What I Have Learned From Academic Research

[apple_pathways]

As I might have mentioned, the topic of my research paper is how the proliferation of the internet has impacted people's sexuality and sexual behavior. In order to come up with research articles, I spent a lot of time searching various sex-related journals for use of the word "internet". (This was the best method I found; all attempts to narrow or focus my search ended with no results.) Since my search methods were less than precise, I've spent a lot of time browsing through unrelated journal articles. Combined with the research for my paper, I've learned a few things, namely:

• A LOT of scientists have studied the practice of condom-less sex among gay men. Seriously, during my research I thought about creating my own Research Paper Drinking Game where I would down a shot every time I came across the word "barebacking".
  
• "Autassassinophilia is a paraphilia (i.e. "fetish") in which a person is sexually aroused by the risk of being killed." I have no idea how to pronounce that.
  
• Social scientists REALLY enjoy coming up with cutesy article titles. Some of my favorite examples: “Signed, Sealed, Delivered ... I’m Yours”: Calibrating Body Ownership through the Consensual Mastery/slavery Dynamic; the elegantly simple Hey stud: Race, sex, and sports; and the enigmatic Silver 'porn bullet' for information technology industry?
  
• Studies regarding the use of pornography and other sexually explicit materials are still disturbingly biased toward male use.
  
• Apparently sex, and especially porn, is bad, yo. Not all of the research agrees, but man: it is difficult to find good, comprehensive research that focuses on normal, healthy, positive sexuality.
  

Comments

[jesterjoker.livejournal.com]

Whoa sex reading in academia. Fascinating. o_O

[ladylovelace.livejournal.com]

Have you ever tried http://sexisnottheenemy.tumblr.com/ for links to good, sex-positive academic writing? (ignore me if you have).

I begin to worry about the number of women going back to 'oh no, porn is disgusting and I won't have it' in public, actually. I imagine that the general social conception is that women still don't actually experience sexual arousal. Ever. And I will cut myself off here before it becomes a rant.

[flyingmachine.livejournal.com]

Aut-as-sas-sin-o-phil-i-a.....?

Haha, and I love article titles sometimes, with the standard "___:______." Other times, they're way too long, but they get your attention, yeah?

When I took a sex and sexuality course, we did a lot of reading from Sex Matters, which was a good compilation of positive sexuality articles.

[evilhippo.livejournal.com]

"Autassassinophilia" seems like exactly the sort of word the Sherlock kink meme would like. Maybe I'll go put it there...

I love the dorky titles academics stick on their articles. I like to laugh at them, but they're still effective in getting me to read the articles. What on earth is the silver "porn bullet", though? I understand the idea of a silver bullet for porn, but a "porn bullet?" What would a "porn bullet" be fired against?

This is totally outside my area of study, but I suspect a lot of sex- and porn-positive research hasn't been done (or is vastly outnumbered) because most of society still turns up its nose at anything that can be interpreted as pornography and, I suspect, there is more research funding provided by people who want to prove that porn is bad than there is by people who want to prove that it's not solely the domain of degenerates. I also have this impression that a lot of the gender studies-type thinking (things like "feminist filmmaking" and such, that focuses on media and expression through creative output) that's done on the subject of sexuality happens in entirely different circles than the psychological research (which is, I think, mostly averse to taking things like fiction into account). I don't know whether this impression is at all true, though, because I barely have my toe in the water on this stuff. (-;

[apple-pathways.livejournal.com]

plane_jane pointed me toward that Tumblr before (LOVE IT!), but I haven't come across any links to academic writing.

There is definitely sex-positive research out there, and I've analyzed some of it for my paper; it's just far outweighed by research focused on addictions, disorders, dysfunction, disease risk, etc.

My problem with the research being done about pornography use is that it focuses mainly on the types of porn men have been shown to prefer: hardcore images and videos, etc. Women are more likely to prefer written erotica, sex "chat", and images that are less genitally-focused and more sensual. When you don't include the types of porn that women like in your research, of course it looks like women don't like porn!

I have other issues, too, but you spared me from your rant, so I should return the favor and spare you from mine. ;) (Especially since I know it's just be preaching to the choir.)

[apple-pathways.livejournal.com]

When I was working on this post last night, I had to stop myself from copying and pasting almost EVERY article title I came across; especially since after 12:00 am and after spending the entire weekend reading academic sex research, I was becoming rather slap-happy. ;) There really are some funny ones out there, though; those were just the ones I happened to be browsing through at that moment.

Yes, I've used Sex Matters before; it's a good publication!

[apple-pathways.livejournal.com]

I need to spend more time on the Sherlock kink meme! (PLEASE do go put an autassassinophilia prompt up there! I think it's my new favorite word ever, and I would like to see its proliferation across the internets.)

I imagine "porn bullets" are what the riot squad use to disperse a Fred Phelps rally? I have no idea. I didn't read the article. If I didn't push down my curiosity, I would never get this paper done for all of the interesting (but irrelevant to my interests) research that jumps out at me.

Your observations are spot-on, I think: a lot of the "sex-positive" research I came across was done in the fields of Communications and Gender Studies, which tend to do more of the "thinking and analyzing" type of academic writing than the original research and scientific studies that the public and the media focus on. And you're right that sexually explicit "fiction" is often left out of psychological sex research, which goes back to the "researchers don't study the types of porn women like" problem I was discussing in my comment to ladylovelace.

Also, I am doing research into the Internet specifically, and its incorporation into popular and private sexuality. In terms of the glacial pace at which academic research moves, it's a relatively new phenomenon: a lot of the research I've come across was conducted in the early 2000s when the internet was certainly popular, but not to the degree it is now: about 30% of people at that time had an internet connection in their home. And researchers were still stuck in the "disease risk and prevention" trend of research from the 90s; hence all of the articles on barebacking and the risk of HIV transmission for men who find other men to have sex with through the internet.

All right, I need to stop writing my paper in the comments of my LJ! To the library! ;)

ETA: I was thinking about that 30% statistic I quoted, and it seemed high. It wasn't 30% of Americans who had internet access at homes, but 30% of teens in a particular study.

[roh-wyn.livejournal.com]

Studies regarding the use of pornography and other sexually explicit materials are still disturbingly biased toward male use.

I think this reflects a male-specific bias in academe generally, actually. I'm really no expert in the area of academic studies on sex or sexuality, but my feeling is the big names in the area are still repressed white men, and from that premise, you can draw the usual conclusions about females and pornography, I guess. *sigh*

Apparently sex, and especially porn, is bad, yo.

It's a wonder so much of it exists then. Obviously, the world is NOT listening. ;)

[apple-pathways.livejournal.com]

I feel like research into sexuality is where research into health was 30 years ago: scientists are studying men from a male perspective, and then extrapolating their research to women. When I was reading Bonk by Mary Roach, a recurring theme was how much is still not known about the basic biology of sex. It's amazing that in the 21st century sex is still such a taboo subject! (I know my classmates all think I'm a little weird for studying it; of course, they're mostly Criminologists.)

[alias-amy.livejournal.com]

Have you ever read Allan Brandt's No Magic Bullet? I'm sure venereal disease is not part of your study, but he's a fascinating and lucid writer.

What did you think of Bonk? I found much of it interesting, but it seemed like she struggled to find the balance between her narrative and her academic research. I felt like her editor kept prompting her to add more funny bits and more personal observations, when the subject matter alone was compelling enough.

[apple-pathways.livejournal.com]

Have you ever read Allan Brandt's No Magic Bullet?

No, I haven't, but: a history of venereal disease? Sounds right up my alley. ;)

I enjoyed Bonk, though there were definitely parts of it that have put me off sex forever.

As for the funny bits and her personal commentary, I feel like it's her trademark. Have you read any of her other books? In both Stiff and Spook I thought she did a good job of throwing in the odd wry observation; I find her dry humor very entertaining. However, in Bonk, she does seem to be reaching a little for the jokes; it does come across like she's trying too hard.

[alias-amy.livejournal.com]

I love Mary Roach -- in all seriousness, I would be her if I had the talent to write popularized science. I think writing about sex is a particular challenge though, since you're not quite as confident that the reader thinks the same way you do about it.

there were definitely parts of it that have put me off sex forever.</> hee! Honestly, I feel that way about some romance novels.

"Autassassinophilia" -- it's not supercalifragilisticexpialodocious, but it's close.