Amelie's post on repression
demolitionred, 18 Oct 2005 13:51:29
I tried to get to research through backlash but failed and had to reregister
but when I followed the link I was sent to the research group there did not
appear to be any way to answer the questions and the group was flagged as
private even tho it stated it was public.
so, to answer the question on repression:
repression A defense mechanism, operating unconsciously, that banishes
unacceptable ideas, fantasies, affects, or impulses from consciousness or
that keeps out of consciousness what has never been conscious. Although not
subject to voluntary recall, the repressed material may emerge in disguised
form. Often confused with the conscious mechanism of suppression. resistance
One's conscious or unconscious psychological defense against bringing
repressed (unconscious) thoughts into conscious awareness.
all Freudian based psychology accepts the premise that repression is
dangerous and only known and accepted drives can be controlled. I recently
posted the following - but stuff seems not to go to the site when I reply to
smartgroup mail coming in and other stuff referred to in discussion has
never reached me. I still have a lot to learn about groups.
Catharsis
At first, it may seem odd to place catharsis under the heading of "powerful
effects." After all catharsis studies generally show that pornography
prevents harmful effects like rape and other sex crimes. From this, one
might argue that catharsis proves the "limited effects" of pornography. A
better way to think of catharsis is as a powerful "limiting effect" against
sexually deviant behavior. Therefore, it is properly referred to as a
powerful effect.
A number of cathartic effects have been found for pornography, but perhaps
the most widely cited is the so called "Danish experience." In the 1960's
Denmark experienced a "porno wave", but rather than censoring this content,
in 1967 the government lifted all restriction on pornography (save a 16 year
old age limit for purchasing porn). Yet rather than experiencing a wave of
sex crimes as some had predicted, sex crimes actually declined. For example,
Kutchinsky (1970; 1985; 1987; 1991) found that from 1965 to 1982 sex crimes
against children declined from 30 per 100,000 in '65 to about 5 per 100,000
in '82. Similar evidence is found for rape rates. Kutchinsky concludes that
this is likely the effect of pornography providing potential sex offenders
an alternate means of sexual satisfaction, most likely through masturbation.
Another example of a nation with high amounts of pornography yet low sex
crime rates is Japan. As Abramson and Hayashi (1984) have found, pornography
in Japan is often featured in general interest newspapers and magazines, and
can be seen on prime time television. Not only is porn widely available but
much of its adult content depicts the bondage and rape of young women. "In
fact, one of the best ways to ensure the success of a Japanese adult film is
to include the bondage and rape of a young woman (Abramson and Hayashi,
1984: p. 178)." Despite this, Japan's rape rate is roughly 14 times lower
than that of the U.S.'s (2.4 rapes per 100,000 in Japan compared to 34.5 in
the U.S.). This discrepancy can not be explained by variance in laws, or
Japanese women's reluctance to report rape. Instead, the
Japanese view the availability of such stimuli as a cathartic valve. It is
presumed to provide vicarious satisfaction of a socially unacceptable
behavior. In a culture that endorses strict codes of behavior and highly
defined roles, the depiction of rape also provides a context in which
Japanese men can vicariously abandon all of the explicit signposts of good
behavior. (p. 182).
Continuing with international evidence, Faust (1982) studied countries with
the most and least equality achieved between men and women. She found that
in nations like the U.S. and the Scandinavian countries which highly value
women's equality, pornography was widely available. In contrast, in
countries repressive towards women, like Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the former
Soviet Union, little or no pornography was available.
Another cathartic effect for pornography is found in data about child sex
offenders and rapists. Child sex offenders have been shown to have had very
little, if any exposure to pornography (Byrne and Kelley, 1984; Faust,
1982). Evidence has also shown that a majority of rapists come from sexually
repressive family backgrounds (Goldstein and Kant, 1973; Byrne and Kelley,
1984).
In all of these cases, the cathartic effect of pornography is believed due
to a substitution effect, by which potential sex offenders receive sexual
gratification from pornographic content, rather than from criminal acts
against individuals.
Limited Effects
Limited effects data for pornography are largely confined to experiments
which find no relationship between exposure to pornography and some
dependent variable like aggression or attitudes towards women. This is
especially true of studies measuring men and women's attitude changes after
exposure to nonviolent and violent pornography.
Nonviolent Pornography Exposure
Almost no studies have been able to replicate Zillmann and Bryant's (1982)
finding of negative attitudes towards women after exposure to nonviolent
pornography. For example, Padgett and Brislin-Slutz (1987) conducted a
nearly identical study, massively exposing male and female participants to 5
straight days of nonviolent pornography, and then assessing their attitudes
towards women and rape. Their results found no difference between pre and
post test measures, and no difference between the porn viewing group and the
control.
Similarly, many other studies -- including the Donnerstein and Linz (1985)
study described earlier -- exposing participants to several experimental
conditions (violent porn, nonviolent porn, control) have found that exposure
to nonviolent porn produces few or no adverse attitudes towards women. From
a review of this literature, Linz (1989) notes "We would have to conclude
that the data, overall, do not support the contention that exposure to
nonviolent pornography has significant adverse effects on attitudes toward
rape as a crime or more general evaluations of rape victims (p. 74)."
Violent Pornography Exposure
Despite Donnerstein and Linz's conclusion that violent pornography likely
has some effect on negative attitudes towards women, a number of studies
have found no such results.
Malamuth, Reisin, and Spinner (1979) exposed male and female participants to
magazine portrayals of aggressive (sadomasochism and rape) and nonagressive
pornography. Next, they were exposed to a videotaped interview of an actual
rape victim, and then asked to answer a questionnaire assessing perceptions
of the victim, and attitudes towards rape. Results found no significant
differences between participants exposed to the violent pornography and
those exposed to the nonviolent pornography.
In a similar study, Malamuth, Haber, and Feshbach (1980) exposed
participants to either a sadomasochistic or nonviolent pornographic story.
Next, participants read a description of a rape where the victim clearly
opposed the assault, and were then asked to recommend a prison sentence for
the offender. Results yielded no main effects for exposure to the sexually
violent story and attitudes towards rape as measured by the sentencing
question.
Finally, Krafka et al. (1997) exposed female participants to either feature
length violent pornography, nonviolent pornography, or mildly sexual slasher
films. Participants were pre and post tested for self-perception attitudes
like self-esteem and fear of victimization. Results showed no significant
reductions in self esteem between the experimental groups.
Taken together, these results cast doubt on the asserted link between
violent pornography and negative/antisocial attitudes towards women.
Criticisms of the Experimental Results
A number of very cogent criticisms have been leveled against the
experimental results described above. These criticisms are particularly
relevant considering that many anti porn feminists and conservatives site
the experimental literature as proof that pornography does have harmful
effects.
Generalizability
Perhaps the most cogent criticism of the experimental literature is the
inability to generalize results beyond the college students who
overwhelmingly make up the participants in these studies. Indeed, the vast
majority of results on the effects of pornography have been obtained from
only a handful of U.S. universities (notably the University of Wisconsin,
UCLA, and UC Santa Barbara). Studies have shown that students who volunteer
for such studies are more liberal, more sexually experienced, and have less
objections to pornography than do nonvolunteers (Einsiedel, 1992: p. 268).
This in addition to the obvious fact that most of the population is not
college aged.
Artificial Environment
In the real world few people are exposed to pornography in groups. Instead,
pornography is usually consumed individually in the comfort of the home.
Further, experiments testing aggression after exposure to pornography
provide participants with the completely artificial option of shocking an
instigator. Brannigan and Goldenberg (1987) argue that such experimental
designs also provide no real world sanctions to the expression of negative
attitudes.
Differing Stimuli and Definitions
From experiment to experiment a great deal of difference can be found in the
stimuli provided to participants. In most cases researchers use different
pornographic films which they independently decide are violent - nonviolent,
permissive - nonpermissive, consensual - non-consensual, etc. Thus comparing
a study which used Debby Does Dallas to a similarly designed study using
Long Dong Silver may be spurious (Linz, 1989: pp. 79-80).
No Results - No One Knows
Unfortunately, only studies which report significant findings are normally
published. As a result, a great number of studies showing no effects, and
thus supporting the limited effects model, never make it to public view
(Pally, 1994: p. 28).
Other Approaches to Studying Pornography
The powerful vs. limited effects debate about pornography has led to an
often personal and political stalemate, where feminists and conservatives
argue for powerful effects, while experimental researchers take a more
cautious stance. As a result of this effects quagmire, a number of scholars
have chosen to study pornography for its entertainment value and for its
personal and political uses.
Pornography as Entertainment
Given the fact that the pornography is a $10 billion a year industry
(McDonald, 1997), some consumers must be finding its content entertaining.
Despite this, almost no studies have attempted to describe the attributes
that lead to enjoyment of pornography.
An interesting exception, is the work of Lopez and George (1995) who set out
to understand what makes males and females enjoy pornography. They
conceptualized pornographic enjoyment as a function of two things. First, as
a scale for erotophobia (fear of the erotic) vs. erotophilia (enjoyment of
the erotic) which is comprised of variables relating to sexual experience,
sexual inhibitions, and sex guilt, and secondly as a function of
gender-specific sex norms (i.e. men are more likely to initiate sex, men
enjoy pornography more, etc.). These variables were measured by a pretest of
26 male and 12 female volunteers. After the pretest, participants were
individually exposed to pornographic slides, and asked to rate each for
enjoyment. Results showed that erotiphilic men enjoyed the pornography more
than erotiphilic women whose gender based norms inhibited their enjoyment
(p. 279).
Uses and Gratifications of Pornography
The classic formulation of the Uses and Gratifications theory is that it
asks not "what the media do to people" but "what people do with the media."
As such, uses and gratifications is perfectly suited to asking why people
use pornography, and what they get out of this use.
A number of studies have inventoried particular uses of pornography. For
example, a Newsweek poll found that 52 percent of respondents believed that
sexually explicit content provided information about sex and that 61 percent
found such material entertaining (Press et al., 1985). Similar studies have
found that individuals find adult movies humorous, and as material for
fantasizing about unrealistic women (Winick, 1971).
In a more recent study, Perse (1994) asked what reasons college students
gave for using erotica? She found four specific uses: (1. sexual
enhancement - related to information and foreplay, (2. diversion - related
to escape, relaxation, and entertainment, (3. sexual release - related to
fantasizing, and finally (4. substitution, or using pornography as a
substitute for sex (i.e. masturbation). Of these uses, diversion was found
to be the most strongly endorsed.
Reception and Oppositional Readings of Pornography
Similar to uses and gratifications, reception theory asks how people receive
and decode media messages. Reception theory is also interested in the
author's encoding process.
In terms of pornography research, these ideas have been picked up by
feminist scholars who claim that pornography -- far from being evil -- is
used oppositionally by some, and as a legitimating and empowering tool by
oppressed or marginalized groups. In terms of oppositional readings, Willis
(1984) questions why females must read pornography as a subordinating and
degrading text. Why can't a woman read pornography as an expression of her
own repressed sexual fantasies?
A woman who is raped is a victim; a woman who enjoys pornography (even if
that means enjoying a rape fantasy) is in a sense a rebel, insisting on an
aspect of here sexuality that has been defined as a male preserve. Insofar
as pornography glorifies male supremacy and sexual alienation, it is deeply
reactionary. But in rejecting sexual repression and hypocrisy -- which have
inflicted even more damage on women than on men -- it expresses a radical
impulse. (Willis, cited in McNair, 1996: 97)
In a similar way, marginalized groups like gays and lesbians can produce
their own pornography, thus providing material which questions the hegemony
of Judeo-Christian sexual norms. Unlike the anti-porn feminist viewpoint
which sees pornography as a tool of male repression, this conception sees
pornography as a tool of expression and legitimation (McNair, 1996).
Conclusion
This paper has provided an overview of the limited effects - powerful
effects debate about pornography. From this presentation, it should be clear
that just like debates about television violence or the effect of the mass
media in general, there are no clear answers. As such, it would seem that
the best conclusion one can reach about the effect of pornography is that it
"does not serve as a necessary and sufficient cause of audience effects, but
rather functions among and through a nexus of mediating factors and
influences (Klapper, 1960)." Thus bringing us full circle, back to the
limited effects conclusion that sparked pornography research in the first
place.
References
Abramson, P. and Hayashi, H. (1984). Pornography in Japan: Cross-cultural
and theoretical considerations. In N. Malamuth and E. Donnerstein (Eds.),
Pornography and sexual aggression. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
American Booksellers v. Hudnut. (1986). 106 S. Ct. 1172.
Bandura, A. (1973). Aggression: A social learning analysis. New York:
Prentice-Hall.
Baron, L. and Straus, M. (1984). Sexual stratification, pornography, and
rape in the United States. In N. Malamuth and E. Donnerstein (Eds.),
Pornography and sexual aggression. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Berelson, B., Lazarsfeld, P., and McPhee, W. (1954). Voting. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Brannigan, A. and Goldenberg, S. (1987). The study of aggressive
pornography: The vicissitudes of relevance. Critical Studies in Mass
Communication, 4: 262-283.
Briere, J. and Malamuth, N. (1983). Self-reported likelihood of sexually
aggressive behavior: Attitudinal versus sexual explanations. Journal of
Research in Personality, 17: 315-323.
Buss, A. (1961). The psychology of aggression. New York: Wiley.
Byrne, D. and Kelly, K. (1984). Pornography and sex research. In N. Malamuth
and E. Donnerstein (Eds.), Pornography and sexual aggression. Orlando, FL:
Academic Press.
Donnerstein, E. and Linz, D. (1985). Presentation paper to the Attorney
General's Commission on Pornography, Houston, TX.
Donnerstein, E. and Berkowitz, L. (1981). Victim reactions in aggressive-
erotic films as a factor in violence against women. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 41: 710-724.
Dworkin, A. (1988). Letters from a war zone. New York: Dutton.
Einsiedel, E. (1992). The experimental research evidence. In C. Itzin (Ed.),
Pornography: Women, violence and civil liberties. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Einsiedel, E. (1988). The British, Canadian, and U.S. pornography
commissions and their use of social science research. Journal of
Communication, 38 (2): 108-121.
Faust, B. (1982). Women, sex, and pornography. Victoria, Australia: Penguin.
Ferguson, F. (1995). Pornography: The theory. Critical Inquiry, 21: 670-695.
Gans, H. (1972). The Famine in American mass-communications research.
American Journal of Sociology, 77: 697-705.
Garry, A. (1983). Pornography and respect for women. In D. Copp and S.
Wendell (Eds.), Pornography and censorship. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books.
Geer, J. and Fuhr, R. (1976). Cognitive factors in sexual arousal: The Role
of distraction. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 44: 238-243.
Gitlin, T. (1978). Media sociology: The Dominant paradigm. Theory and
Society, 6: 205-253.
Goldstein, M. and Kant, H. (1973). Pornography and sexual deviance.
Berkeley: University of California Press.
Goodchilds, J. and Zellman, G. (1984). Sexual signaling and sexual
aggression in adolescent relationships. In N. Malamuth and E. Donnerstein
(Eds.), Pornography and sexual aggression. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Hall, S. (1973). Encoding and decoding in the television discourse. In Hall
et al. (eds.), Culture, media, language. (1980). London: Hutchinson.
Hawkins, G. and Zimring, F. (1988). Pornography in a free society.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Henson, D. and Rubin, H. (1971). Voluntary control of eroticism. Journal of
Applied Behavior Analysis, 4: 37-44.
Home Office (1979). Report on the committee on obscenity and film
censorship. Williams, B. (Chairman), London: Her Majesty's Stationery
Office.
Horkheimer, M. and Adorno, T. (1973). The Culture industry: Enlightenment as
mass deception. In The Dialectics of Enlightenment. London: Allen Lane.
Hovland, C., Lumsdaine, A., and Sheffield, F. (1965). Experiments on mass
communication. New York: John Wiley.
Itzin, C. (Ed.), (1992). Pornography: Women, violence and civil liberties.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Jacobellis v. Ohio. (1964). 378 U.S. 184.
Katz, E. (1987). Communication research since Lazarsfeld. Public Opinion
Quarterly, 51: S25-S45.
Kelley, K. and Byrne, D. (1983). Assessment of sexual responding: Arousal,
affect, and behavior. In J. Cacioppo and R. Petty (Eds.), Social
psychophysiology. New York: Guilford.
Kinsey A. (1948). Sexual behavior in the human male. Philadelphia: W.B.
Saunders Co.
Klapper, J. (1960). The Effects of mass communication. Glencoe, IL: Free
Press.
Krafka, C., Linz, D., Donnerstein, E. and Penrod, S. (1997). Women's
reactions to sexually aggressive mass media depictions. Violence Against
Women, 3 (2) : 149-181.
Kutchinsky, B. (1991). Pornography and rape: Theory and practice?
International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 14: 47-64.
Kutchinsky, B. (1987). Deception and propaganda. Society, 24 (5) : 21-24.
Kutchinsky, B. (1985). Pornography and its effects in Denmark and the United
States: A rejoinder and beyond. Comparative Social Research: An Annual, 8:
301-330.
Kutchinsky, B. (1970). Toward an explanation of the decrease in registered
sex crimes in Copenhagen. In U.S. commission on obscenity and pornography,
Technical Report, Vol. 8.
Lawrence, D. (1936). Pornography and so on. London: Faber and Faber.
Lazarsfeld, P., Berelson, B., and Gaudet, H. (1944). The People's choice.
New York: Duell, Sloan, and Pearce.
Levitt, E. (1969). Pornography: Some new perspectives on an old problem. The
Journal of Sex Research, 5: 247-259.
Linz, D. (1989). Exposure to sexually explicit materials and attitudes
towards rape. Journal of Sex Research, 26 (1): 50-84.
Linz, D., Donnerstein, E. and Penrod, S. (1988). The effects of long-term
exposure to violent and sexually degrading depictions of women. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 55: 758-768.
Linz, D. and Malamuth, N. (1993). Pornography. Newbury Park: Sage.
Lopez, P. and George, W. (1995). Men's enjoyment of explicit erotica. The
Journal of Sex Research, 32 (4) : 275-288.
Mackinnon, C. (1983). Pornography: A feminist perspective. Position paper
presented to the Minneapolis City Council.
Malamuth, N. (1978). Erotica, aggression and perceived appropriateness.
Paper presented at the 86th annual convention of the American Psychological
Association, Toronto, Canada.
Malamuth, N. and Check, J. (1985). The effects of aggressive pornography on
beliefs of rape myths: Individual differences. Journal of Research in
Personality, 19: 299-320.
Malamuth, N. and Check, J. (1980). Sexual arousal to rape and consenting
depictions: The importance of the woman's arousal. Journal of Abnormal
Psychology, 92, 55-67.
Malamuth, N. and Donnerstein, E. (Eds.), (1984). Pornography and sexual
aggression. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Malamuth, N. and Donnerstein, E. (1982). The effects of aggressive-
pornographic mass media stimuli. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in
experimental social psychology. (Vol. 15). New York: Academic Press.
Malamuth, N., Haber, S. and Feshbach, S. (1980). Testing hypotheses
regarding rape: Exposure to sexual violence, sex differences, and the
normality of rapists. Journal of Research in Personality, 14: 121-137.
Malamuth, N., Reisin, I. and Spinner, B. (1979). Exposure to pornography and
reactions to rape. Paper presented at the 87th annual convention of the
American Psychological Association, New York.
McCluhan, M. (1964). Understanding media: Extensions of man. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
McCombs, M. and Shaw, D. (1972). The Agenda-setting function of mass media.
Public Opinion Quarterly, 34: 159-170.
McDonald, D. (1997). Regulating sexually oriented businesses. Brigham Young
University Law Review, 339.
McNair, B. (1996). Mediated sex: Pornography and postmodern culture. New
York: Arnold.
Miller v. California. (1973). 413 U.S. 15, 24 .
Padgett, V. and Brislin-Slutz, J. (1987). Pornography, erotica and negative
attitudes towards women. Unpublished manuscript, Marshall University,
Huntington, West Virginia.
Pally, M. (1994). Sex and sensibility. Hopwell, NJ: Ecco Press.
Perse, E. (1994). Uses of erotica and acceptance of rape myths.
Communication Research, 21 (4) : 488-515.
Press, A. et al. (1985, March 18). The war against pornography. Newsweek,
pp. 58-66.
Przbyla, D. and Byrne, D. (1984). The mediating role of cognitive process in
self reported sexual arousal. Journal of Research in Personality, 18: 54-
63.
Russell, D. (1993). Making violence sexy: Feminist views on pornography. New
York: Teachers College Press.
Smith, B. (1988). Sappho was a right-off woman. In G. Chester and J. Dickey
(Eds.), Feminism and censorship: The current debate. London: Prism.
Steinem, G. (1978, November). Erotica and pornography: A clear and present
difference. Ms. .
Tedford, T. (1993). Freedom of speech in the United States. New York: McGraw
Hill.
U.S. Commission on Obscenity and Pornography. (1970). Report. Washington,
D.C. : U.S. Government Printing Office.
U.S. Department of Justice (1986). Attorney General's commission on
pornography. Vols. 1 and 2, Washington, D.C. : U.S. Government Printing
Office.
Winick, C. (1971). A study of consumers of explicitly sexual materials: Some
functions served by adult movies. Technical report of the commission on
obscenity and pornography, Vol. 4: 245-262.
Zillmann, D. and Bryant, J. (1989). Pornography: Research advances and
policy considerations. Hillside, NJ: Erlbaum.
Zillmann, D. and Bryant, J. (1982). Pornography, sexual callousness, and the
trivialization of rape. Journal of Communication, 32 (4) : 10-21.
Zuckerman, M. (1971). Physiological measures of sexual arousal in the human.
In Technical reports on the commission on obscenity and pornography. Vol. 1.
Washington, D.C. : U.S. Government Printing Office.