for pages in the Fanny Hill books that described °'a
Fantasy and Pornography 399
Sexuality
coital experience and felt that she was "lying" by withholding the
information. In fact, her mother's reaction was supportive. A quotation
from Joni Mitchell was cited by Anna to describe her parents: " M a m m a
knows she spoiled me, Papa made me free."
Anna has had two serious coital partners. Peter, her current partner, is
her first enveloping emotional relationship. The move to a new city with
Peter is viewed by her as fun and independence. It is also an attempt to
develop a sexual relationship and a solid friendship in one. "He's the first
man I want to get to know. I can't love a man I can't be friends with."
Anna consulted a doctor about being orgasmic on only 50% of her
coital opportunities. He congratulated her and suggested she counsel some
of his 40-year-old patients. Peter has expressed concern about Anna being
orgasmic more reliably. In turn, she is pleased at his concern for her and for
their relationship.
A year after the interview summarized above, Anna had loosened her
childhood ties to her family considerably. She could talk about her wish for
freedom from her family. She was living with Peter and was able to talk
about the shaping by her father of her image of males: strong, challenging
to her emotional demands, dominant without requiring the female to be
passive.
Anna views the pornography as having given her an image of the
female as dominant: "It's 'look what I have'; she controls with her huge,
powerful, glorified breasts, because she has what the male wants. He is
always willing to have sex in the magazines. But she sets up the environment
for its expression."
Anna used the visual material from her childhood in most of her
sexual life. In the last year, 4 years after her initial interview with me, she
has ceased to do so, although she can conjure the images up for her current
therapist. She does not seek out new magazines to stoke the imaginary fires.
She is not, nor was she ever, dependent on the images for sexual arousal.
She continues to be turned on by new visual and narrative material, and can
use the material at will to stoke arousal.
CASE #2
the family business, Janet felt that she had not been exposed to sex as much
as her new junior-high-school and early-high-school age mates had been.
Sex, drugs, orgies, and pills seemed far more evil to her than the
pornography with which she had grown up. Janet views her childhood as
"real good" because her parents were at ease with the children and family
life was always stable.
Janet saw her mother as "a young mother," the sexual liberal in the
family. Her father was stricter, "about a generation behind. Dad never
talked about sex to me." Janet never got the cautionary tales from her
parents that Anna did. Janet put herself on the pill when she was 16 or 17.
Anna never knew this.
Janet had a boyfriend when she was 16 and has had one almost ever
since. She considered marriage in her senior year in college. When she
decided to enter graduate school in science, she refused her lover's offer to
move with her. This moratorium in their relationship was meant to allow
each of them a period of commitment to their differing professional
choices.
Sexuality
that "Maybe I've seen so much, it can't do anything." She was only once
turned on by pornographic material: the material was in what she called
"the unexpurgated Presidential Report on Pornography," a reference to the
Kemp (1970) illustrated edition of the report.
Janet had one long-term relationship involving strong emotional and
sexual bonds. "I enjoy someone holding me, not just intercourse itself." She
tried a one-night stand out of curiosity, "to prove I could have an orgasm. I
did, but I didn't like it. There was no emotional bond."
The interviews do not make clear why the two women have such dif-
ferent images and memories of their parents. This Rashomon effect may be
based on a number of factors, some mentioned herein; but any explana-
tion would be predominantly surmise, and of uncertain relation to the issue
of this paper.
DISCUSSION
her early adult fantasies. Currently, she has turned to other sources for such
imagery. No image is a necessary prerequisite for arousal for her, however.
In summary, these two cases do not challenge the finding that there is
a sex difference between male and female incorporation of pornographic
material into fantasy. While this sex difference may have endogenous
features, our cases suggest that, at least in part, the difference may be
socially induced. The two women described here had normal, healthy
histories and like many boys, learned to masturbate with gusto and pleasure at
an early age. Like many boys, their exposure to pornography occurred in a
positive social context and did them no observable harm. Nonetheless, both
girls viewed the pornographic material negatively ("sleazy") or, at best,
neutrally ( " I ' m . . . immune"). Unlike boys, neither girls ever sought out
pornographic material, although both know how and where to find it. Even
Anna, who uses sexual imagery, describes it now as a turn-on but not an
obligatory one.
If we assume that the value judgements made ot pornography have
their origins in shared experiences with family and/or peer group, then we
should pose the question, what happens in families and in the gender-
segregated peer groups to foster the sex difference? We see little evidence to
suggest that families foster the use of pornography, but much evidence that
peers do so. Why do boys not view pornography as sleazy and, therefore, to
be avoided? It is probable that many boys do see pornography as sleazy but
do not, therefore, avoid it. Why might this be true? The male peer group,
between nursery school and preadolescence, primes titillation and pleasure
to "dirty" or out-of-bound words. The giggling of boys to four letter words
and words for hidden body parts and functions, the hidden joys of mad lib
games where the bodily, the sexual, and the excretory are joined for
ludicrous effects (such as words mixed together in a fill-in sentence
supposedly on the Constitution of the United States - "The shit was ratified
in Cuntville in 1788") may represent a framework that permits boys to hold
(and to treasure) the forbidden, to invoke the excitement of the forbidden,
to stoke sexual arousal. Girls do not usually have the experience of the
shared gratification of being "bad."
Some attention should be paid to issues of dominance. Explicit in
much pornography is power over women-helpless, weak, and exquisitely
available women. Even the chains on the women appear redundant. If the
male gender curriculum teaches boys to attend to dominance cues and
information, the pornographic literature surely shows men as dominant.
Issues of dominance status are less salient in preadolescent girls' smaller
groups. That does not mean that issues of control are not attended to by
girls; they are probably just less important. It is interesting, though, how
Anna interprets dominance in pornographic material; the female, with
whom she identifies, is in control because the female has what is wanted by
404 Luria
REFERENCES
Gagnon, J. (1979). The interaction of gender roles and sexual conduct. In Katchedourian H.
(ed.), Human Sexuality: A Comparative and Developmental Perspective, University
of California Press, Berkeley, pp. 225-245.
Hite, S. (1976). The Hite Report. McMillan, New York.
Kemp. (ed.). (1970). The illustrated Presidential Report of the Commission on Obscenity
and Pornography. Greenleaf Classics, San Diego.
Kinsey, A. C., Pomeroy, W. B. Martin, C. E., and Gebhard, P. H. (1953). Sexua/Behavior in
theHuman Female. W. B. Saunders, Philadelphia, p. 667.
Money, J., and Ehrhardt, A. A. (1972). Man and Woman: Boy and Girl. Johns Hopkins
University Press, Baltimore.