“all women are whores”: examining misogyny - WSU ...

“ALL WOMEN ARE WHORES”: EXAMINING MISOGYNY

WITHIN XVIDEOS.COM

By

AMBER LORRAINE MORCZEK

A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of

the requirements for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY

Department of Criminal Justice and Criminology

MAY 2018

© Copyright by AMBER LORRAINE MORCZEK, 2018

All Rights Reserved

ii

To the Faculty of Washington State University:

The members of the Committee appointed to examine the dissertation of AMBER

LORRAINE MORCZEK find it satisfactory and recommend that it be accepted.

Faith Lutze, Ph.D., Chair

David Makin, Ph.D.

Craig Hemmens, Ph.D.

iii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Dr. Lutze, Dr. Makin, and Dr. Hemmens: I cannot begin to adequately thank you for your

expertise, support, and speedy responses to anxiety-laden emails. I would not be half the scholar

I am today without your guidance and professional support. Thank you for helping me grow,

learn, and adapt as both a person and scholar.

Dad: Thank you for the many years of love, support, and guidance. I would not be the

person I am today if it was not for you.

Danny: Thank you for everything before, during, and after this process. I would have

quickly succumbed to dissertation-induced madness if it was not for your love, intellectual

prowess, and emotional labor.

Kristine: Thank you for being my best friend and confidant. By lending a wise, listening

ear and always being ready to escape with me into the great outdoors, you have helped me more

than you know.

Wendy: Thank you so much for making me feel like I’m not alone on the roller coaster of

emotion that is writing, editing, and defending a dissertation. You have been such an amazing

ally and support system throughout this process.

Dr. Patricia Murphy: Thank you for encouraging me to write and more importantly, to

never stop writing.

Last, but certainly not least, Plankton: Please know that you are my one and only

irreplaceable feline love. I will always be thankful for your cuddles, head boops, and purrs

throughout this process. I love you so very much and you mean the world to me.

iv

“ALL WOMEN ARE WHORES”: EXAMINING MISOGYNY

WITHIN XVIDEOS.COM

Abstract

by Amber Lorraine Morczek, Ph.D.

Washington State University

May 2018

Chair: Faith Lutze

Internet pornography has been the subject of much debate and scholarly research given its

empirical linkages to misogyny and sexual aggression. However, despite the wealth of research

available on pornographic content and attitudinal and behavioral changes post-consumption,

there is little in the way of insight into pornography consumption within pornographic hub

websites that amass large and diverse collections of pornography. Accordingly, this study

examines the use of misogynistic terminology associated with pornographic videos within one of

the largest and most popular pornographic hub websites in the world: XVideos.com. Adding to

the literature on pornography consumption and misogyny, this study uses publicly available

pornographic video metadata to assess how the presence of misogynistic terminology impacts

interactions with pornographic videos. Findings suggest that misogynistic terminology does

indeed impact interactions with pornographic videos within XVideos.com in a variety of ways

and across different types of pornography. This study lays the groundwork for future research on

pornography consumption within online spaces.

v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................................. iii

ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................... iv

LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................ vii

CHAPTER

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................1

CHAPTER TWO: VIOLENCE TOWARD WOMEN AND PORNOGRAPHY .............14

Explanations for and Expressions of Violence Against Women .................................14

Summary ......................................................................................................................45

CHAPTER THREE: EXPLORING PORN 2.0 .................................................................46

Web 2.0 ........................................................................................................................46

Porn 2.0 ........................................................................................................................48

Gaps in the Pornography Literature .............................................................................70

Summary ......................................................................................................................72

CHAPTER FOUR: METHODOLOGY AND RESULTS ................................................74

Research Setting...........................................................................................................74

Research Design...........................................................................................................75

Sampling ......................................................................................................................76

Measures ......................................................................................................................77

Analyses .......................................................................................................................79

Descriptive Statistics ....................................................................................................79

Research Question 1 ....................................................................................................83

vi




CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION ....................................................................................118

A Dearth of Misogynistic Terminology .....................................................................118

Misogyny and Pornographic Video Metadata ...........................................................120

Misogynistic Terminology and Pornographic Video Categories...............................121

Misogynistic Terminology and Pornographic Video Comments ..............................128

Limitations and Directions for Future Research ........................................................134

Summary ....................................................................................................................139

CHAPTER SIX: IMPLICATIONS AND CONCLUSION .............................................142

Implications................................................................................................................144

Conclusion .................................................................................................................150

REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................151

vii

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 4.1: ......................................................................................................................................75

Table 4.2: .......................................................................................................................................77

Table 4.3: .......................................................................................................................................80

Table 4.4: ......................................................................................................................................83

Table 4.5: .......................................................................................................................................84

Table 4.6: .......................................................................................................................................86

Table 4.7: ......................................................................................................................................87

Table 4.8: .......................................................................................................................................89

Table 4.9: .......................................................................................................................................90

Table 4.10: ....................................................................................................................................92

Table 4.11: .....................................................................................................................................93

Table 4.12: .....................................................................................................................................97

1

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

Commonly heralded as the bastion of free speech, the internet is an incredibly powerful

tool that provides an inordinate number of users with mass media, social interaction, and

entertainment. This proliferation of information and interaction via large online networks has

revolutionized the way that sociocultural messages are conveyed at a macro-level. Put another

way, the transmission of various culturally framed messages is occurring en masse on the

internet and the messaging therein has the potential to shape both attitudes and behaviors of

those who frequent online spaces. Accordingly, the proliferation of the internet and the mass

media available therein has created a range of means for scholars to analyze internet users, the

online social environments they inhabit, the content that they are seeking out, and the impact of

both the environments and interactions on attitudes and behaviors.

Thus, it is no wonder that research related to those who use and interact within online

spaces is increasing and evolving across disciplines, including: business (Ordenes, Ludwig,

Grewal, de Ruyter, & Wetzels, 2016), communications (Bowman, Lewis, & Tamborini, 2014;

Tyson, Elkhatib, Sastry, & Uhlig, 2015), computer science (Hossain, Hu, Feizi, White, Lou,

Kautz, 2016; Trestian, Xiao, & Kuzmanovic, 2013), journalism (Tenenboim & Cohen, 2013;

Reis, Benevenuto, Olmo, Prates, Kwak, & An, 2015), psychology (Black, Mezzina, &

Thompson, 2016), public health (McClellan, Ali, Mutter, Kroutil, & Landwehr, 2017), social

work (Patton, Hong, Ranney, Patel, Kelley, Eschmann, & Washington, 2014), sociology

(Anderson & Cermele, 2014), and criminal justice (Aiello, 2017). In harmony with this extensive

research across disciplines on internet behavior and its meaning within our current cultural

2

frameworks, research on mass media and more specifically, internet pornography, has become a

critical vein of scholarly inquiry.

Indeed, research suggests that every second over 28,000 people are consuming internet

pornography, 35% of all downloads are pornographic in nature, and that consumption is highly

gendered, with men accounting for the bulk of viewership (DeKeseredy, 2013, p. 122; Dines,

2010; Jeffreys, 2009). Moreover, mainstream internet pornography or that which is available to

consumers for free on pornographic hub websites wherein users freely upload, view, rate, and

comment upon pornographic videos, is vast, varied, and easily and anonymously accessible for

little to no cost to those with internet access. Accordingly, given the depth and breadth of

pornographic content and viewership found online and the potential for the content to influence

cultural norms and individual behaviors, there has been much research completed on the topic.

Previous research on internet pornography can be bifurcated into two broad categories.

The first examines the intricacies of pornographic content available for consumers and the

second examines the impact of pornographic content on those who consume it. While examining

the content of internet pornography, previous research consistently reveals that it is awash with

misogyny as well as both verbal and physical aggression; particularly that which is directed at

women and perpetrated by men (Bridges, Wosnitzer, Scharrer, Sun, & Liberman, 2010; Gorman,

Monk-Turner, & Fish, 2010; Salmon & Diamond, 2012; Jensen, 2010; Sun, Bridges, Wosnitzer,

Scharrer, & Liberman, 2008; Vannier, Currie, & O’Sullivan, 2014). Given the misogyny and

aggression inherent to much of internet pornography, other studies have analyzed the impact of

pornography consumption both the attitudes and behaviors of those who consume it (Baer,

Kohut, & Fisher, 2015; Braithwaite, Coulson, Keddington, & Fincham, 2015; Brosi, Foubert,

Bannon, & Yandell, 2011; Carroll, Padilla-Walker, Nelson, Olson, Barry, & Maden, 2008;

3

Foubert & Bridges, 2017; Hald, Malamuth, & Yuen, 2010; Kernsmith & Kernsmith, 2009;

Menaker & Franklin, 2018; Malamuth, Hald, Koss, 2012; Morgan, 2011; Peter & Valkenburg,

2016; Romito & Beltramini, 2015; Seto, Maric, & Barbaree, 2000; Wright & Randall, 2012;

Wright, Sun, Steffen & Tokunaga, 2014; Wright, Tokunga, & Kraus, 2015; Ybarra, Strasburger,

& Mitchell, 2014). Moreover, the impact of pornography consumption becomes particularly

meaningful in the field of criminal justice, as research suggests that it is associated with attitudes

and behaviors supportive of misogyny and gender-based violence. For example, previous

research has found that pornography consumption is associated with child sexual abuse (Hatch,

2012; Winters, & Jeglic, 2017), sex trafficking (Bouche, Farrell, & Wittmer, 2016; Hatch, 2012;

Jeffreys, 2009; Miller-Perrin & Wurtele, 2017), intimate partner violence (Bergen & Bogle,

2000; DeKeseredy & Hall-Sanchez, 2017; Jeffreys, 2009; Moreau, Boucher, Herbert, &

Lemelin, 2012), and sexual aggression in both adolescents (Mancini, Reckdenwald, &

Beauregard, 2012; Owens, Behun, Manning, & Reid, 2012; Peter & Valkenburg, 2016; Rothman

& Adhia, 2016; Rothman, Kaczmarsky, Burke, Jansen, & Baughman, 2014; Ybarra &

Thompson, 2017) and adults (Kernsmith & Kernsmith, 2009; Malamuth, Hald, & Koss, 2012;

Wright, Sun, Steffen, & Tokunaga, 2014; Wright, Tokunaga, & Kraus, 2015).

Indeed, the research connecting pornography to misogyny and violence – both in content

available to consumers and the impact on consumers - is vast. Some feminist scholars have even

suggested that pornography is one of the major misogynistic teaching tools that help educate men

about how to perpetrate sexual violence and that pornography has, more broadly, become the de

facto sexual education for many young people (DeKeseredy & Corsianos, 2016; Dines, 2005;

Flood, 2010; Jensen, 2007; Whisnant, 2010). Given that a) pornography is so popular and being

consumed by an inordinate amount of people, b) research indicates that internet pornography is

4

overwhelming misogynistic and serves to reinforce gender inequality, and c) consumption of

pornography is repeatedly associated with gender microaggression, misogyny and sexual

violence, it is incredibly important to find other ways and means to study pornography and the

ways in which consumers interact with it.

Yet, despite the overwhelming evidence that internet pornography is misogynistic,

contains violence toward women, and impacts those who consume it in harmful ways,

pornography research is often limited in its approach by often demarcating pornography as either

wholly regressive or wholly progressive, treating consumers as a homogenous group, and rarely

examining what specific types of pornography are associated with harmful outcomes. Indeed, the

reality of pornography consumption is inherently complex and varied and must be treated as such

within research. This viewpoint is akin to those taken by scholars who study prostitution and sex

trafficking. Take, for instance, Jeffreys (2009) research on globalized prostitution. Jeffreys

(2009) contends that while many tend to conceptualize "Johns" or those who buy sex, as a

homogenous group, the reality is that a difference exists between a person who visits agentic sex

workers and a person who knowingly consumes the nonconsensual labor of those being sex

trafficked while engaging in prostitution tourism (Jeffreys, 2009). Monto (2010) echoes this

sentiment and states that there is “no single or simple reason” why men choose to buy sex (p.

250). Much in the same way, there may be differences across consumers of pornography and

types of porn being consumed.

Therefore, more research is needed into how actual consumers are engaging with,

discussing, and using pornography of various orientations that extend beyond laboratory studies

(Donnerstein & Berkowitz, 1981; Goldstein, 1973; Kuhn & Gallinat, 2014; Langevin et al.,

1988; Malamuth & Ceniti, 1986; Marshall, 1988; Shim & Paul, 2014; Wilson, 2014), survey

5

data (Baer et al., 2015; Bergen & Boyle, 2000; Braithwaite et al., 2015; Brosi et al., 2011; Carr

& VanDeusen, 2004; Carroll et al., 2008; Foubert & Bridges, 2017; Hald & Malamuth, 2015;

Kernsmith & Kernsmith, 2009; McKimmie, Masser, & Bongiorno, 2014; Malamuth et al., 2012;

Moreau, Boucher, Herbert, & Lemelin, 2015; Morgan, 2011; Romito & Beltramini, 2015;

Thompson, Kingree, Zinzow, & Swartout, 2015; Vincent, Virden, & Amin, 2005; Wright &

Randall, 2012; Wright & Tokunaga, 2015; Wright et al., 2014; Ybarra & Thompson, 2017),

content analysis (Fritz & Paul, 2017; Gorman et al., 2010; Peters, Morrison, McDermott, Bishop,

& Kiss, 2013; Salmon & Diamond, 2012; Gossett & Bryne, 2002; , 2010; Sun, Bridges,

Wosnitzer, Scharrer, & Liberman, 2008; Vannier, Currie, & O’Sullivan, 2014), and internet

search interest (Makin & Morczek, 2015; Makin & Morczek, 2016; Walker, Makin, and

Morczek, 2016). Indeed, prolific pornography researchers DeKeseredy & Corsianos (2016)

states that researchers still need to address where “cyber porn subcultures” are located, what

content is being housed therein, and who is “lurking” in these spaces (p. 55).

Furthermore, research on the association between pornography and misogyny needs to

progress and expand because the way people interact with pornography is evolving in tandem

with technology. Online spaces harboring pornographic content are advancing to include, not

only pornographic imagery and videos but also social networking components wherein users can

independently generate and share pornographic content and interact with others within the same

website. Accordingly, in what Tyson et al. (2015) refer to as “Porn 2.0,” social networking

components are now seamlessly integrated into pornographic websites wherein users can now

easily upload, download, view, rate, and comment upon pornographic videos. According to

previous research on the relationship between pornography and violence toward women, these

6

social networking features within pornographic websites become especially meaningful, as they

can represent “tacit approval” for the gendered aggression (Makin & Morczek, 2015, p. 9).

Research needs to expand to examine such mechanisms of interaction. Thus, to take a

more nuanced approach to the study of pornography, this research will utilize an emerging data

source to study user interactions across different types of pornography on a pornographic

website. To my knowledge, there are only two studies examining different manifestations of user

interaction within pornographic websites. The first study examines the social networking

component of the website, Pornhub.com. Through an analysis of user-generated profiles on

Pornhub, researchers in this study assess how differences in consumer age and gender impact

behavior on the website (Tyson et al., 2015). In the second study, scholars examine pornographic

content and user behavior using metadata garnered from a selection of popular pornographic

websites. More specifically, this study examines user-generated views, ratings, and frequency of

comments on pornographic videos across various categories of pornographic content to assess

user behavior and content popularity (Trestian et al., 2013).

The latter study astutely builds upon the work of those researching social media more

broadly, as experts in the field have examined how users interact both across and within online

environments. For example, communications scholars have found that how users choose to title

the online content they upload or post greatly influences how other users interact with it –

regardless of the content contained therein (Lakkaraju, McAuley, & Leskovec, 2013). In other

words, acting as a gatekeeper, titles influence how consumers perceive and interact with online

content. Researchers in communications have also determined that the number of views on a

given online video is one means to assess its popularity with users and that users can provide

instantaneous feedback on online content such as videos by rating content (Wyrwoll, 2014). Put

7

another way, ratings are “opinions that can be contributed by just one click on a given scale”

(Wyrwoll, 2014, p. 4). These “one-click opinions” provide researchers with insight into how

users perceive the content without having to assess actual user-generated sentiment (Wyrwoll,

2014, p. 63).

More still, research has shown that users can also interact with online content by posting

comments and the amount of commentary on a given piece of content can be indicative of its

popularity with users (Wyrwoll, 2014). Research suggests that when users comment on websites

that require registration with even the most basic of demographic information to post comments,

it signifies the user is motivated to not only consume the content but interact with the content. In

other words, “platforms that require registration demand a higher degree of user motivation than

those allowing unregistered discussion” (Springer, Engelmann, Pfaffinger, 2015, p. 6). Indeed,

users make active choices about not only what content they wish to consume while online, but

also which content they would like to actively comment on. Sharing an opinion or something

otherwise personal in the form of internet commentary creates a sense of ownership in which the

user is much more invested in the online content (Chung & Yoo, 2008). Indeed, user-generated

internet comments are so potent that they have the potential to affect audience perceptions of the

medium on which the user is commenting (Ziegele, Breiner, & Quiring 2014). In fact, according

to Weber (2014), internet comments have the “ability to communicate collectively relevant

issues to large audiences and to facilitate the formation of public opinion” (p. 942). Some

researchers have even suggested that users act as the “secondary gatekeepers” for content

published online, as they assist in assessing the value of the content and behave in a pseudo-

editorial function determining “what is worthy and what is less so” (Singer, 2014, p. 56).

8

Yet, despite the aforementioned importance of studying user commentary within online

spaces and the insight such analyses can provide therein, to my knowledge, there is only two

peer-reviewed studies that examine consumer commentary in relation to pornographic videos.

First, providing an important contribution to the literature, Brennan (2017) examines

commentary on gay pornography within a popular gay pornography review website wherein

users gather to comment upon pornography they have viewed across a variety of genres and

online platforms. Accordingly, Brennan (2017) notes that while such research is in its infancy

regarding pornographic content, discourse about specific types of pornography is an incredibly

important means to understanding how pornographic content is interpreted by viewers. Second,

Pihlaja (2016) examines levels of community engagement within the pornographic website,

Pornhub.com, via a broad examination of pornographic video commentary from the top 100

most viewed videos on the website. Pihlaja (2016) offers his study as a means of assessing

whether pornographic video commentary on Pornhub is in any way similar to the types of

commentary commonly found on other, albeit not pornographic, video websites like YouTube.

At the conclusion of his study, Pihlaja (2016) notes that more research is needed on this topic, as

online commentary offers a means to examine user discourse in places where it is “naturally

occurring” (p. 109).

Thus, for the purposes of this study, I will expand upon the prior work of Trestian et al.

(2013), Tyson et al., (2015), Pihlaja (2016), and Brennan (2017) by analyzing publicly available

metadata associated with pornographic videos from the website, XVideos.com. In short,

XVideos is a free hosting service for pornographic videos wherein the pornographic videos (as

well as the information associated with them), can be viewed by anyone in the world without

log-in credentials or payment. Moreover, XVideos is unique in that it is one of the few

9

pornographic websites that allows anyone to download a comma-delineated file (CSV) file

containing metadata associated with the videos contained on the site at the time of download

without requiring any, again, log-in credentials or payment. The content available in this file

includes pornographic video titles, pornographic video categories, number of views on each

pornographic video, the number of ratings on each pornographic video, the percentage rating on

each video, and pornographic video comments.

Currently, XVideos.com is one of the most popular pornographic websites in the United

States garnering more than 100,000,000 unique visitors per day (XVideos.com, 2017). It is also,

at the time of writing, in the Top 50 of the most searched websites in both in the United States

and worldwide, ranked 34 and 45 respectively (Alexa.com, 2017). Thus, by capturing data from

a popular (and extensive) pornographic website like XVideos, the current study can readily

explore user interaction across various types of content by examining the terminology that is

associated with the pornographic content therein.

Accordingly, the terminology examined in this study is that which is misogynistic in

nature. Adams and Fuller (2006) define misogyny as the hatred of or disdain for women and an

“ideology that reduces women to objects for men’s ownership, use, and abuse” (p. 939).

Inextricably linked to patriarchal cultural norms and socialization processes (Koo, Stephens,

Lindgren, & George, 2012), misogyny is deeply entrenched in the sociocultural system of gender

inequality in which it flourishes and may take many forms – including the use of misogynistic

terminology. According to Adams and Fuller (2006), misogynistic terms “ultimately support,

justify, instill, and perpetuate ideas, values, beliefs, and stereotypes that debase women” (p. 940).

In other words, misogyny and the terminology associated with it both legitimize and support

systems of gender inequality and such prevailing cultural beliefs of gender inequality are often

10

used to justify and minimize violence toward women. Nielsen (2002) echoes this sentiment and

states that the mere use of misogynistic speech is a “harm in and of itself” because of “the role it

plays in creating and reinforcing systems of gender hierarchy in the public sphere” (p. 279).

Moreover, Croom (2013) notes that the use of what he denotes as “sexist slurs” supports the

dehumanization of women and inherently harms, not only those targeted, but women as a group -

contributing to inequitable power relations and oppression (p. 24). Moreover, Catalano and

Griffin (2016) state that commonly used misogynistic slurs like slut, bitch, and whore

"dehumanize girls and women, and reduce them to sexual objects for boys and men to evaluate,

ridicule, and conquer" (p. 200). Further, according to Jane (2014), by simply invoking and

sexualizing a woman's gender in the form of common misogynistic terminology is a well-

established strategy to keep the target in a subjugated position.

Thus, much like in the same way that racists terms like the n-word serves to demean,

dehumanize, and legitimize violence against African American people (Croom, 2013; Nielsen,

2002) and the f-word serves to demean, dehumanize, and legitimize violence against those in the

LGTBQ community (Croom, 2013; Kian, Clavio, Vincent, & Shaw, 2011), misogynistic terms

demean, dehumanize, and legitimize violence against women (Adams & Fuller, 2006; Kelly

1988). Moreover, it is important to note that while these gendered epithets tend to garner less

attention and condemnation than racial and homophobic slurs, they are no less important in

understanding how macro-level systems of oppression, inequality, and violence function within

our culture.

Therefore, much in the same way that one may study the use of racial epithets to study

racism and macro-level systems of racial inequality, gender scholars have examined the use of

misogynistic epithets to study misogyny and gender inequality. Previous research on

11

misogynistic terminology and its linkage to macro-level factors like gender inequality and the

cultural legitimization of violence, specifically toward women, has been used to assess lyrics in

music across genres (Adams & Fuller, 2006; Barongan & Hall, 1995; Cundiff, 2013; Herd, 2015;

Hunter & Soto, 2009; Ling & Dipolog-Urbanan, 2017; Weitzer & Kubrin, 2009), political

discourse (Cuen & Evers, 2016; Vasvari, 2013), and communications on social media (Anderson

& Cermele, 2014; Bartlett, Norrie, Patel, Rumpel, & Wibberly, 2014; Fulper, Ciampaglia,

Ferrara, Ahn, Flammini, Menczer, Lewis, & Rowe, 2014; Hardaker & McGlashan, 2016; Kian,

et al., 2011). Previous research has also addressed how misogynistic terms are used in men’s

perpetration of intimate partner violence (Anderson & Cermele, 2014; Wolfson, Palumbo, &

Lindgren, 2010) and online harassment, wherein men make explicit or implicit threats of

violence toward women (Hardaker & McGlashan, 2016; Jane 2017; Sobieraj, 2017).

Thus, examining misogynistic terms within online spaces and more specifically in online

spaces most frequently populated by men and containing pornography, is both necessary and

important. Lewis et al. (2016) agrees with this sentiment, arguing that research examining

“specific features of misogynistic communication” in online spaces needs to be “prioritized”

because a) there is a “glaring lack of gendered analysis of a phenomenon that is frequently

gendered” and b) such terminology has real-world consequences for women as a class (p. 2).

Indeed, these assertations are not unlike those commonly espoused by critical criminologists, as

critical criminologists have long studied the ways in which macro-level forces such as gender

inequality (Pazzani, 2007; Sanday, 1981) and the cultural legitimization of violence (Baron &

Strauss, 1989; Pazzani, 2007; Smith & Donnerstein, 1998) contribute to crime and more

specifically, gendered violence (DeKeseredy, 2015, p. 5; Makin & Morczek, 2015; Makin &

Morczek, 2017; Pazzani, 2007). Scholars must find new means and data sources to identify and

12

oppose sociocultural arrangements that contribute to the oppression of and violence against

women.

Accordingly, in addressing misogynistic terminology, previous research has denoted

certain pejorative words as inherently misogynistic and a review of the literature suggests that

the most commonly cited misogynistic terms include: bitch, whore, hoe (i.e. a slang term for the

word, whore), slut, cunt, and skank (Cuen & Evers, 2016; Jane, 2017). Scholars in the

aforementioned studies note that such words are often used by men to simultaneously sexualize,

objectify, undermine, disparage, and dehumanize women (Jane, 2014) and can easily be

described as “sexist slurs” (Croom, 2013), “misogynistic epithets” (Sobieraj, 2017), “gendered

slurs” (Allan, 2016), “gendered cyberhate” (Jane, 2017), “microassaults” (Sue, 2010),

“demeaning and derogatory comments” (Fasoli, Carnaghi, & Paladino, 2015) and/or

"articulations of misogynistic vitriol" (Jane, 2017, p. 2). The influence of misogynistic

terminology has become so palpable that Jane (2017) has even coined the term “rapeglish” to

highlight the terminology commonly used to degrade and attack women in online spaces (p. 36).

Therefore, for the purposes of this study and in line with previous scholarship, misogynistic

terminology is defined as the use of the following words: bitch, cunt, slut, whore, hoe, and skank.

The purpose of this study is to determine if misogynistic terminology impacts user

interaction with pornographic videos hosted on XVideos.com. By implementing a mixed

methods design that includes content analysis and a multi-phase quantitative component, the

study will have both the breadth and depth to answer the following research questions:

1. What is the relationship between the number of views, video ratings, and the number of

comments on pornographic videos and misogynistic terminology in video titles?

13

2. What is the relationship between the misogynistic terminology in video titles and

pornographic video category?

3. What is the relationship between the misogynistic terminology in video commentary and


4. What themes emerge in pornographic video commentary containing misogynistic

terminology?

Accordingly, to address the research questions in this study, Chapters two and three

include a comprehensive examination of the existing literature on misogyny, pornography, and

Porn 2.0. Chapter four presents the mixed methodology used in this inquiry as well as the results.

Chapter five includes a discussion of the findings, limitations of the current study, and avenues

for future research. The final chapter in this manuscript contains the implications of the current

study as well as the conclusion.

14

CHAPTER TWO

VIOLENCE TOWARD WOMEN AND PORNOGRAPHY

Critical criminology is a large collection of concepts and theories about crime and

deviance (DeKeseredy, 2015, p. 5). Within critical criminology, one unifying component is the

idea that unequal distributions of power and intersecting class, race, and gender relations serve as

major explanations of crime and deviance (DeKeseredy, 2015, p. 5). While there are many

variants of critical criminology, feminist criminology is most relevant to the current study given

its focus on the inequitable power relations between men and women and the manifestations of

said inequality in acts of gendered violence. In their foundational work, Feminism and

Criminology, Daly and Chesney-Lind (1988) discuss how, while feminist criminology is not a

monolith, it does broadly focus on the perpetration of men's violence toward women within the

patriarchy and how criminal justice scholarship needs to more effectively and meaningfully

confront such violence. More specifically, and in line with the current study, Daly and Chesney-

Lind (1988) state how feminist criminology have long been concerned with pornography and its

linkages to violence against women.

Explanations for and Expressions of Violence Against Women

Dissatisfied with how mainstream criminology issues of gender and gendered violence

from criminological analyses, feminist criminologists have long been actively involved in the

study of and struggle against gender inequality (and its intersections with racism and classism),

men’s violence toward women, and the relationship of each to prevailing cultural norms and

mass media representations of women (Burgess-Proctor, 2006; DeKeseredy, 2015; Renzetti,

2013). Referencing macro-level patriarchal norms wherein men dominate women and maintain

15

superior roles within the societal structure, feminist scholars (and critical criminologists more

generally) have supported the idea that structural gender inequality can ultimately help

criminologists explain sexual violence and that representations of that sexual violence are critical

to our collective understanding of how violence manifests (Brownmiller, 1975; DeKeseredy &

Corsianos, 2016; DeKeseredy, 2015; Renzetti, 2013, p. 13; Sanday, 1981).

Feminist literature on violence toward women has established there are many factors that

influence sexual violence. From individual level factors such as deviant sexual arousal (Abel,

Barlow, Blanchard, & Guild, 1977) and mental illness (Hocket et al., 2009) to macro-level

factors such as the proliferation of pornography (Brownmiller, 1975; Dworkin, 1981;

DeKeseredy & Corsianos, 2016), patriarchal gender inequality (Pazzani, 2007; Sanday, 1981),

cultural legitimization of violence (Baron & Straus, 1989; Icoz, 2005; Pazzani, 2007; Smith &

Donnerstein, 1998), and social disorganization (Baron & Straus, 1989; Pazzani, 2007),

explanations for violence against women and more specifically, sexual violence, are numerous

and varied. Yet, as noted by Makin and Morczek (2016), the interaction between macro-level

measurements has become “increasingly important” in both domestic and international research

on gender-based violence, especially concerning “displaying, promoting, and preserving” a

culture that actively or passively reinforces sexualized violence against women (p. 3).

Accordingly, macro-level factors, specifically patriarchal gender inequality, the cultural

legitimization of violence, and the proliferation of pornography an existing theoretical

framework to guide the study of pornography and violence toward women (Makin & Morczek,

2015).

Patriarchal Gender Inequality

16

Gender inequality is inherently connected to patriarchal values, norms, and institutions.

Patriarchy is the relationship between gender and power wherein men, to the detriment of

women, retain and feel entitled to power in cultural, social, political, sexual, and familial spheres

(Kelly, 1988). One means to exert this power and control and to reinforce inequality between the

sexes is to control of women’s sexuality and the perpetration of gendered violence in many

forms (Brownmiller, 19875; Kelly, 1988). Sexual violence perpetrated by men within patriarchy

occurs on a continuum and is defined as “any physical, visual, verbal, or sexual act” that is

experienced by women as individuals or as a group that limits women’s freedom and safety

(Kelly, 1988). In other words, sexual violence ranges from “the myriad forms of sexism women

encounter everyday” to the “all too frequent” rape and murder of women and girls (Kelly, 1988,

p. 97). Understanding gendered violence as existing along a continuum identifies how more

egregious forms of sexual violence (e.g. rape, sexual assault, and intrafamilial sexual violence)

“blend into” forms of sexual violence that are not purely physical (e.g. the use of derogatory

sexist language) (Kelly, 1988, p. 75). This continuum perspective highlights how all forms of

sexual violence are interwoven and inherently damaging for women and in relation to men’s

power over women. Thus, even seemingly slight behaviors like using sexist language are

intimately connected to other behaviors that are currently defined as crimes under the law (Kelly,

1988). As Kelly (1988) notes, defining sexual violence as that which is only deemed criminal by

law omits the plethora of male-perpetrated aggressions that do not currently fit neatly within a

predefined criminal statute (Kelly, 1988). In addition to this idea of sexual violence falling on a

continuum with patriarchal culture, feminist scholars have also noted how other culturally

defined attitudes and behavior impact women’s experiences of male violence.

17

Rape Culture: The Cultural Legitimization of Violence

Patriarchal power structures are inherently linked to gender inequality and numerous

expressions of sexual violence. This notion of patriarchal gender inequality is especially salient

within a rape culture. Reinforcing systems of gender inequality and patriarchal notions of

sexuality, a rape culture comprises the cultural norms, attitudes, and behaviors that normalize,

neutralize, justify, condone, and excuse gendered aggression in many forms (Buchwald, Fletcher,

& Roth, 2005; Harding, 2015; Makin & Morczek, 2016). While rape culture can manifest via the

hyper-sexualization and sexual objectification of women (Henry & Powell, 2016; Kelly 1988),

gender microaggression (Sue, 2010), the use of misogynistic terminology (Bou-Franch, 2016),

victim-blaming sentiments (Harding, 2015), adherence to rape myths (Jensen, 2011; Kelly,

1988), and lenient treatment for perpetrators of sexual violence (Flood & Pease, 2009), mass

media representations within a rape culture become particularly powerful at shaping how women

are represented and perceived at both the individual and societal level (Jensen, 2007). These

mass media influences within a rape culture can not only shape views on sexual violence toward

women but can also incentivize sexual violence; especially if these behaviors are socially

accepted and affirmed by one’s peers and wider culture (DeKeseredy, 2014; Makin & Morczek,

2016). In this sense, mass media and the language and imagery therein become a conduit for

both gender inequality and the legitimization of violence within the larger patriarchal culture;

affirming that women are inferior to men and that any aggression that is perpetrated against them

is natural, legitimate, and unproblematic (Kelly, 1988). This cultural legitimization of violence

within a rape culture has been explained as a combination of exposure to gendered violence via

mass media outlets and the function of such exposure to not only legitimize violence but

18

“desensitize users to the use and experience of violence” (Mullins & Young, 2012, p. 5). When

women are routinely constructed as sexual objects who warrant male aggression, it serves to

desensitize those who are consuming mass media to the harmful representations of women

therein effectively resulting in the normalization and legitimization of gender violence. Of

course, this cultural legitimization of violence within a rape culture extends to the internet

wherein there are degrading representations of women within mass media and more specifically,

pornographic content (Herring, 2002). Yet, before exploring the research on pornography more

specifically, we must first assess the other ways gender inequality is expressed as

microaggressions.

Expressions of Violence Against Women Through Microaggressions

In direct relevance to this study and couched within this discussion of patriarchal gender

inequality and rape culture, is the study of microaggression. Microaggression is defined as “the

everyday verbal, nonverbal, and environmental slights, snubs, or insults, whether intentional or

unintentional, which communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative messages to target persons

based solely upon their marginalized group membership” (Sue, 2010, p. 3). Any marginalized

group within a given society can become a target of microaggression including people of color,

women, and those who identify as LGTBQ. Moreover, these microaggressions can intersect with

one another to produce different variations of oppression given intersecting group membership

(Sue, 2010, p. 3). Regardless of what marginalized group is the target, microaggressions are

socially constructed acts that invalidate and demean their targets on both an individual level and

macro-level and communicate that members of oppressed groups are inferior to dominant groups

(Sue, 2010, p. 3). Therefore, microaggressions are a way for dominant groups to consciously or

19

unconsciously reaffirm that inequality is wholly legitimate and natural, and taken collectively,

microaggressions result in oppressed groups being marginalized within larger society all while

receiving unequal and unjust treatment compared to more dominant groups (Sue, 2010).

According to Sue (2010), microaggressions can be differentiated from other forms of

subtle sexism as they manifest in three ways: microassaults, microinsults, and

microinvalidations. Microassaults are often conscious biases that are intentionally expressed

toward a marginalized person or a marginalized group (Sue, 2010). A microassault can include a

member of a dominant group making explicit derogatory remarks about or to an oppressed group

such as using racial, homophobic, and/or misogynistic slurs (Sue, 2010). In the case of

microassaults, both oppression and aggression are inflicted by and negotiated using hostile,

inflammatory, and hateful language (Bou-Franch, 2016).

Microinsults differ slightly from microassaults in that they are likely “outside the level of

conscious awareness of the perpetrator” and manifest as either verbal or nonverbal interpersonal

interactions or “environmental cues” that demean oppressed groups and convey negative

messages about women (Capaodilupo, Nadal, Corman, Hamit, Lyons, & Weinberg, 2010; Sue,

2010, p. 9). For example, in her research on microaggressions and microinsults more

specifically, Sue (2010) states that the glorification of internet pornography is one way that

microinsults can manifest given that it serves an environmental indicator of inequality wherein

men are constructed as having the right to sexualize women (Sue, 2010). More specifically, men

who utilize pornography and glorify its existence are contributing to the sexual objectification of

women, communicating that women’s bodies are not their own, and relegating women to exist as

sexual beings who exist to “service the sexual fantasies of men” (Sue, 2010, p. 10). Indeed, when

20

considering microinsults as it manifests in pornography, the female body becomes a conduit for

men's sexual gratification in both physical and online spaces (Henry & Powell, 2015, p. 768) and

the danger lies not in sex itself, but rather this “particular conception of sex in patriarchy” that is

mediated through pornography (Jensen, 2007, p. 16). In this way, Capaodilupo et al. (2010)

suggest, “men may feel authorized or supported in their objectifying and demeaning behaviors

because they are being reinforced by popular media” (p. 208). Both microassaults and

microinsults become particularly relevant for this study given their manifestations within and

relationships to the world of online pornography.

The last type of microaggression is microinvalidations. Microinvalidations “directly

attack or deny the experiential realities of socially devalued groups” by excluding, negating, or

nullifying the beliefs and experiences of marginalized peoples or groups (Sue, 2010, p. 10). For

example, stating that one is “colorblind” or otherwise does not see color is one manifestation of a

racial microinvalidation, as it denies the privilege inherent to being in the dominant groups or in

this case, being white (Sue, 2010, p. 11). Another example of microinvalidations is the overt

denial of women’s experiences of men’s violence, as it repudiates how impactful and

problematic men’s violence is within our culture (Kelly, 1988). Taken both collectively and

individually, microaggressions in their varying forms serve to harm historically oppressed groups

of people and undermine their worth and importance within a larger society, often to the benefit

of more dominant groups (Sue, 2010).

While any oppressed group can be subject to microaggressions, racial microaggressions

were first to garner significant scholarly focus (Sue, 2010; Tynes, Rose, & Markoe, 2013;

Williams, Oliver, Aumer, & Meyers, 2016). Of interest to the current study are the ways

21

microaggressions are used within online spaces and the impact of such usage within these spaces

and beyond. The first study to examine microaggressions with online spaces and social

networking websites was conducted by Tynes and Markoe (2010). In their analysis of racial

microaggressions, Tynes and Markoe (2010) examined the differences between how African

American college students and White college students responded to racially insensitive imagery

found on Facebook and MySpace. The researchers found that those in the dominant group (i.e.

White college students) were more likely than African American students to “condone and even

encourage” racial microaggressions within online spaces; going as far as to laugh at the racially

insensitive images they were shown and to affirm the imagery therein for other users via the use

of positive comments beneath the imagery (Tynes & Markoe, 2010, p. 1). This study was the

first to truly highlight how microaggressive images and the associated affirmations of these

images can both flourish and linger within online spaces. These microaggressions may be more

impactful due to how many people are able to view the rhetoric and affirmations over extended

periods of time. The study found that the mere posting of microaggressive imagery within an

online space represented an indirect way to express derogatory views about people of color and

the comments upon that imagery was another means to reaffirm, approve of, and justify those

derogatory views (Tynes & Markoe, 2010).

Another study to address racial microaggression within online spaces includes one that

examines racial climates on college campuses and more specifically how online environments

laden with racial microaggressions can impact those climates. Tynes et al. (2013) found that

many microaggressions experienced by people of color are taking place on social networking

websites and that microaggressions can migrate offline to impact the climate within physical

22

spaces like college campuses. Tynes et al. (2013) report that the permeation of microaggressions

from online spaces onto colleges campuses are creating environments wherein oppressed groups

feel decidedly unsafe, unwelcome, and marginalized from dominant groups. The manifestations

of microaggressions via text, images, video, and commentary appearing within social networking

websites substantially contribute to negative climates for racial minorities both online and in

physical spaces and enhance feelings of marginalization and oppression. Therefore,

microaggressions are problematic both within online and offline spaces and contribute to

changes in how oppressed groups feel and are perceived by the dominant group (Tynes et al.,

2013).

Building on the work of Tynes and Markoe (2010) and Tynes et al., (2013), Williams,

Oliver, Aumer, & Meyers (2016) also examined the impact of racial microaggressions in online

spaces specifically related to internet memes. Their findings suggest that negative representations

of people of color via the use of racial derogatory internet memes represented an indirect way to

harm racial minorities and that those who post derogatory images were more likely to condone

online discrimination of racial minorities and affirm others who posted racially microaggressive

imagery (Williams et al., 2016). While posting online content that disparaged oppressed groups

represented an indirect harm to the oppressed groups themselves, it remained incredibly

impactful, as it resulted in others both condoning and affirming discriminatory messages

(Williams et al., 2016). Moreover, given that microaggressions were taking place within online

environments, the microaggressions acted as “artifacts” of oppression and inequality that could

potentially remain online “in perpetuity,” and have the potential to be witnessed by an inordinate

number of people, markedly extending their reach and impact (Tynes et al., 2013, p. 111).

23

Microaggressions that take place online can not only harm their targets (e.g. members of the

oppressed group) but also shape how others who bear witness to the microaggressions feel about

oppressed peoples (Tynes, et al, 2013).

Studies of racial microaggressions in online spaces highlight that microaggressions are

not only a problem on the internet but have real-world implications for how targeted groups feel

and are perceived. Moreover, these studies show that microaggressions within online spaces can

serve to legitimize and normalize the oppressed groups inferior status given the affirmatory

feedback mechanisms therein. This research is especially salient for the current study, as it

confirms that online spaces play a fundamental role in how oppressed groups are perceived and

how those in dominant groups navigate online spaces in ways that reaffirm their cultural

superiority.

Gender Microaggression

While studies of microaggressions are originally couched within conversations about

race, any marginalized group can become a target of microaggressions. Women, given their

institutionalized inferior status within patriarchal norms, are often the targets of

microaggressions perpetrated by men as members of the dominant group. Accordingly, gender

microaggressions are a form of systemic sexism that oppresses and demeans women -

reinforcing their subordinate place within society (Huber & Solorzano, 2014; Sapodilla, Nadal,

Corman, Hamit, Lyons, & Weinberg, 2010). Gender microaggression also “communicate hostile,

derogatory, or negative sexist slights and insults toward women,” and like racial

microaggressions, analysis of gender microaggression is useful in describing the ways in which

sexism and gender inequality flourishes within a larger culture (Capodilupo, 2010; Sue, 2010, p.

24

3). Scholars also note that gender microaggressions are harmful because of the “cultural

meaning” they activate and the cumulative nature of their usage shape how women are viewed

on a cultural level (Gartner & Sterzing, 2016, p. 496).

Acting as reflections of a worldview wherein women are inferior compared to men,

gender microaggressions in their many manifestations serve to keep women in the subordinate

place within society and may even serve to legitimize violence against them (Sue, 2010). For

example, in their groundbreaking work on youth sexual violence, Gartner and Sterzing (2016)

use gender microaggressions to examine youth-perpetrated sexual harassment and sexual assault.

Findings from their analysis indicate that gender microaggressions serve as a potential “gateway

mechanism” to the perpetration of real-world sexual harassment and sexual violence (Gartner &

Sterzing, 2016, p. 491). While gender microaggressions may appear subtle and less harmful than

more overt and physical forms of misogyny and violence, gender microaggressions are not any

less responsible for reinforcing harmful gender power differentials that result in both sexual

harassment and sexual violence (Gartner & Sterzing, 2016). Indeed, Gartner and Sterzing (2016)

even go as far to place gender microaggression on their newly developed continuum of sexual

violence that begins with gender microaggressions and sexual harassment and ends with legally

actionable sexual offenses (p. 498). This research is incredibly important within the context of

the current study and beyond, as it highlights how gender microaggressions may serve to create

and sustain environments wherein gender inequality and sexual violence toward women is both

normalized and condoned; potentially escalating and evolving over time to manifest in embodied

forms of violence (Gartner & Sterzing, 2016).

25

Given the relationship between oppression and aggression, research on gender

microaggressions has also extended into criminal justice scholarship, with researchers examining

how gender microaggression relates to pornography (Makin & Morczek, 2015). In their study of

Google search interest for rape-oriented pornography, Makin and Morczek (2015) argue that

gender microaggression can manifest in two ways in relation to pornography. First, in reference

to Sue’s (2010) earlier assertion that the glorification of pornography serves as a

microaggression toward women, Makin and Morczek (2015) argue that pornographic websites

are “repositories for gendered aggression” given the propensity of such websites to contain

representations of women that are both sexually objectifying and laden with highly gendered

sexual violence (p. 10). Second, citing the previous work of Tynes et al (2013) on racial

microaggressions in online spaces, the authors also assert that gender microaggression can

manifest via user interaction within pornographic websites through not only viewing

pornography but by the act of rating and commenting upon pornographic videos (Makin &

Morczek, 2015). In other words, gender microaggression occurs through the consumer

interaction within pornographic websites via the “tacit approval” for the sexually objectifying,

misogynistic, and violent content therein (Makin & Morczek, 2015, p. 9). In this case, the

authors found that user interaction on pornographic websites is merely a vehicle for users to

create and reinforce systems of gender inequality and to normalize violence, much like how

racialized imagery online serves to reinforce and legitimize racism and aggression toward people

of color therein (Makin & Morczek, 2015; Tynes et al., 2013). Thus, pornography serves as a

“proxy measurement” of gender inequality and the cultural legitimization of violence given the

interest in said content and the representations of women within (Makin & Morczek, 2015, p. 9).

Like the research on racialized imagery in online spaces, pornography becomes incredibly

26

important given the extensive exposure such messaging has wherein consumers can substantiate,

encourage, and condone other users’ interest in internet-based pornographic materials laden with

violence against women via views, likes, and comments (Mowlabocus, 2010).

Previous research on the manifestations of gender microaggression become important

within the context of the current study of internet pornography in four distinct ways. First,

gender microaggressions serve as reinforcement mechanisms for patriarchal gender inequality

and legitimate violence against women (Morczek & Makin, 2015; Sue, 2010). Second, via the

manifestation of gender microaggression existing within verbal, misogynistic terms or

microassaults against women (Sue, 2010). Third, how gender microaggression can manifest and

flourish within specific environments and the impact such microaggressions have on reinforcing

gender inequality and oppression on a macro-level (Gartner & Sterzing, 2016; Makin &

Morczek, 2015). Fourth, and perhaps most importantly, the potential for microaggressions to

become “gateway mechanisms” or “environmental antecedents” to sexual violence in real-world

settings (Gartner & Sterzing, 2016, p. 495).

Microassaults and Misogynistic Terminology

Gender inequality, patriarchal norms, and gender microaggressions serve as the backdrop

and catalyst for violence against women in its many manifestations. While gender

microaggressions can be expressed both verbally and visually, microassaults through the use of

misogynistic terminology to describe women are especially important (Capodilupo, 2010, p.

197). Microassaults are harmful to women on an individual level, but also illustrate the macro-

level societal perceptions of women and the worldview of those using misogynistic

microassaults. The use of such language not only serves as a form of gender microaggression but

27

is an important means of construction for “gender identities and for the negotiation of social

hierarchies” (Anderson & Cermele, 2014, p. 277). Thus, it is no surprise that microassaults

directed at women and misogyny are interconnected and interrelated to race, class, and sexual

orientation (Sue, 2010).

Misogyny has been defined as the hatred of women that manifests in the hyper-

sexualization, objectification, dehumanization, debasement, and legitimization of violence

against women both as individuals and as a class (Adam & Fuller, 2006; Koo et al., 2012).

Misogyny does not occur in isolation, but is rather, deeply embedded within inequitable

patriarchal norms of the “larger social, cultural, and economic system that sustains and

perpetuates the ideology” (Adams & Fuller, 2006, p. 941). Deeply embedded within current

cultural frameworks that legitimize sexual violence (Makin & Morczek, 2015), misogynistic

beliefs have been linked to rape-supportive attitudes (Shotland, 1985) as well as sexual violence

(Malamuth, Linz, Heavey, Barnes, & Acker, 1995). While misogyny can be espoused in many

ways, one simple way to recognize misogynistic views is via the use of gender microassaults or

what will now be referred to as misogynistic terminology. Misogynistic terminology is used to

“tear down, insult, and denigrate” women based on their gender and can be easily identified

using “linguistic markers” or specific words that espouse hateful and discriminatory opinions of

women that place men in superior positions in a binary (Anderson & Cermele, 2014, p. 280).

Such terminology, much like racial or homophobic slurs, a) disparages women as a class, b)

devalues women’s existence and experiences, and c) perpetuates the idea that women are of

lower status than men (Murnen, 2000). Indeed, the use of misogynistic terminology is an

important area of scholarly inquiry, as it is directly reflective of gender inequality; acting as

28

“societal propaganda” that blatantly communicates the messenger’s views on women while

simultaneously reflecting the cultural norms and power relations from which it emanates

(Murnen, 2000, p. 319; Santaemilia & Maruenda, 2016).

Accordingly, numerous studies have examined the use of misogynistic terminology and

its relationship to violence toward women. Misogynistic terminology has been studied across

musical genres (Adams & Fuller, 2006; Barongan & Hall, 1995; Herd, 2015; Hunter & Soto,

2009; Ling & Dipolog-Urbanan, 2017; Weitzer & Kubrin, 2009), as well as within political

discourse (Cuen & Evers, 2016; Vasvari, 2013), social media communications (Anderson &

Cermele, 2014; Bartlett, Norrie, Patel, Rumpel, & Wibberly, 2014; Fluper, Ciampaglia, Ferrara,

Ahn, Flammini, Menczer, Lewis, & Rowe, 2014; Hardaker & McGlashan, 2016; Kian et al.,

2011) and within the field of criminal justice (Anderson & Cermele, 2014; Hardaker and

McGlashan, 2015; Jane 2017; Sobieraj, 2017; Wolfson, Palumbo, & Lindgren, 2010). This

research has found that misogynistic language is a) a decidedly effective mechanism to exert and

reaffirm power and control over women, b) tactically employed to “attack, denigrate, and harm

the target” while allowing the perpetrator to reaffirm their dominant position (Anderson &

Cermele, 2014, p. 278), and c) allows men who use misogynistic terms to coalesce around these

interactions affirming one another’s positions of power and women’s inferior status (Messner,

2005, p. 41).

Not only has research shown that misogynistic terminology is inherently harmful given

its linkages to gender inequality and harmful representations of women, previous research has

suggested that the use of misogynistic terminology is directly linked to violence toward women.

For example, in their analysis of civil protection orders for victims of intimate partner violence,

29

Anderson and Cermele (2014) found that men who perpetrate intimate partner violence used

misogynistic terms like “bitch,” “whore,” “slut,” and “cunt” to verbally abuse their current and

former partners (p. 285). The authors theorize that perpetrators of intimate partner violence

strategically use misogynistic language to aggressively reinforce gender hierarchies within their

relationships and to keep women within these heterosexual partnerships “in their place”

(Anderson & Cermele, 2014). The examination of the relationship between misogynistic

terminology and violence toward women has also extended to online spaces. In their study of

misogyny on Twitter, Hardaker and McGlashan (2016) found that misogynistic slurs like “bitch”

and “slut” are often used by men who make rape threats toward women online. Lastly, and

perhaps most meaningfully, a recent study examining the use of misogynistic terminology on

Twitter found that “the use of misogynistic language on social media is correlated with higher

number of rapes per capita” at the state level (Fulper, Ciampaglia, Ferrara, Ahn, Flammini,

Menczer, & Rowe, 2014, p. 3). Accordingly, Fulper et al., (2014, p. 3) conclude that “tracking

language on social media and other public arenas on the internet could thus provide an

alternative source of information about the level of sexual violence in the population.” Fulper et

al. (2014) further conclude that misogynistic language usage in online spaces may serve as a

“useful signal” to “identify rapetolerant cultures” and occurrences of sexual violence in offline

settings (p. 3).

These prior studies show how misogynistic language tends to not only supplement but

reinforce overt forms of gender inequality and violence toward women. Indeed, the

manifestations of misogyny via language has become so palpable and harmful, especially within

online spaces, that some researchers have referred to it as “gender intimidation” (Murnen, 2000),

30

“e-bile” (Jane, 2015), “cyber violence” (Herring, 2002), and “toxic technocultures” (Massanari,

2015). Regardless of the name used to describe misogynistic discourse, it is clear that it not only

sustains and reinforces but also compliments more traditional forms of aggression perpetrated by

men against women.

According to previous research across disciplines, misogynistic terminology can best be

defined as using the following terms: bitch (Adams & Fuller, 2006; Allan, 2016; Anderson &

Cermele, 2014; Croom, 2013; Cuen & Evers, 2016; Fasoli et al., 2015; Galinsky et al., 2013;

Hardaker & McGlashan, 2015; Hunter & Soto, 2009; Jane, 2017; Kian et al., 2011; Lewis,

Rowe, and Wiper, 2016; Ling & Dipolog-Urbanan, 2017; Sue, 2010; Sobieraj, 2017; Vasvari,

2013; Weitzer & Kubrin, 2009), whore (Bartlett et al., 2014; Cuen & Evers, 2016; Jane, 2014;

Jane 2017; Lewis et al., 2016; Mantilla, 2013; Salter, 2017; Weitzer & Kubrin, 2009), hoe (i.e. a

slang term for the word, whore) (Adams & Fuller, 2006; Allan, 2016; Galinsky et al., 2013;

Hunter et al., 2009; Jane, 2017; Kian et al., 2011; Ling & Dipolog-Urbanan, 2017; Vasvari,

2013; Weitzer & Kubrin, 2009), slut (Adams & Fuller, 2006; Allan, 2016; Bartlett et al., 2014;

Croom, 2013; Cuen & Evers, 2016; Fasoli et al., 2015; Galinsky et al., 2013; Jane, 2014; Jane,

2017; Kian et al., 2011; Lewis et al., 2016; Mantilla, 2013; Salter, 2017; Sue, 2010; Vasvari,

2013; Weitzer & Kubrin, 2009), cunt (Allan, 2016; Anderson & Cermele, 2014; Caputi, 2004;

Cuen & Evers, 2016; Fasoli, 2015; Hardaker & McGlashan, 2015; Jane 2017; Lewis et al., 2016;

Mantilla, 2013; Sobieraj, 2017; Vasvari, 2013), and skank (Cuen & Evers, 2016; Jane 2017).

These terms are highly gendered and most commonly directed at women by men in offline and

online spaces to degrade women or other men who are not abiding by the rules of normative

masculinity (Fasoli et al., 2015). Yet, each of these misogynistic terms demeans and

31

dehumanizes women in slightly different ways. The first term, bitch, is literally defined as a

“female dog” and is a common slur directed at women that is both hostile and disparaging (Ling

& Dipolog-Urbanan, 2017). Other misogynistic terms like, slut, whore, hoe, and skank are used

to demean women sexually; referencing and demeaning women for their presumed or implied

sexual promiscuity and in accordance, deviation from patriarchal notions of female sexuality

(Fasoli et al., 2015; Jane, 2014; Weitzer & Kubin, 2009). Lastly, the word cunt, perhaps one of

the most abhorrent of the gendered slurs, is a term used to both abuse and sexualize women as

well as to pejoratively describe the vagina (Allan, 2016). In sum, misogyny and more

specifically, the use of misogynistic terminology, is linked to a broader culture that normalizes

and legitimizes violence toward women and reinforces gender inequality. While these words do

not garner the same social stigma as racial epithets or homophobic slurs, misogynistic

terminology nevertheless serves to delegitimize the status of women in our culture and to

legitimize violence against women as a class. This persists regardless of whether the terms are

directed at a specific person or more diffuse; speaking about women rather than to women.

While prior research on microaggressions and misogynistic language can provide insight

into how gender inequality manifests and relates to violence toward women within our culture,

feminist criminologists also cite pornography as a clear expression of violence against women:

pornography (MacKinnon, 1989). The impact of pornography consumption on both attitudes and

behaviors conducive to gender inequality, misogyny, and violence toward women has been

researched extensively.

Pornography

32

Although pornography in varying forms has existed for centuries, it has not always been

an immensely profitable pursuit with ties to a vast corporate-capitalist industry (DeKeseredy,

2015; Dines, 2010; Jensen, 2007). Playboy, Hugh Hefner’s 1950’s creation, was arguably the

first notable industrialized pornographic endeavor reaching national and international fame

(Dines, 2010). Of course, other pornographic materials of varying levels of explicitness

followed Playboy’s success, but it was the internet that truly revolutionized modern pornography

production, distribution, viewership, and cultural visibility (Comella, 2010; DeKeseredy, 2014;

Dines, 2010; Weitzer, 2010). In fact, recent statistics indicate that there are currently 4.2 million

pornographic websites available for consumers with some of the most popular, like

XVideos.com, amassing over 100,000,000 unique visitors in a single day (XVideos.com, 2017).

Indeed, pornography is so popular globally that revenues from various types of pornographic

endeavors recently reached over $97 billion amassing “more financial capital than Microsoft,

Google, Amazon, eBay, Yahoo!, Apple, Netflix, and EarthLink combined” (DeKeseredy, 2013;

DeKeseredy, 2014, p. 189).

Accordingly, given how many people have access to the internet, internet pornography is

reaching millions of consumers and that number is steadily increasing, including men, who are

the most common consumers of pornographic content online (Antevska & Gamey, 2015; Bridges

& Jensen, 2011; DeKeseredy & Corsianos, 2016; Flood, 2010; Jensen, 2007; Jensen, 2010;

Tyson, Elkhatib, Sastry, & Uhlig, 2015; Whisnant, 2010). Research shows one study found that

92.2% of men had watched pornography in the past 6 months and 63.4% had watched

pornography within the last week (DeKeseredy & Corsianos, 2016). More evidence of the

growth and reach of pornography is the proliferation of user-friendly and highly interactive

33

pornographic websites that were modeled after the video-sharing website, YouTube

(DeKeseredy, 2015). Launched in the mid-2000’s and revolutionizing the way pornography is

both produced, distributed, and consumed, these websites are massive internet repositories for

user-generated pornographic content that is easily searchable, free, and customizable

(DeKeseredy, 2014; Makin & Morczek, 2015). While these emerging pornographic behemoths

will be discussed in the next chapter, it is fair to say that interactive pornographic websites such

as these are one of the primary ways that consumers seek out, view, and interact with

pornography today.

Not only is this content incredibly popular, but previous research indicates that

pornography is both an explanation for as well as a manifestation of violence against women.

The idea that mass media can legitimize violence and espouse expressions of gender inequality

becomes important within the context of pornography, as the overwhelming majority of

pornography depicts women (apart from that which is marketed to homosexual audiences)

(Herring, 2002) and the overwhelming majority of consumers of that pornography are men

(DeKeseredy & Corsianos, 2016). Some scholars have even proposed that the gendered nature of

pornography acts as “societal propaganda” reinforcing inequality between the sexes, defining

women as sexual objects for men’s consumption, and normalizing men’s perpetration of sexual

violence (Murnen, 2000, p. 319). Indeed, this sentiment is supported by recent literature that

shows young people construct their gender identities and notions about sexuality in relation to

pornography (Attwood, Smith, & Barker, 2018; Scarcelli, 2015). Thus, pornography becomes

rape culture propaganda – both espousing and reinforcing harmful and misogynistic views on

gender and sexuality, and normalizing violence toward women (Jensen, 2007). This

“propaganda” is especially significant given that millions of people both consume and interact

34

with internet pornography as well as other, like-minded and affirmatory consumers within

pornographic websites. These gendered pornographic representations via words, images, and/or

video reinforces disrespectful, objectifying, and misogynistic cultural attitudes toward women

(Herring, 2002, p. 190). Of course, harm, in this sense at least, may not be embodied or directed

at a specific target, but rather is diffuse and indirect; shaping and reshaping how women are

viewed on a macro-level (Henry & Powell, 2015; Herring, 2002). Relatedly, pornography is also

of particular interest to criminologists given its “documented connections” with sexual violence,

prostitution, and the global sex trafficking of women” which supplies a “steady stream” of

female bodies to both producers and consumers (Dines, 2005, p. 107).

Given the massive scale and reach of the pornography industry and the representations of

women therein, DeKeseredy (2015, p. 14) denotes that “the time is now” for critical

criminologists and feminist scholars to examine the confluence between broader macro-level

forces and consumer behavior when studying pornography and to ground such scholarship in

theories of gender inequality and the cultural legitimization of violence. Moreover, much like

how cultural criminologists study how media representations shape public perceptions of social

problems and reflect unequal social relations, scholarship on pornography must be cognizant of

how gender inequality is both portrayed within pornography and mirrored by pornography

consumers all while remaining conscious of the emerging technologies where these interactions

are taking place (DeKeseredy, 2015). These culturally constructed messages become an

important means to study gender inequality and how inequality manifests within online spaces

(Garlick, 2010). Ergo, the massive proliferation of the internet, sexist mass media, and

misogynistic spaces therein “might be causing corrupt preferences to influence and strengthen

35

men’s patriarchal beliefs, attitudes, and treatment of women” (DeKeseredy & Olsson, 2011, p.

43).

Indeed, pornography becomes a particularly valuable area of study as it relates to

violence against women as it is a) an incredibly popular and easily accessible via the internet

(Makin & Morczek, 2016), b) linked to sexual objectification of women (Kelly, 1998) and

gender microaggressions (Makin & Morczek, 2015; Sue, 2010), c) routinely depicts misogyny

and violence toward women (DeKeseredy, 2014; Dines, 2010; Kelly, 1988), and d) impacts both

attitudes and behaviors of consumers (Dines, 2010; Jensen, 2007; Whisnant, 2010).

Consequently, researchers have begun to examine the content of internet pornography as well as

how it is impacting attitudes and behaviors, especially in relation to the representation of and

violence toward women.

Internet Pornography: Content

Internet pornography is varied and vast – evolving to meet consumer demand.

Accordingly, to effectively examine the content of internet pornography and its relationship to

violence toward women, researchers have conducted extensive content analyses of pornographic

content (Bridges, Wosnitzer, Scharrer, Sun, & Liberman, 2010; Fritz & Paul, 2017; Gorman et

al., 2010; Sun, Bridges, Wosnitzer, Scharrer, & Liberman, 2008). In Sun et al.’s (2008) content

analysis of the top 44 top-renting heterosexual adult videos in 2005, nearly 85% of the videos in

the sample contained aggression perpetrated by men and directed at women. Types of physical

aggression most often coded within the videos included hair pulling, pinching, spanking, open

hand slapping, gagging (e.g. when a sex toy, hand, or penis is inserted into a performer’s mouth,

both visibility and audibly restricting breathing), and choking (e.g. when one performer visibly

36

places their hands around another performers throat, applied pressure, and restricted breathing).

Moreover, Sun et al. (2008) found that women within these pornographic films were often

targets of verbal aggression such as being called misogynistic terms like “slut,” “whore,” and

“bitch” by the male performers in the scene. In fact, researchers found the violence toward

women to be so palpable that sex within this pornographic content was portrayed as being

“intertwined with violence,” as “sexual pleasure was contingent upon and derived from

aggression” (Sun et al., 2008, p. 321). This pioneering content analysis highlights how violence

toward women is rampant and eroticized across popular pornographic films.

Another content analysis of 304 best-selling heterosexual pornographic videos scenes

derived similar results. According to Bridges et al. (2010), physical aggression and verbal

aggression was rampant within their sample of pornographic videos and largely directed at

women by men. Indeed, their analyses indicated that 50% of the pornographic videos sampled

contained verbal aggression (e.g. misogynistic name-calling using words like “bitch” and “slut”)

and 88.2% physical aggression toward women. Consistent with previous findings from Sun et

al., (2008), the physical forms of aggression directed at women in this sample included spanking,

open hand slapping, pinching, hair pulling, choking, and gagging (Bridges et al., 2010, p. 1072).

Moreover, the researchers found that physical aggression within these pornographic video scenes

was also a strong predictor of verbal aggression in that verbal aggression was 350% more likely

to occur if physical aggression was part and parcel to the scene (Bridges et al, 2010). In addition,

the results indicated that specific sexual acts within the videos were associated with both

physical and verbal aggression. For example, scenes depicting female-to-male oral sex (e.g.

blowjobs) as well as those depicting ass to mouth (i.e. ATM; when a man engages in anal sex

with a woman and then removes his penis from her anus and places it in her mouth) were more

37

likely to contain both verbal and physical aggression toward women (Bridges et al., 2010). In

sum, Bridges et al. (2010, p. 1080) noted that “sexuality, as portrayed in these popular videos,

was primarily aggressive” toward women and positive behaviors indicative of intimacy and

consent (like kissing, hugging, and/or verbal compliments) “were the exception rather than the

rule.” Thus, confirming results from Sun et al.’s (2008) analysis, heterosexual sex within

pornography depicts men in positions of power over women and routinely depicts and

normalizes sexual violence.

Another content analysis assessing the levels of violence “free and easily available”

heterosexual internet pornography available via Google searches was conducted by Gorman et

al. (2010, p. 131). Consistent with previous findings, over half of the videos in the sample

portrayed men as dominating women in degrading, exploitative, and abusive ways (Gorman et

al., 2010). Moreover, the videos in this sample reinforced the message that the women who were

being dominated by men were assuming their seemingly natural submissive sexual role (Gorman

et al., 2010). Accordingly, the authors state that these findings suggest that internet pornography

is a “powerful tool for reinforcing gender inequality” and consumers may view this inequitable

and aggressive version of sexuality wherein men verbally, physically, and sexually abuse women

as “a template for normal sexual behavior” (Gorman et al., 2010, p. 142). The authors posit that,

based on previous research and their own findings, that internet pornography reinforces that

women are inferior to men, are constructed as sexual objects that exist for male pleasure, and that

sexual violence is normal, natural, and unproblematic, especially within heterosexual sexual

relations (Gorman et al., 2010).

38

Vannier, Currie, and O’Sullivan (2014) recently conducted a content analysis examining

“Teen” and “MILF” pornography. Pornographic videos within the “Teen” category are

incredibly popular and most often depict women who are or appear to be 18 to 20 years old

whereas videos categorized as “MILF” (or “mother I’d like to fuck”) tend to depict women in

their mid to late 30’s and 40’s. The study found that regardless of the category “male actors were

depicted more often as in control of the pace/direction of sexual activity, and female actors were

portrayed more often as the victims of exploitation” (Vannier, Currie, & O’Sullivan, 2014). Yet,

“Teen” videos were more likely to contain themes of sexual exploitation than “MILF” videos,

with representations of teenage women being either “tricked” or otherwise manipulated into

engaging in sexual activity with men, and therefore garnering far less power than their male

counterparts in the scene (Vannier et al., 2014, 261). Conversely, “MILF” videos portrayed

female performers as more in control of the initiation, pace, and direction of sexual activity as a

likely artifact of perceived age and social status as compared to young teen girls and women. The

findings from this content analysis add to the literature in that it a) begins to substantiate that

different categories of pornography depict gender inequality and violence at varying rates and in

differing ways, and b) confirms that women, regardless of age, are more often submissive than

men in pornographic videos (Vannier et al., 2014).

To further substantiate these findings, a recent content analysis of internet pornography

by Fritz and Paul (2017) examined variations in levels of objectification of women as well as

depictions of aggression within free internet porn videos. Consistent with previous research,

mainstream heterosexual pornography was awash with depictions of the sexual objectification of

women as well as physical aggression toward women (Fritz & Paul, 2017). Much like the

39

scholars who came before them, Fritz and Paul (2017, p. 10) state that pornography consistently

defines the woman as sexual objects and conclude the target of men’s aggression in a

“systematic way” and that this “may influence sexual learning and behavior” of those consuming

such content (p. 10). In other words, all four content analyses over the course of a decade

indicate that pornography is awash with representations of women as sexual objects deserving of

men’s violence. Given the gendered nature of pornographic consumption and the consistency of

these findings, it should be noted that there is clearly a market for pornographic content depicting

violence toward women and given this fact, it is important for research to extend or examine

consumer interactions with this content (Jensen, 2007, p. 61).

Accordingly, there are two common themes that emerge from this previous research on

pornographic content available on the internet. The first is that internet pornography indisputably

portrays verbal, physical, and sexual violence toward women and each study has further

substantiated the other in that regard. The second theme to emerge from this research is the

tendency to treat pornography as a homogenous entity. In other words, while these content

analyses of internet pornography have tremendous merit and are used to give researchers a

baseline of violence directed against women by men within pornography, more research needs to

be completed to assess how violence toward women varies across different types or categories of

pornography. More specifically, whether there are specific genres or categories of pornography

that are more violent and misogynistic than others. Despite the lack of deference paid to violence

toward women across various categories of pornography, other research has been completed

based on these studies that examine harmful outcomes associated with pornography

consumption.

40

Internet Pornography: Impact on Attitudes and Behaviors

Although it is difficult to connect pornography to specific acts of violence in a linear

fashion, many studies have found tangible evidence of post-pornography consumption attitudinal

and behavioral changes that may result in an environment or behaviors conducive to sexual

violence committed toward women. These studies become of critical importance to criminal

justice scholarship, as they highlight the connection between pornography consumption and real-

world acts of sexual violence punishable by criminal law. Indeed, recent studies indicate that

consuming pornography is linked to attitudes supportive of sexual violence toward women (Hald

& Malamuth, 2015; Hald, Malamuth, & Yuen, 2010; Thompson et al., 2015; Wright & Tokunga,

2015). Previous research has also found that men who consume pornography are more likely to

adhere to traditional gender roles (Antevska & Gavey, 2015), believe in rape myths (Milburn,

Mather, & Conrad, 2000), lack empathy for rape victims (Milburn et al., 2000), utilize victim

blaming sentiments (Milburn et al., 2000), endorse prostitution myths that normalize sexual

exploitation and the sex industry (Menaker & Franklin, 2018), appeal for more lenient sentences

for those who perpetrate sexual violence (Zillmann & Bryant, 1984), trivialize the impact of

sexual aggression (Zillmann & Bryant, 1984), and beliefs that their peers would be supportive of

forced sex (Thompson et al., 2015). Some of the latest research on human trafficking even

suggests that those who consume more pornography were more likely to know what human

trafficking is but were less likely to consider human trafficking as a serious issue warranting

governmental intervention (Bouche, Farrell, & Wittmer, 2016). Studies also indicate that

pornography usage is related to bystander apathy or the suppression of willingness to intervene

as a bystander when confronted with sexual violence (Brosi et al., 2011; Foubert & Bridges,

41

2017). In other words, exposure to and consumption of pornography is linked to “callousness”

toward sexual violence in many forms (Foubert & Bridges, 2017, p. 1).

Moreover, in terms of research indicating behavioral changes post-pornography

consumption, research consistently suggests that pornography consumption is associated with

violence toward women. In fact, research has found that pornography consumption is linked to a

higher likelihood of verbal aggression toward female partners during sexual activity (e.g. calling

female partners “sluts” and “whores”) (Wright, Sun, Steffen, & Tokunaga, 2014) as well as

varying expressions of sexual coercion (Baer et al., 2015; Carr & VanDeusen, 2004; Kernsmith

& Kernsmith, 2009; Wright et al., 2014; Ybarra & Thompson, 2017) and overt acts of sexual

aggression (Flood & Pease, 2009; Malamuth, Hald,& Koss, 2011). These results are consistent

across youth as well with scholars finding that exposure to pornography among adolescents was

associated with “disrespectful, risky, or violent sexual acts” (Romito & Beltra, 2015, p. 9), the

perpetration of rape (Ybarra & Thompson, 2017), and escalations in levels of sexual humiliation

in sex crimes perpetrated by adolescent sex offenders (Mancini et al., 2012). These findings for

adolescents were further substantiated by a recent review of the literature by Owens, Behun,

Manning, and Reid (2012) wherein the scholars examined research dating back to 2005. Owens

et al. (2012, p. 116) found that adolescent pornography use was related to “increased degrees of

sexually aggressive behavior.” Scholars have also found that among male high school students

who consumed pornography, those who were to do so more frequently were found to be more

likely to pressure their female sexual partners to make or imitate pornography against their will

(Rothman, Kaczarmarsky, Burke, Jansen, & Baughman, 2014; Rothman & Adhia, 2015). Lastly,

a recent meta-analysis indicated that over the course of 20 years of research on pornography

42

consumption among youth, pornography consumption is related to sexual aggression

perpetration among young men specifically (Peter & Valkenburg, 2016).

Moreover, research has shown that “pornography plays a key role in women’s

experiences of male violence in private places” (DeKeseredy, 2015, p. 9). While there has yet to

be a nationally representative victimization survey that incorporates questions about current or

former intimate partner’s pornography consumption, researchers have gathered data from rape

crisis centers and battered women’s services workers as well as victims of intimate partner

sexual violence on the subject (Bergen & Bogle, 2000; DeKeseredy, 2015; DeKeseredy &

Corsianos, 2016; DeKeseredy & Hall-Sanchez, 2016; Funk, 2006; Moreau, Boucher, Hebert, &

Lemelin, 2015). In these studies, pornography has been linked to the perpetration of sexual

violence by men against both current and former intimate, female partners (Bergen & Bogle,

2000; DeKeseredy, 2015; DeKeseredy & Corsianos, 2016; DeKeseredy & Hall-Sanchez, 2016;

Funk, 2006; Moreau et al., 2015). In fact, one study found that 30% of female victims of intimate

partner violence surveyed reported that pornography was directly involved in their partner’s

perpetration of intimate partner sexual violence (Hall-Sanchez, 2014). Accordingly, the authors

also posited that those women who did not report a linkage to pornography may just be unaware

of their partner’s consumption and how it relates to the abuse (Hall-Sanchez, 2014).

Still more, research by Wright, Sun, Steffen, & Tokunaga (2014) found those studied

who consumed pornography expressed higher levels of interest or engagement in potentially

abusive sex practices such as spanking, hair-pulling, role-played forced sex, tying a partner up,

dominating a partner, facial ejaculation (e.g. wherein a man ejaculates upon a woman’s face as

she kneels before him), double-penetration (e.g. wherein a woman is penetrated by multiple

penises or objects at once, either in one orifice or multiple), ass-to-mouth, penile gagging, and

43

misogynistic name-calling. Perhaps most insidiously, research has shown that men who

frequently consume violent pornography are significantly more likely to admit that they “would

rape or sexually assault a woman if they know they could get away with it” (Flood & Pease,

2009, p. 135). While the researchers did not elaborate on what categories of pornography were

deemed violent, this study highlights that different forms may relate more strongly to sexual

assault than others. Lastly, pornography has also been empirically connected to other contact

offenses such as child-based sexual offenses perpetrated by adult men (Hatch, 2012; Winters, &

Jeglic, 2017). Indeed, the impact of pornography on sexual offending has been so palpable that

criminal justice professionals have called for banning pornography use as a condition of

supervised release for those convicted of sexual offenses (Smith, 2011).

Research on pornography is also emerging in relation to sexual experimentation post-

pornography consumption. Recent studies indicate that heterosexual couples are engaging in

more anal sex than in years past, which scholars suggest is due to the popularity of the practice in

mainstream pornography (Fahs & Gonzalez, 2014; Marston & Lewis, 2014). When women are

surveyed about their sexual experiences in this research, including experiences with heterosexual

anal sex, results showed that they find the practice painful and engage in the behavior, not for

mutual sexual satisfaction, but rather because of pressure from their male partners (Fahs &

Gonzalez, 2014; Marston & Lewis, 2014). In fact, discussions about mutuality, consent, and

women’s pleasure are usually absent from the narratives of those surveyed, both men and

women, on the practice (Fahs & Gonzalez, 2014). “Many men do not express concern about the

possible pain for women, viewing it as inevitable” and researchers posit that “coercion could

emerge as a dominant script for anal intercourse,” as “women being badgered for anal sex

appears to be normal” (Marston & Lewis, 2014, p. 5). Both studies highlight that pornography, at

44

least in this context, is certainly helping to create “new norms regarding sexual behavior”

including, but not limited to, the normalization of pain and coercion experienced by women in

their heterosexual partnerships during anal sex (Fahs & Gonzalez, 2014, p. 512).

In a recent meta-analysis of pornography consumption and sexual aggression in general

population studies, researchers found that in 22 studies from 7 different countries, pornography

consumption is indeed consistently linked to sexual aggression (Wright et al, 2015). Wright et al.

(2015) conclude that, “the accumulated data leave little doubt that, on average, individuals who

consume pornography more frequently are more likely to hold attitudes conducive to sexual

aggression and engage in acts of sexual aggression than individuals who do not consume

pornography or who consume pornography less frequently” (p. 201). Thus, prior research leaves

little doubt that pornography is inundated with representations of violence toward women that

reinforce systems of gender inequality and is correlated to both attitudes and behaviors

supportive of sexual aggression. Moreover, previous research on rape culture would suggest that

these attitudes and behaviors are becoming normalized within the larger culture (Dines, 2010;

Jensen, 2007).

In sum, two themes emerge from the research on the impact of pornography consumption

on attitudes and behaviors. First, is that pornography in these studies is treated as a homogenous

entity despite the tremendous variation amongst pornographic videos available online today.

While some studies do manage to differentiate between violent and nonviolent pornography in

their examinations of the impact on consumers (Baer et al., 2015), those categories are still very

broad in scope and do not necessarily help researchers understand what types of pornography

results in harmful outcomes and in what context. Second, much like the content they consume,

the consumers of pornography within these studies are treated as a homogenous group and there

45

are few studies that account for individual-level variations in pornography usage across various

types of pornographic content. Thus, more research is needed to begin to address the limitations

of the current scholarship.

Summary

Critical criminological scholarship has long examined how structural inequality is related

to crime and victimization. Likewise, feminist criminologists study of how patriarchal norms and

structural gender inequality impact men’s violence toward women. One such manifestation of

gender inequality and men’s violence toward women is pornography (Brownmiller, 1975;

Renzetti, 2013; Sanday, 1981). Accordingly, while pornography has been the focus of much

scholarship relating to misogyny and violence toward women, there is little research on how

pornography consumers interact with pornography within websites where it is housed and

whether these interactions vary across consumers and pornographic content. Thus, the current

study will examine how misogyny impacts user interaction with pornographic videos hosted on

XVideos.com. Chapter 3 will address the limitations of the current scholarship, as well as

explore the new ways with which pornography flourishes in online spaces – via pornographic

websites with social networking components.

46

CHAPTER 3

EXPLORING PORN 2.0

The internet, and the technology inherent to its development, has arguably changed how

information is gathered and social interactions take place moving from being a luxury to

becoming a necessity and “way of life” rendering internet usage an unavoidable part of the

human existence for most people (Christopherson, 2007; Herring, 2002, p. 187; Williams,

Burnap, & Sloan, 2017, p.3). Reinventing the way interpersonal communications takes place and

how mass media is consumed, the internet is constantly creating new spheres of social influence,

shaping (and reshaping) culture norms, and sprouting new means of consumption and

communication that dwarfs the means and ways humans used to interact before its’ advent

(Cappella, 2017). Accordingly, the “unprecedented and detailed information” available online,

not only about online content but also about consumers and the culture they inhabit, dwarfs self-

report data of the past (Cappella, 2017, p. 5; Stoleru and Costescu, 2014). Scholarly insight into

interactions within online spaces cannot only breed insight about individuals, but also the culture

with “more complex combinations than could have ever been imagined even a couple of decades

ago” (Cappella, 2017, p. 11). Indeed, “the interplay of media and interpersonal communication

has changed at its core” and research needs to reflect these changes (Cappella, 2017, 11). Along

with this new way of life and means of communication, comes new ways to study human

interactions taking place using a machine interface (Williams et al., 2017).

Web 2.0

47

Internet users can now not only generate, seek out, and view online content, but can

readily interact with content in a variety of ways in online spaces (Ksiazek, Peer, & Lessard,

2014, p. 5). These new interactive features, means of communication, and manifestations of

connectivity have been labeled as Web 2.0 (Tyson et al., 2015). Web 2.0 is “a collection of open-

source, interactive, and user-controlled online applications” (Constantinides & Fountain, 2008, p.

232). The main way to differentiate Web 2.0 from other, more passive parts of the internet is the

idea that the user is the “vital factor” acting as both the consumer and a content contributor by

contributing user generated content as well as seeking out content from other users

(Constantinides & Fountain, 2008, p. 233). Web 2.0 can include blogs, social networking

websites wherein users create personalized profiles with varying levels of descriptive

information, and video sharing websites with social networking components that allow users to

generate, upload, download, share and/or interact with content via views, ratings, and comments

within online spaces (Constantinides & Fountain, 2008; Tyson et al., 2015).

This unprecedented access to content as well as other people has resulted in de facto

communities being formed at the website level. Indeed, belonging to websites with Web 2.0

features and choosing to interact with content and other users instills a sense of community as

users become aware that they are interacting with others who share similar interests, beliefs, and

values (Allen et al., 2014; Fu, Liu, & Wang, 2008). Moreover, platforms wherein users can both

view and interact with content, and by proxy, interact with one another, serves as a platform for

constructing, maintaining, and accentuating “both individual and group identities” (Allen et al.,

2014, p. 25). These direct and indirect human interactions, even through a machine interface, can

lend themselves to relationship building even if those relationships are indirect and are strictly

48

maintained within online domains (Allen et al., 2014). Users can indirectly become

“companions” with those who share the same interests and garner systems of social support for

their interests even if users within online domains never directly interact either online or in real

life (Oh, Ozkaya, & LaRose, 2014). The mere mutual consumption of content, as it manifests via

views, ratings, and commentary, can be enough to instill and enrich a sense of community and

bonding amongst de facto peers reinforcing both attitudes and behaviors (Oh et al., 2013). In

fact, research has found that those who use features on Web 2.0 across platforms, can find a

sense of companionship that is almost equivalent to the amount of companionship normally

found within intimate partnerships (Oh et al., 2013). In other words, the behavior of others in

online spaces is incredibly important to reinforcing group norms and fostering a sense of

belonging to a larger community that affirms attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors. This hallmark of

new Web 2.0 platforms becomes relevant to the current study, as 1) it provides some insight into

how users navigate spaces with like-minded users and 2) has extended into the realm of adult

content online.

Porn 2.0

Internet pornography caters to anyone with an internet-connected device and is ever

evolving in tandem with technological improvements that has expanded from simple images and

videos to multi-user social media and video sharing platforms that provide ways to interact with

pornography that are unprecedented. Accordingly, named in relation to Web 2.0, Porn 2.0

represents a subsection of internet pornography differentiated by free and seemingly endless

access to pornographic content and the means to interact with that content (DeKeseredy, 2014).

While still an “economic juggernaut” laden with harmful representations of women, Porn 2.0 is

49

different from pornography from years past wherein consumers could merely passively and

independently consume content via DVD, pay-per-view websites and/or within peer-to-peer

sharing networks (DeKeseredy, 2014, p. 194; DeKeseredy & Olsson, 2011; Tyson, Elkhatib,

Sastry, & Uhlig, 2016). While technology has always been adapted for sexual purposes, Porn 2.0

represents a departure from limited access to now being consumed en masse online amongst

millions of one’s peers and even produced by those outside the confines of the traditional

pornography industry. There are various pornographic websites that fall under the auspices of

Porn 2.0. The most popular pornographic website with Porn 2.0 features garnering millions of

unique visitors per month is XVideos.com (Alexa.com, 2017).

In the world of Porn 2.0, one can both create and curate a social-media profile within a

pornographic website to interact with other pornography consumers as well as upload, view, rate,

and comment upon pornographic videos in tandem with other users on the site (Tyson et al.,

2016). Not unlike other video-sharing websites like YouTube, Porn 2.0 allows users from all

over the world to view, rate, and comment upon pornographic videos as well as interact with

other pornography consumers in real time. Users can even upload and curate their own

pornographic content for other users to consume thus creating an opening for anyone with access

to the internet to become an active participant in the world of pornography production,

distribution, and consumption (Garlick, 2010). In other words, Porn 2.0 represents an entirely

new way to experience pornography and these new platforms like XVideos.com blur the

boundaries between producer, consumer, curator, amateur, and professional (Paasonen, 2010;

Wilkinson, 2017).

50

Yet, despite this new means of interaction, research suggests that the content of

pornographic videos and the impact of consumption has not changed. As noted in the previous

chapter, internet pornography in its many iterations is not only overwhelmingly misogynistic and

violent in its representations of heterosexual sexuality, but it is also linked to attitudes and

behaviors conducive to violence toward women. This remains true as there is a dearth of women

creating more agentic and less violent depictions of pornographic sex (Bridges et al., 2010).

These representations and implications of consumption not only dramatically influence what

types of pornography flourishes within Porn 2.0 spaces but influences also how users interact

with pornographic videos within these spaces. Thus, it is important to understand the new and

dynamic spaces wherein Porn 2.0 exists.

Users and Their Communities in Porn 2.0

Largely populated by men, users of Porn 2.0 can be broadly delineated into two types: 1)

those who produce, upload, and distribute pornographic videos and 2) those who consume and

interact with pornographic videos (Jin, Phua, & Lee, 2015). Most often, those who produce,

upload, and distribute pornographic videos are determining a) what type of pornographic video

to post (e.g. a video that they made themselves or are sharing a scene from a pornographic film

made by a major pornographic studio), b) how the video is titled, and lastly, c) how that

pornographic video is categorized or otherwise placed into pornographic genres (Tyson et al.,

2016). The subset of users are those individuals who seek out, view, rate, and comment upon

pornographic videos that have been uploaded to the website. In tandem, these two groups of

people flourish within Porn 2.0 spaces making way for millions to share a common pornographic

experience.

51

As noted above, these interactions between those who produce, upload, and distribute

pornographic videos and those who view and interact with pornographic videos represent the

added consumer-driven utility of Porn 2.0, wherein users can also directly and indirectly interact

with one another forming a pseudo community of users within the Porn 2.0 landscape. Porn 2.0

websites with social-networking features that allow users to create profiles with varying degrees

of self-selected anonymity are incredibly popular and “articulate a list of other users with whom

they share a connection, and view” (Jin et al., 2015, p. 6). Indeed, internet users more generally

find an innate sense of group camaraderie with whom they share an interest, especially those

with interests in pornography, given their interests and actions are generally kept secret to

outsiders and in their everyday lives (Dines, 2010). Thus, Porn 2.0 users can bond with like-

minded individuals who engage with pornographic content by sharing, recommending, and

exchanging images, videos, and information within the “brotherhood” shrouded by the obscurity

that comes with interacting via an online interface rather than in offline spaces (Aslan, 2011;

Malarek, 2011). Indeed, previous research has indicated that the interactive features of Porn 2.0

“engender a sense of community” wherein consumers can bond in “nonhierarchical and

noninstitutional spaces” and provide affirmatory feedback to those directly or indirectly

espousing their views therein (DeKeseredy & Olsson, 2011; Mowlabocus, 2010, p. 71).

While serving to, perhaps innocently, interact with one’s peers who share a mutual

interest in pornography, Porn 2.0 websites also have a dark side in their relationships to violence

toward women. This “group mentality” or sense of community that is fostered within Porn 2.0

websites dominated by men can both “consolidate and radicalize” as well as embolden sexist and

misogynistic views reinforcing and reproducing patriarchal power structures (Henry & Powell,

52

2015, p. 769). While this type of homosocial bonding with one’s male peers is not new regarding

pornography, the reach and implications of these massive self-affirming networks are

unprecedented; leading to spaces that reproduce and reconstitute representations of both gender

and sex (DeKeseredy & Olsson, 2011). In other words, these “patriarchal online communities”

provide the ways and means for men to exchange and discuss pornography with like-minded

peers (DeKeseredy & Schwartz, 2016, p. 6). In Porn 2.0 websites, the website itself becomes an

echo chamber, reinforcing views about sex, sexuality, violence, and women for the millions of

consumers who navigate within the online space (Stoleru & Costescu, 2014). As DeKeseredy

and Olsson (2011) note, Porn 2.0 and the individual websites therein create environments that

normalize and glorify harmful representations of women and reinforce gender inequality. Makin

and Morczek (2015) describe this interaction with pornographic videos in Porn 2.0 spaces as a

manifestation of gender microaggression where the websites themselves are repositories for

gender microaggression. Through the objectifying, degrading, and violent depictions of women

and the interactions (e.g. views, ratings, and comments) represent “tacit approval” for the gender

microaggressions therein (Makin & Morczek, 2015, p. 9).

Moreover, it is important to note that when a Porn 2.0 user views, rates, or comments

upon something within an online space, they are not necessarily just making a personal decision,

but rather broadcasting their decision for large-scale distribution by sending messages to many

individuals about what is appropriate to consume and how one should feel in regard to the

content (Cappella, 2017). In other words, consumers can substantiate, encourage, and condone

other users interest in pornographic materials laden with violence against women via views,

ratings, and comments (Mowlabocus, 2010). This has resulted in “the emergence of pro-abuse

53

cyberspace male peer support groups” within Porn 2.0 websites that legitimize gender inequality

and gendered violence by “presenting women as objects to be conquered and consumed”

(DeKeseredy & Olsson, 2011, p. 40). Thus, this means of interaction and homosocial bonding

over pornographic content depicting violence toward women ensures that “the [pornographic]

video is not experienced on its own but is embedded within the community that consumes it”

(Mowlabocus, p. 72). Indeed, pornographic websites serve as a "powerful introduction service"

to those who share similar ideas and behavior proclivities and given the nature of these websites,

men espousing misogynistic views can do so without either external or internal constraint, as

they are with their peers and unchained by issues of social desirability (Henry & Powell, 2015;

Malarek, 2011, p. 174).

Another important factor in the negotiation of these online spaces is relative anonymity

that they provide. According to previous scholarship, there are two types of anonymity within

online spaces, technical anonymity, and social anonymity (Christopherson, 2007; Hayne & Rice,

1997). Technical anonymity refers to the removal of all potentially identifying information from

one’s profile whereas social anonymity refers to the relative lack of social cues present to

succinctly identify an individual (Christopherson, 2007). In other words, social anonymity allows

an individual to feel comparatively anonymous within a website, where true anonymity is not

actually afforded (Christopherson, 2007, p. 3040). Accordingly, the results of a recent study of

anonymity within online spaces found evidence that anonymity offered via online

communication can emphasize the “unity of the group, and thereby enhance group members

feelings of attraction and identification to the group” (Tanis & Postmes, 2007, p. 967).

Moreover, the anonymity provided by internet-based communications increase group salience

54

and “members will identify more strongly with the group” (Christopherson, 2007, p. 3048).

Research has also suggested that “anonymity can work to increase the effectiveness of work

groups by allowing individuals to identify more with the group and work toward the goals of the

group rather than their own personal goals” (Christopherson, 2007, p. 3051). In this

“deindividuated” state the individual “loses his or her sense of self-awareness” thereby making it

more likely that the individual will engage in groupthink (Christopherson, 2007, p. 3050). The

real or perceived anonymity within these online spaces strengthens the impact of social norms, as

those expressing unpopular or even derogatory opinions have little to no social consequences for

their statements and may even find their beliefs substantiated by other users (Christopherson,

2007).

In relation to Porn 2.0, while users can and do create social media profiles, they can

seriously limit the amount of identifying information they include resulting in profiles that barely

indicate more than gender, age, and sexual preferences (Trestian et al., 2013). Even if users do

include some identifying information, it may be drowned out given the plethora of other users on

the website. Users can view and interact with pornography of their choosing under the cloak of

facelessness and without feeling inhibited by the disclosure of identifying information. Thus,

users are disinhibited by relative anonymity and feel free to “explore their hidden identity” and

explore content that may fall outside the social norms without “fear of social consequences”

(Christopherson, 2007, p. 2041; Springer et al., 2015).

Research on legal internet pornography is not the first time these "virtual communities"

comprising seemingly anonymous users have been substantiated. According to Aslan (2011),

child sex offenders use the internet to not only garner child pornography but also to seek out

55

larger social networks of like-minded individuals. Communicating with those who share their

proclivity for sexualizing children, users express and reinforce ideas about child-based sex

offenses that make the behaviors seem "acceptable and normal" (Aslan, 2011, p. 410). Moreover,

these "virtual communities" in which large numbers of sex offenders and pedophiles interact

reinforces the harmful messages like that sexual attraction to children is an expression of "love"

and that the victims truly enjoy and desire to engage in sex with adults (Aslan, 2011, p. 410). In

this way, these online communities orbiting their shared interest in this particular subset of

pornography both foster and abet abusive behavior by rendering the perpetrators anonymous,

disinhibited, and unconcerned about retribution for their actions within a network of like-minded

peers (Herring, 2002). These interactions then serve as an echo chamber, glorifying misogynistic

pornography as well as deviant sexual behavior.

Extending this work, Malarkey (2011) discusses the various online communities in which

those who solicit sex from prostitutes. Developing into what Malarek (2011, p. 9) refers to as an

online “brotherhood,” these websites, comprised of mostly men, are free to join, available 24/7,

and always willing to validate the proclivities of its members. Acting as the "biggest support

network on the planet" for men who frequent sex workers, men feel the internet is a space to

share with other men, “from the comfort of their homes and under the guise of a screen name”

their “fantasies, their escapades, their best and their worst” (Malarek, 2011, p. 9). Put another

way, these men are disinhibited and offer their shameless views on the topic at hand; free from

the chains of social desirability and amongst those with whom they share a common interest. To

be sure, the internet provides men with interest in various manifestations of the sex industry with

a “safe haven”; a space ripe with “encouragement and support” (Malarek, 2011, p. 188).

56

Thus, of interest to the current study are not only the various types of pornographic

content that are housed within Porn 2.0 websites but the indirect and direct interaction between

users and the pornographic content. Moreover, given that these interactions are not only

dominated by men but occurring within a culture that legitimizes sexual violence and male

dominance, these users and their interactions with pornographic content become key points of

scholarly inquiry.

Porn 2.0: Curating the Pornographic Experience

While there are many ways consumers of pornography can interact with pornographic

content online, of interest to this study are the ways interactions take place with pornographic

content within pornographic websites. Accordingly, this section will denote these characteristics

as well as how they relate to Porn 2.0.

Pornographic video titles. Titles are incredibly important, as they can give consumers a

glimpse into what content is contained therein (Reis et al., 2015). Research substantiates this

assertion, indicating that the title of a work will impact not only how consumers perceive it, but

how popular a work may become and that the selection of certain words or phrases within titles

can greatly impact how users interact with the content without ever even clicking on the content

at all (Lakkaraju et al., 2013; Reis et al., 2015). This research extends to online spaces and more

specifically, websites that house pornography, in that the titles of content impact the popularity

of the content, how users interact with that content, and how consumers perceive the content

(Dines, 2010; Feng, Guo, Chen, Tan, Xu, Shen, & Zhu, 2014; Lakkaraju et al., 2013; Song,

Vallmitjana, Stent, & Jaimes, 2015).

57

Thus, in relation to Porn 2.0, users who upload pornographic content to adult websites

can provide a title for their pornographic video submission. The title can provide not only

descriptive information to other consumers based on the uploaders’ descriptive information

provided but serve as a means for potential viewers to judge the relevancy of the content

selecting content that they perceive to be worth consuming (Dines, 2010). For Porn 2.0 websites,

the titles of pornographic video submissions are readily highlighted either directly above or

below the video providing users with an easy means to identify and catalog a pornographic video

of interest.

Pornographic video categories. From the differentiation across music to different types

content within online newspapers, categories give us a framework to organize media we

consume and help us narrow the type of content we are seeking (Reis et al., 2015). Thus,

pornography, much like music, is organized into pre-defined categories to disaggregate the

various types of pornography available to consumers. In their research on pornographic websites,

Tyson et al. (2015, p. 424) found that users “rely heavily on category information for discovering

content of interest” and that searches for content are “primarily driven by category-based

browsing.” Moreover, according to Tyson et al. (2015, p. 425), users of Porn 2.0 websites “do

not seek a specific video, rather, they search for any video that falls with certain (broad) interest

constraints.” Thus, categories play an important role for pornographic video consumers and are

likely to guide consumers interests.

A review of the literature, including that of Beaudoin and Menard’s (2015) study

examining pornographic video categories across various pornographic websites, indicates that

there are broad themes that exist within pornographic video categories. Reflected in the broader

58

themes are a) sexual orientation, b) performer descriptive information, c) descriptive information

about the body parts and/or sexual acts featured in the video, d) information about the type of

footage used within the pornographic video, and e) information relating to specific fetishes

highlighted within the video (Beaudoin & Menard, 2015; Mazieres, Trachman, Cointet,

Coulmont, & Prieur, 2014; Ogas and Gaddam, 2011).

Sexual orientation. It is important to note that, within pornographic hub websites, the

categories represent heterosexual sexual relations unless specifically denoted otherwise

(Beaudoin & Menard, 2015; Mazieres et al., 2014). For example, all videos depicting gay sex or

sexual relations between two or more homosexual men will be categorized as “Gay.” Therefore,

when one accesses pornographic hub websites they must immediately select the category “Gay”

in order to see gay pornography, as the content will not be featured in other categories (Ogas &

Gaddam, 2011). The same logic holds true for videos depicting transgender performers, wherein

to seek out content one must select that category. The same cannot be said, however, for

pornography depicting lesbian sex, as lesbian pornography is often marketed to heterosexual

men and is therefore freely available throughout pornographic websites without specifically

denoting the category therein (Dines, 2010; Ogas & Gaddam, 2011). Accordingly, categories

indicative of sexual orientation are often denoted as, “Gay,” “Lesbian,” and/or “Shemale.”

Performer descriptive information. Outside of sexual orientation, one of the most

popular ways to categorize pornographic content is via descriptive information about the

performer or performers. For example, pornographic content is often categorized by race,

ethnicity, age, hair color, and fixtures of bodily anatomy (Beaudoin & Menard, 2015). Indeed,

one of the most popular ways to categorize pornography is via race and ethnicity (Dines, 2010).

59

For example, categories like “Asian Woman,” “Black Woman,” and “Latina” unambiguously

signal to consumers of heterosexual pornography demographic information about the female

performer. Moreover, a category like “black sex” generally denotes that the pornographic content

depicts two or more black performers engaged in sexual activity whereas “Interracial” normally

depicts white women having sex with black men (Ogas & Gaddam, 2011). Lastly, categories like

“Exotic” can be best described as a broad category for any non-white female performers;

predominantly performers of Southeast Asian, Eastern European, and/or Caribbean Latina

descent (Angeles & Sunata, 2007; Kempadoo, 2000). All of these categories specify the racial or

ethnic make-up of the performers and generally focus on the descriptive information about the

female performer or performers within the videos (Dines, 2010).

Another incredibly popular way to categorize pornography is using descriptive

information about the performer’s age. In terms of age, three broad categories emerge and can be

readily selected. The first category, “Teen”, generally represents female performers ages 18 to 20

years old (Ogas & Gaddam, 2011). The second, “MILF” (i.e. Mother I’d Like to Fuck)

represents female performers ages 35 to 50 years old and third, “Mature” represents performs of

varying genders who are 50 years of age or older (Ogas & Gaddam, 2011). Again, these

categories are generally descriptive of the female performer’s age (Beaudoin & Menard, 2015).

Finally, there are categories that denote who the performers are within the pornographic

videos. For example, the “Celebrity” category highlights videos containing mainstream

celebrities engaged in sexual relations either via the production of their own pornographic films

(e.g. Kim Kardashian) or via sex scenes they have shot in major motion picture films outside of

the pornography industry (Ogas & Gaddamn, 2011). There is also a “Pornstar” category that

60

represents films with popular pornographic stars (Beaudoin & Menard, 2015; Ogas & Gaddam,

2011) and an “Amatuer” category if the pornographic video involves “material involving

nonpaid models, nonprofessional settings and production, or professional portrayals that mimic

amateurism” (Hald & Stulhofer, 2016, p. 854).

Bodily characteristics and sexual acts. Another popular means to categorize

pornography on pornographic hub websites is via descriptive terminology for bodily

characteristics (Beaudoin & Menard, 2015). For example, pornography consumers can seek out

pornography depicting actresses with red, blonde, or brunette hair or even denote the amount of

hair they are seeking out on a female performer’s primary sex organs (e.g. “Shaved Pussy”)

(Ogas & Gaddam, 2011). Pornographic categories highlighting different parts of human

anatomy may even go as far as to represent the differing sizes of specific body parts such as

“Ass,” “Big Ass,” “Big Cock,” “Big Tits,” and “Huge Tits” (Ogas & Gaddam, 2011).

Furthermore, pornographic videos may also be categorized via the types of sexual acts performed

within the pornographic content. For example, categories like “Anal,” “Ass to Mouth,”

“Blowjob,” “Creampie,” “Cumshot,” “Facial,” and “Squirting” all represent the heterosexual

sexual acts depicted in the video.

Type of footage. The next categorical theme is the type of footage used in the

pornographic video. Accordingly, if the pornographic video contains footage containing

animations, it would be categorized as either “Anime” or “Toons” on most Porn 2.0 websites

(Ogas & Gaddam, 2011). Additionally, if the footage is a recording of “women who present

themselves live via internet webcam to solicit customers to view the women naked or engaging

61

in sexual activities” it would be categorized as “Cam Porn” (Mathews, 2017, p. 160). Lastly,

videos depicting one individual masturbating are categorized as “Solo and Masturbation.”

Fetishes. Pornographic video categories may also denote sexual fetishes. For example,

categories like “Heels” or “Stockings” generally depict female performers wearing high heels or

stockings while engaged in sexual acts with other performers (Ogas & Gaddam, 2011). Other

sexual fetishes that are often used as pornographic categories are “BDSM” (e.g. bondage,

discipline, and sadism & masochism), “Pissing” (e.g. depictions of performers urinating either

independently or on one another), and “Oiled” (e.g. wherein sexual relations take place while the

performers are covered in massage oil) (Ogas & Gaddam, 2011). All of these categories allow

users to narrow their search to their specific sexual fetish.

While this list is not an exhaustive list of all the pornographic video categories available

for consumers, as innumerable categories exist, it represents some of the main ways

pornographic video are categorized by users within pornographic websites. Despite the

distinctive nature of these categories, it is important to note that there is often overlap across

them (Hald & Stulhofer, 2016). For example, while a video may be categorized as “Teen” it may

also depict BDSM or a video may be categorized as “Anime” and may also depict anal sex.

Despite this overlap, however, research indicates that the category the video is originally placed

within by the uploader is widely considered the overarching theme of the video, despite the

possible variations therein (Hald & Stulhofer, 2016; Mazieres et al., 2014; Tyson et al., 2012).

Pornographic video views. From YouTube videos denoting the number of people who

have viewed video submissions to Twitter analytics highlighting how many people have

accessed individual users Tweets, calculating, and highlighting the number of views online

62

content receives is a direct means to infer popularity of the content and how many consumers it

is reaching (Reis et al., 2015). The number of views on a given piece of content can also

communicate to other users whether the content is worth viewing and how acceptable other users

find the content to view (Hayes, Carr, & Wohn, 2016; Reis et al., 2015; Tenenboim & Cohen,

2013; Trestian et al., 2013).

Recording and highlighting the number of views on a given piece of online content has

extended to pornographic websites. After a pornographic video has been uploaded to a Porn 2.0

pornographic website, other consumers may then begin to view it. Then the number of views a

video receives is readily denoted beneath the pornographic video within a pornographic website.

Indicative of the popularity and utility of the pornographic video, tallying the number of views

within online spaces such as pornographic websites provide a numeric way of denoting a) what

pornography consumers are watching, b) what types of pornography are most popular with

consumers, and c) what content is acceptable to consume (Trestian et al., 2013). In fact, the

worth, importance, and acceptability of pornographic content may be judged based on views

alone, absent ever consuming the content (Trestian et al., 2013). For example, even if a user is

skeptical about viewing pornographic content online, they can use the number of views denoted

beneath the pornographic video as a gauge to determine whether their behavior falls outside the

social norm (Trestian et al., 2013). Put another way, if many people have already viewed this

content, it may seem more acceptable to the next person and therefore, they will be more apt to

watch.

Rating pornographic videos. The ability to rate online content is an important part of

subtle, yet powerful online communications. From websites like Facebook that allow users to

63

“Like” posts and to sites like Reddit that allow users to “upvote” or “downvote” user-generated

posts, the ability to provide feedback via rating is a popular way to assess how consumers feel

about something, absent more descriptive, qualitative data (Wyroll, 2014). Sometimes referred to

as a “one-click opinions,” much like views, indicate to other users how valuable the content is

(Wyroll, 2014). These “one-click opinions” are also indicative of what consumers approve or

disapprove of and in one click of the mouse, users are providing a powerful metric for how

valuable and worthwhile online content is (Wyroll, 2014).

Much like other spaces on the web, pornography websites have integrated rating features

into their platforms, so users can not only view pornographic content but then vicariously let

other consumers know the value of that content via its rating. Though there are a variety of rating

schemes available across Porn 2.0 websites, the most common is the “thumbs up” or “thumbs

down” binary feature using a percentage ranging from 0 to 100% (Trestian et al., 2013). These

rating systems within Porn 2.0 websites also provide a more collaborative form of approval,

highlighting what “people with similar tastes and preferences” have selected and approved of in

the past (Cappella, 2017, p. 8). Much like the information about the number of views a

pornographic video has received, the rating system on most Porn 2.0 websites is located directly

beneath the pornographic video itself.

Pornographic video commentary. Many websites offer their users the chance to not

only view and rate content but to leave feedback on the content using their own words via

comment interfaces (Weber, 2014; Ziegele et al., 2014). Internet comments are a popular form of

online participation; becoming a standard feature in most online spaces in conjunction with

professionally marketed content in both Web 2.0 and Porn 2.0 (Ziegele et al., 2014). Much like

64

how anyone can leave a comment on a Facebook status or respond to an Instagram post, Porn 2.0

websites have integrated comment interfaces underneath the pornographic videos uploaded to the

website.

Given that commenting features have been seamlessly integrated into Web 2.0 and Porn

2,0 platforms across the internet, many researchers have called for research on internet

commentary and find this new means of communication a worthy scholarly pursuit, as it can

garner tremendous information about user interest and reflections post-consumption (Coe,

Kenski, & Rains, 2014; Loke, 2012; Siersdorfer, Chelaru, Pedro, Altingovde, & Nejdl, 2014;

Tanis & Postmes, 2007). Given the depth and breadth of data available via internet comments,

previous research on commentary within online platforms has been completed using internet

news websites (Chung & Yoo, 2008; Coe et al., 2014; Ksiasek et al., 2014; Siersdorfer et al.,

2014; Spring et al., 2015), YouTube (Siersdorfer et al., 2014), Twitter (Anderson & Cermele,

2014), online brothel review websites (Jovanovski & Tyler, 2018), pornographic video review

websites (Brennan, 2017), as well as popular pornographic videos hosted on Pornhub.com

(Pihlaja, 2016). More specifically, scholars have examined the relationship between internet

comments and hate speech (Erjavec & Kovacic, 2012), racist commentary (Hughey & Daniels,

2013; Loke, 2012), sexist rhetoric (Anderson & Cermele, 2014; Stoleru & Costescu, 2014), and

attitudes supportive of aggression (Brennan, 2017).

This research across disciplines has found that commenting online indicates that users are

“more invested, aware, and attentive” or otherwise “more engaged” with the content on which

they are commenting (Ksiazek et al., 2014, p. 505). Moreover, while users comment for a variety

of reasons, many do so to publish their opinion on or share personal experiences with the content

65

they have just consumed for other users to read, reflect upon, and interact with (Springer et al.,

2015). Commenting also allows users to identify with other users with whom they share similar

perspectives with and to mold their own perspectives based on what others have commented

(Hughey & Daniels, 2013; Springer et al., 2015). This is true irrespective of whether commenters

are interacting directly with another user or simply posting their reflection after consuming

content online.

Moreover, research on internet commentary indicates that it must be contextualized

within the culture it is nested, as commentary emerges from the cultural conditions from which it

is housed (Stoleru & Costescu, 2014). Thus, in addition to becoming an important space for

communication and sharing one’s experiences or feedback, internet comments sections can also

be an important space for spreading derogatory messaging directed at a variety of people, groups,

and institutions (Erjavac & Kovacic, 2012). In fact, in their research on how violence against

women is "reproduced and perpetuated" in online spaces, Stoleru & Costescu (2014) examined

online commentary regarding the implementation of a new domestic violence law. One of the

main themes they found within the comments were justifications of and support for violence

toward women with commenters reinforcing antiquated notions about gender, gender inequality,

and violence toward women by responding to the article they had read. They also found that

commenters tried to "degender" the problem, while "gendering the blame," reflecting cultural

norms that exonerate perpetrators and blame victims (Stoleru & Costescu, 2014, p. 108). The

process of justifying violence and blaming the victim centered around "her behavior, her fault,

and her decision to stay" (Stoleru & Costescu, 2014, p. 108). Thus, this research found that these

men's comments were constructed around placing women in subordinate positions of power, yet

66

women were also contrasted as being responsible for men's violent behavior. The authors state

that these men pathologized women and framed their comments around the idea that women

deserve the violence perpetrated against them and that male violence is normal and natural

(Stoleru & Costescu, 2014). In sum, Stoleru and Costescu (2014, p. 114) state that the main idea

of the work is that violence toward women "thrives" and is "reproduced in new, unrestricted

environments" like comment sections online and the comments "restore their offline attitudes

and beliefs," especially when encountering affirming attitudes (p. 114). It is clear that when

commenters espouse views consistent with gender inequality and the normalization of men’s

violence they are not only reflecting their personal feelings and larger cultural norms but also

serving to reaffirm and reinforce these harmful norms for others who are viewing the comments.

Despite the incredible insight that can be drawn about cultural norms, consumption

patterns, and personal reflections, to my knowledge, there are only two studies that examine

internet commentary on pornography. In her groundbreaking research on pornographic video

commentary within a pornography review website, Brennan (2017) found that comments in

relation to specific pornographic videos can offer substantial qualitative insight into viewer

perceptions the pornography therein, as the commentary is not limited by social desirability as it

might be if users were to be interviewed or surveyed regarding their perceptions of the

pornography they consume (Brennan, 2017). Moreover, the comment section of this website

made way for users to espouse their views on pornography with other like-minded pornography

consumers while reaffirming their interests and reinforcing the utility of the pornography they

consume for their peers. In sum, this study highlights the importance of examining user’s

comments on pornographic videos, as comments are not constrained or inhibited by social

67

desirability, but rather give an accurate representation of how consumers feel about and reflect

upon pornography (Brennan, 2017).

Furthermore, drawing on comparisons to the online video website, YouTube, the work of

Pihlaja (2016) is also important within this context, as his study highlights that while those who

comment on popular pornographic videos on Pornhub do so in the presence of other

pornographic video consumers, their interactions appear to be with the pornographic content

itself and not directly with other consumers. In other words, many commenters within the

Pornhub space avoid community engagement and instead, openly reflect on the pornographic

materials they consume in response to the content itself and the pleasure derived from it, but not

in response to other users. This is an important addition to the literature, as it shows that those

who interact within the pornographic website, Pornhub.com, may do so differently than on other

media platforms (Pihlaja, 2016).

Considering new technologies are driving a large percentage of social interaction online,

researchers have consistently stated that research on these types of interactions needs to be

expanded to a variety of content. Burgeoning research on internet commentary, or comments

posted in response to online content, has become an ever-expanding means of scholarly inquiry

to not only better understand the unique dynamics of communication online, but to also

understand how this communication can be contextualized in the culture in which it takes place.

Furthermore, research on internet commentary can also assist researchers with understanding

how internet users perceive and reflect upon topics of relevance. Accordingly, Whisant (2010, p.

117) states this research on online commentary must extend to that housed within Porn 2.0

websites, as such commentary is a “rich vein” for scholarly analysis that is not restricted by

68

issues of social desirability and directly reflect user’s views on pornographic videos across

pornographic categories.

Thus, given that there is so limited research on internet commentary in relation to

pornographic videos, the current study has the potential to provide an understanding of not only

what users are saying in response to pornographic content online, as well as what themes emerge

within that commentary. This becomes especially salient when we consider that the internet

commentary across online spaces is reflective of the culture in which it flourishes – a patriarchal

culture wherein women are subservient to men and are routinely objectified and aggressed

against in pornography (Stoleru & Costescu, 2014). The commentary housed within Porn 2.0

websites is reflective of patriarchal culture norms wherein gender inequality, misogyny, and

violence toward women are deemed natural and unproblematic and it makes it an appealing

mode of scholarly analysis (DeKeseredy, 2014).

Emerging Research on Porn 2.0

As noted above, Web 2.0 more broadly has received a tremendous amount of scholarly

attention across disciplines. Yet, Porn 2.0 has largely remained untouched by academic

scholarship outside of basic descriptive information about the features of the websites (Tyson et

al., 2015), overviews of the Porn 2.0 landscape (Mowlabocus, 2010), and the emerging amateur

content available on Porn 2.0 websites (Paasonen, 2010). Yet, given the features of Porn 2.0, its

consumer base, and the ways and means users can interact with the pornographic content therein,

researchers have finally begun to formally examine the intricacies of viewership and usage

within these pornographic websites.

69

Accordingly, there are only two studies, to my knowledge, which begin to specifically

assess and measure various means of user interaction within pornographic websites with Porn 2.0

features. The first study examines several different Porn 2.0 websites to provide readers with

basic descriptive information about the features - views, ratings, and comments (Trestian et al.,

2013). Citing the need to examine the “richest courses of information” about interactivity with

pornographic content within pornographic websites, Trestian et al. (2013) found that the number

of views and the video rating was readily displayed underneath pornographic videos to provide

consumers with information about the popularity of the video with other users (p. 2). Moreover,

Trestian et al. (2013) found that while rating systems vary across pornographic video websites, a

common way for users to rate the content they consume is via a “thumbs up” or thumbs down”

mechanism. Still more, findings suggest that comments provided an effective and objective

means for users to leave feedback or talk about the pornographic video therein (Trestian et al.,

2013). While this study provides readers with basic identifying characteristics of Porn 2.0, it fails

to explore the websites with sufficient depth and breadth.

The second, citing the need to move away from researching passive pornography

consumption to examining active social environments wherein pornography now exists and

flourishes, provides a simplistic overview of user demographics within the Porn 2.0 website,

Pornhub.com, that serves one of the largest pornographic websites in the world next to

XVideos.com. The findings are consistent with previous scholarship on pornography more

generally suggest that users are predominantly heterosexual men under the age of 40. Thus, Porn

2.0 is highly gendered. Moreover, compared to the small number of women that frequent the

website, men are much more active by opting to view, rate, and comment on pornographic

70

videos far more often than their female counterparts (Tyson et al., 2015). Again, while this

information is useful and gives other scholars some insight into the highly gendered nature of

Porn 2.0 interactions primarily confirms what scholars have posited for decades – that men are

more apt to consume pornography, frequent pornographic websites, and interact within male-

dominated spaces harboring pornographic content (Tyson et al., 2015). In addition to both

Brennan’s (2017) and Pihlaja’s (2016) prior work on pornographic video commentary, these two

studies, while representing the dearth of literature on Porn 2.0, lay the foundation for more

detailed analysis of Porn 2.0 websites.

Gaps in Pornography Literature

Accordingly, while previous research on pornography is inherently valuable, there are

three main gaps in the literature that need to be addressed. First, previous research has tended to

treat those who consume pornography as a homogenous group when the reality of pornography

consumption is much more complex (Paasonen, 2010). This logic is in line with previous

scholarship on sex work, as not all people who purchase sex have the same motivations nor seek

out the same content (Jeffreys, 2009; Monto, 2010).

Second, while research has consistently indicated that pornography is associated with

harmful outcomes, it fails to critically examine what types of pornography are associated with

harmful outcomes and in what context they become harmful. Indeed, scholars need to stop the

debate about if pornography is harmful and understand the context in which it is harmful. Much

like how researchers on violent media more broadly has indicated that the debate must end about

if violent forms of media increase aggression, but rather, future scholarship should focus on what

types of violent media are associated with aggression, how much exposure is associated with

71

aggression, and who is more likely to be affected given the variations in content they consume

(Bushman & Huesmann, 2014, p. 53). Researchers must examine what types of violent

media are more likely to be associated with varying forms of aggression for different consumers

and in what context (Bushman & Huesmann, 2013). Extending this declaration to the current

study, scholars who study pornography must cease the debate on if pornography

impacts attitudes and behaviors in a harmful manner, because research has substantiated that it

does shape attitudes and behaviors post-consumption, but rather go deeper to examine what types

of pornography are most associated with harm, how different levels of viewership impact

harm, and how does this harm vary across different types of pornography?

Lastly, current research has failed to rigorously examine how those who consume

pornography interact within the spaces in which pornography is housed and sought out via

pornographic hub websites. Makin and Morczek (2015) concur, stating that research must

expand to include pornographic websites harboring pornographic content because of the sheer

number of consumers accessing pornography via this medium and the fact that these websites act

as repositories for gendered aggression. Consequently, research must extend to not only assess

the type of content users are uploading to pornographic hubs, but also the potentially harmful

ways users interact with the content therein. Indeed, previous research has noted that Web 2.0

features and interactions “necessitates studying new communication dynamics between message

producers and receivers” (Jin et al., 2015, p. 6).

Though, to my knowledge, there have only been two academic studies to examine

various means of interactions within pornographic hub websites and two others that examine

pornographic video commentary specifically, these studies did not explicitly and purposefully

72

examine the nuance of user interaction as it relates to gender and more specifically, various

manifestations of misogynistic user interactions with pornographic videos (Brennan, 2017;

Pihlaja, 2016; Trestian et al., 2013; Tyson et al., 2015). The focus on misogyny specifically

within this study becomes an important avenue to identify how harmful, gendered language is

related to pornography consumption, especially given the previously substantiated linkages

between misogynistic terminology and expressions of gender inequality and aggression that have

been identified through research (Anderson & Cermele, 2014; Hardaker & McGlashan, 2016;

Jane 2017; Sobieraj, 2017).

Thus, this study addresses these gaps in the following ways. First, this research examines

user interaction with pornography within one of the largest pornographic websites in the world,

XVideos.com. Examining both pornography and pornography usage in such a space, unfiltered

by issues of social desirability, provides for a true reflection of the community of this

pornographic hub and the values and norms therein. Second, the data available via XVideos.com

creates a means to disaggregate the ways interactions take place with pornographic content

through uploading, titling, categorizing, viewing, rating, and commenting upon pornographic

videos. These data provide a wealth of information and can lend insight into how interactions

take place across interactive mechanisms within a pornographic website with Porn 2.0 features.

Third, and perhaps most importantly, the current study allows for the examination of what types

of pornography are associated with manifestations of misogyny.

Summary

In summary, the internet has forever altered the way and means human beings interact

with one another and with mass media, and this revolutionary mechanism for social interaction

73

and media exchange has extended to pornography. Denoted as Porn 2.0, pornography

consumption is no longer a passive and solitary pursuit, but rather participatory and social where

pornography consumers can not only generate and upload pornographic content, but share, rate,

and comment upon the content with peers on pornographic websites. This new means of

interaction and communication gives way to scholarly inquiry about the pornographic content

available therein. Yet, little is known about interactions within these spaces. Thus, given the

extensive literature on the relationship between pornography, misogyny, and violence toward

women, we can extend academic scholarship to include how violence toward women manifests

within Porn 2.0.

74

CHAPTER FOUR

METHODOLOGY AND RESULTS

This study employed mixed methods to assess whether misogynistic terminology is

related to user interaction with pornographic videos. Indeed, data associated with pornography as

it related to gender inequality and violence cannot be myopically overlooked and should be

considered complementary to other criminal justice scholarship about violence toward women

and more traditional means of data acquisition. Thus, to fill the gaps in the current literature, this

study answers the following research questions:

1. What is the relationship between the number of views, video ratings, and the number of

comments on pornographic videos and misogynistic terminology in video titles?

2. What is the relationship between the misogynistic terminology in video titles and


3. What is the relationship between the misogynistic terminology in video commentary and


4. What themes emerge in pornographic video commentary containing misogynistic

terminology?

Research Setting

One of the most popular pornographic video websites in the world, XVideos.com, is a

publicly available pornographic website that allows anyone to go to the website and download

metadata from their entire pornographic video database without requiring log-in credentials

and/or payment. As noted in Table 4.1, this data includes pornographic video titles, pornographic

75

video category, pornographic video rating, the number of views per pornographic video, the

number of comments per pornographic video, and comments on pornographic videos. Video

titles, categories, and comments contain textual qualitative information, whereas the rest of the

variables are numerical measures. While the information garnered from this data is only

generalizable to XVideos.com, this website represents a massive wealth of content from which

research questions can be employed and conclusions can be drawn. Indeed, XVideos.com is an

ideal setting for this study as it contains the publicly available data required to address the

research questions and also allows the researcher to examine user interaction with pornographic

videos in an unobtrusive manner.

Table 4.1: Pornographic Video Data from XVideos.com

Video Uploader Variables Video Viewer Variables

Video titles

Video category

Video rating

Number of views per video

Number of comments per video

Comments on videos

Research Design

Mixed Methodology

This study employs a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods to address the

research questions therein. In doing so, qualitative manifest coding procedures have been used to

identify the existence of misogynistic terminology and quantitative methods examine whether a

relationship exists between misogynistic terminology and user interaction with pornographic

76

videos. Furthermore, a qualitative content analysis is employed to examine what themes emerge

from the pornographic video comments.

Sampling

Given the sizeable amount of cases within the dataset, only pornographic videos that

included relevant descriptive information to address the research questions within this study were

included in the final sample. Accordingly, to ensure that all research questions can be addressed,

the sampling frame for the current study includes only pornographic videos that have a title, a

category, and comments, as well as information about the number of views, comments, and

ratings per video. To fully encapsulate the data and measure user interaction with pornographic

videos, the following sampling procedures have been employed.

Sampling Procedures

An examination of the dataset derived from XVideos.com indicates that 468,533 cases

met the sampling frame criteria. Since the remaining cases within the sampling frame for

analysis also contained pornographic videos with substantial numbers of comments (ranging

from 1 to 1308 per pornographic video), comment outliers were removed before the final sample

was drawn. Thus, in accordance with Tukey’s (1977) method for outlier detection, pornographic

videos that had more than 11 comments per pornographic video were flagged as outliers and

eliminated from the sampling frame, reducing the total number of cases from 468,533 to a total

of 424,321 videos with a total of 1,244,074 comments. Yet, even after removing videos that

contained more than 11 comments, the sampling frame remained much too large for expedient

analysis or for that, which is possible given the software and computing power to be utilized in

the analysis. Thus, a random sample was drawn using the statistical software package, SPSS. The

decision to utilize random sampling procedures is in accordance with Kraska and Neuman’s

77

(2012) assertion that random sampling is the ideal way to ensure that the sample represents the

true characteristics of the target population (p. 130).

Accordingly, a random sample of 10,000 cases was drawn to ensure that data processing

is manageable for both the researcher and the analytical software, yet still provides for adequate

statistical power as well as the depth and breadth necessitated for qualitative content analysis.

Thus, as noted in Table 4.2, the final random sample to be used in the analysis contains 10,000

pornographic videos with comments.

Table 4.2: XVideos.com Dataset Frequencies

Original Dataset Sampling Frame Random Sample

Pornographic

Videos 3,300,731 424,321 10,000

Measures

The extensive review of the literature in Chapter 2 provides the basis for the measures

employed in the current analysis. Consequently, the following terms have been defined as

misogynistic: bitch, slut, whore, hoe, cunt, and skank. These terms were identified within both

the pornographic video titles and pornographic video comments using manifest coding

procedures, as this “highly reliable” method of coding allows the researcher to identify words

and locate them within the textual data (Kraska & Neuman, 2012, p. 213). Once these terms were

78

identified throughout the pornographic video titles and pornographic video comments, a

dichotomous, dummy variable was created to denote the presence of any of the aforementioned

misogynistic terms. More specifically, this variable is dummy coded as either 0 (i.e. no

misogynistic terminology) or 1 (i.e. the presence of at least one misogynistic term) for the

subsequent analyses. The identification of misogyny via manifest coding procedures throughout

both pornographic video titles and pornographic video comments guides both the quantitative

and qualitative analyses for this study.

While manifest coding procedures guide the analyses, the variables to be measured in this

study depend upon the research question being addressed. For Research Question 1 the

independent variable is misogynistic terminology in pornographic video titles and the dependent

variables consist of the number of views on pornographic videos, pornographic video rating and

the number of comments on pornographic videos. For Research Questions 2 and 3, however, the

independent variable becomes pornographic video category, whereas the dependent variables

become misogynistic terminology. More specifically, the dependent variable in Research

Question 2 becomes misogynistic terminology in pornographic video titles and in Research

Question 3, the dependent variable is misogynistic terminology in pornographic video

comments. These variables are employed to assess the relationship between misogynistic

terminology and pornographic video category. The final research question will examine what

thematic categories emerge from pornographic video comments containing misogynistic terms

by way of content analysis. Thus, the unit of analysis for the quantitative components of the

study consists of individual pornographic videos. However, given the nature of the data and the

aim of the research question, the unit of analysis for the qualitative component of the study

becomes individual pornographic video textual comments containing misogynistic terminology.

79

Analyses

To answer the research questions and provide the groundwork for the successive

analyses, the following preliminary steps were taken. First, a content analysis with manifest

coding procedures is used to identify the occurrence of misogynistic terms both within the

pornographic video titles as well as pornographic video comments. Manifest coding for

misogynistic terms will serve to identify and quantify misogynistic terms in both pornographic

video titles as well as pornographic video comments and create the binary misogyny variables

needed to address the research questions. Further analyses as well as the research questions they

correspond to have been denoted below.

Descriptive Statistics

A random sample of 10,000 pornographic videos with comments was selected for

analysis to ensure it was representative of the original dataset. As noted in Table 4.3 below, the

sample contains 10,000 pornographic videos with an average rating of 65.73% (out of 100%) and

29,202 comments (or an average of 2.92 comments per video). While the total number of views

across the random sample exceeds 45 million, the average number of views per pornographic

video is 4,592. Furthermore, of the 44 video categories within the sample, the descriptive

statistics illustrate that Unknown (23.10%), Blowjob (9.4%), Teen (5.6%), and Gay (5.6%) were

the most prevalent pornographic video categories. The category Unknown, the most popular

category within the random sample, accounts for videos that did not get labeled using another

predetermined category identifier when uploaded to XVideos.com. Thus, Unknown acts as a de

facto, catch-all category, encompassing a diverse combination of pornographic videos. The

second most popular categories, Blowjob, and Teen, are themes depicting male to female oral

sex and young, teenage performers respectively. Gay was also a popular category within the

80

sample, encompassing pornographic videos uploaded to XVideos.com that depict gay men

engaging in pornographic sexual relations.

Table 4.3: Descriptive Statistics

N=10,000

Variable Frequency (%) Mean (SD)

Pornographic Video Views 45,924,733 4,592.47 (9,646.66)

Pornographic Video Ratings 2,882,482 65.73 (26.33)

Pornographic Video Comments 29,202 2.92 (2.46)

Pornographic Video Categories 44 --

Unknown 2,310 (23.10%) --

Blow job 936 (9.36%) --

Teen 562 (5.62%) --

Gay 463 (4.63%) --

Brunette 408 (4.08%) --

Hardcore 401 (4.01%) --

Amateur 368 (3.69%) --

Only girls 358 (3.58%) --

Big tits 349 (3.49%) --

Exotic 344 (3.44%) --

BDSM 334 (3.34%) --

Cam porn 269 (2.69%) --

Ass 266 (2.66%) --

Sexy 254 (2.54%) --

Asian Woman 237 (2.37%) --

Mature 234 (2.34%) --

Black sex 175 (1.75%) --

Shemale 159 (1.59%) --

Cum shot 157 (1.57%) --

Blonde 150 (1.50%) --

BBW 123 (1.23%) --

Anal 91 (0.91%) --

Facial 86 (0.86%) --

Shaved pussy 83 (0.83%) --

MILF 81 (0.81%) --

Pissing 77 (0.77%) --

81

Heels 70 (0.70%) --

Porn star 69 (0.69%) --

Creampie 64 (0.64%) --

Big cock 60 (0.60%) --

Big ass 55 (0.55%) --

Interracial 54 (0.54%) --

Celebrity 52 (0.52%) --

Red head 51 (0.51%) --

Feet 50 (0.50%) --

Ass to mouth 40 (0.40%) --

Squirting 40 (0.40%) --

Toons 30 (0.30%) --

Latina 24 (0.24%) --

Oiled 24 (0.24%) --

Stockings 21 (0.21%) --

Huge tits 14 (0.14%) --

Black woman 5 (0.05%) --

Solo and masturbation 1 (0.01%) --

Given the data for this study was generated from a pornographic website accessible to

anyone from all over the world, the random sample of 10,000 pornographic videos contained

cases with qualitative data (e.g. video titles and comments) that were in a wide variety of foreign

languages. Thus, when conducting this analysis, no foreign language titles or comments were

examined. Accordingly, of the 10,000 videos in the sample, 168 pornographic videos (1.68%)

included titles and comments that were entirely in foreign languages and were subsequently

excluded from the analysis. This left a remaining total of 9,832 videos. Given that each research

question within this study examines a different component of the dataset further exclusions were

made depending upon the research question being addressed.

82

When using analyses that examined pornographic video titles only, a further 306 videos

were excluded from the remaining 9,832, since these videos contained titles in a foreign

language. This yielded a total of 9,526 videos for any subsequent analysis using the variable,

pornographic video titles. When analyzing only pornographic video comments, 373 videos

contained comments entirely in foreign languages. These 373 videos were excluded from the

total of 9,832, yielding 9,459 videos for any analysis examining pornographic video comments.

Thus, of the 10,000 pornographic videos in the original random sample 9,153 contain an English

language title and at least one comment in English. Each component of the study reflects these

new totals as they pertain to each research question being addressed.

Moreover, given the presence of misogynistic terminology guides all six research

questions, Table 4.4 denotes the frequency of misogynistic terms found within the dataset via the

use of qualitative manifest coding procedures. As is noted in the preceding chapters, misogyny is

denoted as the presence of at least one misogynistic term (e.g. bitch, slut, whore, hoe, cunt,

and/or skank). Accordingly, descriptive statistics highlight that 15.82% of the pornographic

videos were found to contain at least one instance of misogynistic terminology and 1.0% of the

videos had both misogynistic terminology in the title as well as the comments. Across both

pornographic video titles and comments the qualitative data indicates that bitch, slut, and whore

were the most common misogynistic terms and cunt, hoe, and skank were the least common.

Moreover, 505 videos contained pornographic video titles with at least one misogynistic term

and 1142 videos contained at least one comment with a misogynistic term. This amounts to a

total of 1339 comments within the sample that contain at least one misogynistic term.

83

Table 4.4: Misogynistic Terminology Variable Frequencies

Misogynistic Terminology Frequency Percent

Pornographic Video Titles (n=9,526) 505a 5.30

Slut 301

Bitch 95

Whore 70

Cunt 28

Hoe 15

Skank 4

Pornographic Video Comments (n=9,459) 1,142b 12.07

Bitch 687

Slut 293

Whore 244

Cunt 148

Hoe 49

Skank 15

Pornographic Video Titles and Comments (n=9,153) 92c 1.0

Total Number of Videos Containing Misogyny (n=9,832) 1,556 15.82 a Denotes videos with a title containing at least one misogynistic term. b Denotes videos with at least one comment containing a misogynistic term. c Denotes videos with both titles and at least one comment containing a misogynistic term.

Research Question 1

Pornographic Video Views

The first research question in this study is, “What is the relationship between the number

of views, video ratings, and the number of comments on pornographic videos and misogynistic

terminology in video titles?” This research question addressed the relationship between the

dependent variable, number of pornographic video views, and the independent variable,

misogynistic terminology in pornographic video titles. An analysis of the variables in the dataset

indicated that the dependent variable, pornographic video views, was nonparametric and

84

contained outliers. To correct this and prepare the data for analysis, the variable had to be re-

expressed using a log transformation to normalize the data and remove outliers. After this

transformation, outliers were then calculated on the newly expressed variable using the

interquartile range (IQR). Thus, after the log transformation and calculations using the IQR to

identify and remove outliers within the variable, 72 cases were flagged as outliers and removed

from the sample for the analysis – dropping the sample size to a total of 9,454 pornographic

videos.

After the log transformation was complete and the outliers were dropped from the

analysis, the sample became parametric. Thus, an independent-samples t-test was conducted to

compare views in relation to pornographic video titles with misogyny and those without

misogyny. On average, there was a significant difference in the scores for misogyny (M=2.92,

SD=0.73) and no misogyny (M=3.05, SD=0.79); t(571.65)=3.804, p<001. The difference

between the means is 0.12864 ± .071245 at a 95% confidence level. Thus, the results suggest that

when misogynistic terminology is present within the pornographic video titles, the views on

those videos decrease. However, the effect size suggests a weak relationship (r = 0.16) (see

Table 4.5).

Table 4.5: Independent Samples T-Test Results: The Effect of Misogyny in Pornographic

Video Titles on Pornographic Video Views

n=9454

Variable F t(df) p

Misogyny 7.358 3.804 (571.65) p<.001

85

Next, a Pearson correlation was conducted to assess the strength and direction of the

relationship between misogynistic terminology in pornographic video titles and pornographic

video views. The results confirm that the relationship is negative in that videos with misogynistic

terms in the video titles garnered less views than those with misogynistic terminology (r = -

0.063, p<.001). However, the correlation coefficient suggests that this relationship is weak.

Pornographic Video Ratings

This research question examines the relationship between the dependent variable,

pornographic video ratings, and the independent variable, misogynistic terminology in video

titles. The variable, pornographic video rating, is non-parametric, albeit with no outliers, it

violates the assumptions of an independent samples t-test. Thus, a Mann-Whitney U-Test was

utilized to compare group medians. The results indicate that videos with misogynistic video titles

did not differ in a statistically differ from those videos without misogynistic video titles in terms

of pornographic video ratings, U = 2,280,620, z = .047, p = .963, r = 0.0006. Therefore, the

analysis indicated that misogynistic terminology was not found to be significantly related to

pornographic video ratings.

Pornographic Video Comments

This research question examines the relationship between the dependent variable, the

number of pornographic video comments, and the independent variable, misogynistic

terminology in video titles. An analysis of the variable, number of comments, indicated that it

was nonparametric and contained outliers. Thus, the variable was log-transformed to both

eliminate outliers and attempt to normalize the distribution. While the outliers were eliminated

during the log transformation, the distribution remained positively skewed, thereby necessitating

the use of a nonparametric test. As a result, a Mann-Whitney U-Test was utilized, which can

86

compare medians between two groups for non-parametric data. The results, represented in Table

5.5, indicate that videos containing titles with misogynistic terminology differed significantly

from those without misogynistic terminology in terms of the number of comments per video, U =

2,004,289, z = -4.725, p < .001. Thus, pornographic videos with misogynistic video titles garner

fewer comments than those videos without misogynistic video titles. However, the effect size

suggests a weak relationship (r = 0.05) (see Table 4.6).

Table 4.6: Mann-Whitney U Results: The Effect of Misogyny in Video Titles on the

Number of Pornographic Video Comments

n=9526

Variable n Mean Rank z U p

No misogyny 9,021 4,793.82 -- -- --

Misogyny 505 4,221.89 -4.725 2,004,289 p<.001

Next, a Spearman correlation was used to determine the strength and direction of the

relationship between misogynistic terminology in video titles and number of comments. The

results indicated that there was a negative correlation between misogynistic terminology in video

titles and the number of comments per video (rs = - 0.049; p<.001). Thus, pornographic videos

with misogynistic video titles had fewer comments compared to pornographic videos without

misogynistic video titles. However, the correlation coefficient indicated this relationship is weak.

Research Question 2

The second research question is, “What is the relationship between the misogynistic

terminology in video titles and video category?” This research question included an examination

87

of the relationship between the dependent variable, misogynistic terminology in pornographic

video titles, and the independent variable, pornographic video categories. To test this

relationship, a Chi-square test with Fisher’s Exact was employed. To avoid overfitting the model

due to limited observations, only pornographic video categories that represent at least 5% of the

sample (n=9526) will be examined in this analysis. Four categories met this criterion and are

listed as follows: Unknown (21%), Blowjob (10%), Teen (6%), and Gay (5%).

Chi-square tests using the Fisher’s Exact test revealed that the presence of misogynistic

terminology within pornographic video titles is significantly related to pornographic video

category. Specifically, statistical analyses confirmed that misogyny in pornographic video titles

occurs less frequently in videos categorized as Gay (OR=0.155; p<.001) and Unknown

(OR=0.500; p<.001) and more frequently in videos categorized as Blowjob (OR=1.578; p<.001).

The same analyses also confirmed that misogyny in pornographic video comments occurred

more frequently in the Teen category, but the results are not statistically significant. Results from

this analysis are presented in Table 4.7.

Table 4.7: Fisher’s Exact Results: Misogyny in Video Titles and Pornographic Video

Categories

n=9526

Category OR [95% CI]

Blowjob 1.578 [1.218-2.045]***

Teen 1.222 [0.857-1.743]

Unknown 0.500 [0.382-0.656]***

Gay 0.155 [0.058-0.416]***

Note. * p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001

88

Moreover, dummy codes were utilized to collapse categories to assess whether any

further insight can be garnered into how misogynistic terminology in pornographic video titles is

related to pornographic video category. For example, to develop the newly recoded category

variable “Race” the following categories were recoded into a binary, dummy variable: Asian

Woman (n=236), Black Sex (n=175), Black Woman (n=5), Exotic (n=297), Interracial (n=54),

and Latina (n=18). This aggregated variable accounts for 785 cases or 8% of the data. All the

aforementioned categories contained overarching themes that involved racial demographics of

the performers therein. For the category, “LGTBQ,” the categories Gay (n=446), Shemale

(n=156), and Only Girls (n=354) were collapsed together as they represented videos featuring

LGTBQ themes, those otherwise depicting homosexual sexual relations and/or those involving

transgender performers. This aggregated variable accounts for 956 cases or 10% of the dataset.

Next, the category, “Fetish,” involved collapsing categories associated with fetish pornography

including: BDSM (n=334), Feet (n=50), Heels (n=69), Pissing (n=77), Squirting (n=40), Oiled

(n=24), and Stockings (n=21). These categories have been repeatedly highlighted in the literature

as fetish genres (Ogas & Gaddam, 2011). This aggregated variable accounts for 615 cases or 6%

of the data. Lastly, “Age” was developed by collapsing the three categories associated with the

age of the performers therein, including: Mature (n=234), MILF (n=80), and Teen (n=553). The

central theme of these categories involved highlighting the respective ages of the performers

therein. This aggregated variable accounts for 867 cases or 9% of the data.

The statistically significant results from these newly collapsed categories indicated that

misogynistic terminology in pornographic video titles occurs less frequently in videos

categorized using LGTBQ categories (p<.001) and that misogynistic terminology in

pornographic video titles occurs more frequently in video titles categorized via Age (p=.002),

89

and Fetish (p<.001). More specifically, videos categorized as LGTBQ were 2.81 times less likely

to have pornographic video titles containing misogynistic terminology compared to those not

categorized as LGTBQ (OR=0.356). Similarly, videos categorized via fetish were 2.05 times

more likely to have misogynistic video titles than those not categories via fetish (OR=2.057).

Still more, videos categorized via Age were 1.5 times more likely to have video titles that

contained misogyny compared to those videos not categorized by age (OR=1.543). Lastly, the

relationship between the pornographic video category, Race, and misogynistic terminology in

pornographic video titles was not found to be statistically significant (see Table 4.8).

Table 4.8: Fisher’s Exact Results: Misogyny in Video Titles and Collapsed Pornographic

Video Categories n=9526

Categories OR [95% CI]

Fetish 2.057 [1.550-2.729]***

Race 1.095 [0.815-1.471]

Age 1.543 [1.179-2.018]**

LGTBQ 0.356 [0.227-0.560]***

Note. * p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001

Research Question 3

The third research question is, “What is the relationship between the misogynistic

terminology in video comments and video category?” This analysis included a quantitative

examination of the relationship between the dependent variable, misogynistic terminology in

pornographic video comments, and its relationship to the independent variable, pornographic

90

video category. A Chi-Square analysis using Fisher’s Exact was once again conducted

examining misogyny in the remaining pornographic videos with comments. Much like the

previous analysis using Chi-square with Fisher’s Exact, only categories that represented at least

5% of the sample (n=9459) were used in this analysis to avoid overfitting the model due to

limited observations. Four categories met this criterion and are listed as follows: Unknown

(21%), Blowjob (10%), Teen (6%), and Gay (5%).

Results show that misogyny in pornographic video comments occurred less frequently in

videos categorized as Gay (OR=0.403; p<.001), Teen (OR=0.724; p=.035), and Unknown

(OR=0.773; p<.001) when compared to other categories. The same analyses also confirmed that

misogyny in pornographic video comments occurred more frequently in the Blowjob category,

but the results are not statistically significant. Results from this analysis are presented in Table

4.9.

Table 4.9: Fisher’s Exact Results: Misogyny in Video Comments and Pornographic

Video Categories

n=9459

Category OR [95% CI]

Blowjob 1.014 [0.823-1.250]

Unknown 0.773 [0.661-0.905]***

Teen 0.724 [0.538-0.975]*

Gay 0.403 [0.264-0.617]***

Note. * p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001

91

Moreover, and as noted in the previous research question, certain categories of videos

were collapsed and tested using Chi-Square with Fisher’s Exact to determine whether a

statistically significant relationship exists between misogynistic terminology in pornographic

video comments and pornographic video category. Accordingly, the aggregated variable Race

(n=784) accounts for 8% of the data and the “LGTBQ” (n=905) aggregated variable accounts for

10% of the data. “Fetish,” another aggregated variable, accounts for 6% of the data and lastly,

the aggregated variable, Age (n=846), accounts for 9% of the data.

The statistically significant results from these new categories indicated that misogyny

within video comments occurred less frequently in videos associated with LGTBQ themes

(p<.001) and that misogyny occurred more frequently in videos associated with Race (p<.001),

and Fetish (p=.017). More specifically, videos categorized as LGTBQ were 1.74 times less likely

to have misogyny within the video comments than those videos not categorized as LGTBQ

(OR=0.575). Videos categorized via Race, however, were nearly two times more likely to have

misogynistic comments compared to videos not categorized by race (OR=1.757). Lastly, videos

categorized via Fetish were 1.3 times more likely to have misogynistic commentary than those

not categorized as Fetish (OR=1.340). The category, Age, was not significantly related to

misogynistic terminology in pornographic video comments (see Table 4.10).

92

Table 4.10 Fisher’s Exact Results: Misogyny in Video Comments and Collapsed

Pornographic Video Categories

n=9459

Collapsed Category OR [95% CI]

Race 1.757 [1.467-2.105]***

Fetish 1.340 [1.063-1.688]*

Age 0.914 [0.731-1.142]

LQTBQ 0.575 [0.446-0.741]***

Note. * p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001

Research Question 4

The final research question within this mixed methods study employs content analysis to

determine what thematic categories emerged from pornographic video comments containing

misogynistic terminology. More specifically, this final research question is as follows: “What

themes emerge in pornographic video commentary containing misogynistic terminology?” It is

important to note that since none of the data within this research contains any identifying

information (as that data, while publicly available, was not collected for the purposes of this

study), the unit of analysis for this component of the research is pornographic video comments.

The use of comments as the unit of analysis allows the author to capture the complexities of the

data.

The qualitative analysis examining themes within pornographic video commentary

containing misogynistic terminology provided robust results – including the identification of 10

thematic categories. Of the 29,202 comments within this study, 1,339 included misogynistic

terminology. Thus, 1,339 pornographic video comments were analyzed and are subsequently

referred to by their thematic categories and comment numbers. Table 4.11 summarizes the 10

93

thematic categories to emerge from the data as well as the percentage of the thematic categories

within the comments that contained misogynistic terminology.

Table 4.11 Thematic Categories Depicting Misogynistic Language

n=1339

Thematic Category Description Percent

Complimentary

Misogyny

Complimentary language and/or flattering feedback about

a performer’s physical appearance, sexual prowess, and/or

cinematic demeanor

29.9

Personal

Reflections

First-person perspectives and noted personal affiliations of

the commenter 27.3

Who, What, and

Where

Inquires or statements about who the performer within the

pornographic is, what other pornographic content contains

the performer, and where the content can be found

18.1

Race, Ethnicity,

and Nationality References to race, ethnicity, and/or nationality 13.9

Critical Misogyny

Critical language and/or criticisms about a performer's

physical appearance, sexual prowess, and/or cinematic

demeanor

11.9

Degradation and

Violence

Explicit references to degradation, abuse, sexual assault,

and/or rape 11.9

Video Narrative Descriptions of the pornographic video, including the

content, quality, and/or specific segments 8.0

Bravado

Boastful comments about one’s penis size and/or the

sexual abilities of either the commenter, the male

performer within the video, and/or both

5.5

Uncodeable

Commentary deemed uncodeable due to pervasive spelling

and grammatic errors as well as a general lack of

coherence

3.7

Generic

Basic use of the misogynistic terms outlined in in study,

including brief statements that employed misogynistic

terminology without associated descriptions or context

3.0

Note. Due to intersections of thematic categories, the percentages do not add up to 100%.

94

As noted in Table 4.11, the most prevalent thematic category, accounting for almost 30%

of comments that contained misogynistic terminology, is Complimentary Misogyny.

Complimentary Misogyny describes any instance wherein a commenter uses complimentary

and/or otherwise flattering language in conjunction with misogynistic terminology. This thematic

category also includes complimentary feedback about a performer’s physical appearance, sexual

prowess, and/or cinematic demeanor.

The second most prevalent thematic category, Personal Reflections, accounts for 27.3%

of the comments that contained misogynistic terminology. This thematic category includes any

comments wherein the commenter is speaking using a first-person perspective and commenting

on things they have done or would do; sexually or otherwise. This thematic category also

includes any comment in which the commenter denotes a personal affiliation with the performer

therein or otherwise references someone they know personally.

The third thematic category to emerge from the analysis is, Who, What, and Where.

Accounting for 18.1% of the pornographic video comments that contained misogynistic

terminology, Who, What, and Where is simply any instance wherein a commenter asks a) who a

performer is, b) what other pornographic materials the performer can be found in, and/or c)

where a specific pornographic video can be located. This thematic category also includes any

comment wherein a commenter explicitly notes a performer by their stage name.

Accounting for nearly 14% of the pornographic video comments that contained

misogynistic terminology, the fourth thematic category, Race, Ethnicity, and Nationality, is any

pornographic video comment that refers racial demographics, ethnicity, and/or nationality within

the text of the comment. This thematic category includes simple racial descriptive (e.g. black and

95

white) as well as racial slurs and other offensive terminology associated with race, ethnicity, and

nationality.

The next two thematic categories, Critical Misogyny and Degradation and Violence

account for nearly 12% of the pornographic video comments that contained misogynistic

terminology, respectively. Critical Misogyny, refers to any comment wherein a commenter uses

critical language in conjunction with misogynistic terminology. This includes criticisms about

intelligence, physical appearance, as well as sexual ability. Degradation and Violence, on the

other hand, includes any comment that uses over degrading language in association with

misogynistic terminology as well as those that denote abuse and/or violence. This category also

includes degradation via dehumanization, wherein commenters opt to describe others by using

dehumanizing language (e.g. “it”).

Accounting for 8% of the pornographic video comments that contained misogynistic

terminology, the next thematic category to emerge from an analysis of data includes, Video

Narrative. Video Narrative describes any instance that simply refers to pornographic video

quality, specific segments of pornographic videos, and/or those that describe how the video was

filmed. Still more, the eighth thematic category, Bravado, includes any comment wherein a

commenter boasts about their supposed sexual prowess and/or the size of their penis. This

thematic category, accounting for nearly 6% of the sample, also includes any comment wherein a

commenter directly refers to the sexual ability of male performers within the pornographic

videos. All the comments that fall within this thematic category can also involve instances

wherein a commenter is comparing themselves to the performers in the video.

The final two thematic categories include Generic Misogyny and Uncodeable Comments,

which account for 3.7% and 3% of the pornographic video comments that contained

96

misogynistic terminology. Generic Misogyny, refers to any comment that references

misogynistic terminology without context and/or specific descriptive information. This includes

comments that simply contain one of the misogynistic terms outlined in the study or simplistic

statements using those terms. Uncodeable Comments, on the other hand, describes any comment

that was deemed uncodeable due to pervasive spelling and grammatical errors, lack of

coherence, and/or otherwise unintelligible messages. The next section denotes how these

thematic categories intersect with one another and provides specific examples of the types of

comments coded within each thematic category.

Thematic Category Examples and Intersections

An important finding regarding the themes that emerged from the pornographic video

commentary is the fact that, given the complex nature of the data and unit of analysis (i.e.

pornographic video comment), thematic categories intersected with one another within a single

comment. Indeed, pornographic video commentary was not always neatly categorized within one

distinctive thematic category, but rather contained information that was coded across multiple

categories. Accordingly, out of the 1339 cases in the sample of misogynistic comments, 943

cases (70.43%) were coded using only one thematic category while 396 cases (29.57%) were

coded using more than one theme. More specifically, results indicated that 352 comments

(26.3%) contained two themes, 41 comments contained three themes (3.1%), 1 comment

contained four themes (0.1%), and 2 comments contained five themes (0.1%). Table 4.12

provides a summary of the main themes to emerge from pornographic video commentary as well

as the number of times each theme overlaps with another within a single pornographic video

comment. However, while some comments were coded under three or more themes, those

specific combinations are not reflected in this table.

97

Table 4.12: Intersections of Thematic Categories

n=1339

Thematic Category Frequency Percentage

Category 1: Complimentary Misogyny 425 100

Complimentary Misogyny 243 57.18

Complimentary Misogyny + Personal Reflections 62 14.59

Complimentary Misogyny + Who, What, and Where 56 13.18

Complimentary Misogyny + Race, Ethnicity, and Nationality 35 0.08

Complimentary Misogyny + Video Narrative 15 0.04

Complimentary Misogyny + Degradation and Violence 7 0.02

Complimentary Misogyny + Bravado 6 0.01

Complimentary Misogyny + Critical Misogyny 1 0.00

Category 2: Personal Reflections 402 100

Personal Reflections 166 41.29

Personal Reflections + Complimentary 62 15.42

Personal Reflections + Race, Ethnicity, and Nationality 53 13.18

Personal Reflections + Who, What, and Where 43 10.70

Personal Reflections + Degradation and Violence 31 7.71

Personal Reflections + Video Narrative 17 4.23

Personal Reflections + Critical Misogyny 16 3.98

Personal Reflections + Bravado 14 3.48

Category 3: Who, What, and Where 261 100

Who, What, and Where 116 44.44

Who, What, and Where + Complimentary Misogyny 55 21.07

Who, What, and Where + Personal Reflections 39 14.94

Who, What, and Where + Race, Ethnicity, and Nationality 23 8.81

Who, What, and Where + Critical Misogyny 10 3.83

Who, What, and Where + Degradation and Violence 9 3.45

Who, What, and Where + Video Narrative 5 1.92

Who, What, and Where + Bravado 4 1.53

Category 4: Race, Ethnicity, and Nationality 216 100

Race, Ethnicity, and Nationality 57 26.39

Race, Ethnicity, and Nationality + Personal Reflections 53 24.54

Race, Ethnicity, and Nationality + Complimentary Misogyny 35 16.20

Race, Ethnicity, and Nationality + Who, What, and Where 23 10.65

Race, Ethnicity, and Nationality + Critical Misogyny 17 7.87

Race, Ethnicity, and Nationality + Degradation and Violence 15 6.94

Race, Ethnicity, and Nationality + Bravado 9 4.17

Race, Ethnicity, and Nationality + Video Narrative 7 3.24

Category 5: Critical Misogyny 164 100

98

Critical Misogyny 98 59.76

Critical Misogyny + Race, Ethnicity, and Nationality 17 10.37

Critical Misogyny + Personal Reflections 15 9.15

Critical Misogyny + Degradation and Abuse 11 6.71

Critical Misogyny + Who, What, and Where 8 4.88

Critical Misogyny + Bravado 8 4.88

Critical Misogyny + Video Narrative 6 3.66

Critical Misogyny + Complimentary Misogyny 1 0.61

Category 6: Degradation and Violence 173 100

Degradation and Violence 90 52.02

Degradation and Violence + Personal Reflections 31 17.92

Degradation and Violence + Race, Ethnicity, and Nationality 15 8.67

Degradation and Violence + Critical Misogyny 11 6.36

Degradation and Violence + Who, What, and Where 9 5.20

Degradation and Violence + Complimentary Misogyny 7 4.05

Degradation and Violence + Video Narrative 5 2.89

Degradation and Violence + Bravado 5 2.89

Category 7: Video Narrative 112 100

Video Narrative 53 47.32

Video Narrative + Personal Reflections 17 15.18

Video Narrative + Complimentary Misogyny 15 13.39

Video Narrative + Race, Ethnicity, and Nationality 7 6.25

Video Narrative + Critical Misogyny 6 5.36

Video Narrative + Who, What, and Where 5 4.46

Video Narrative + Degradation and Violence 5 4.46

Video Narrative + Bravado 4 3.57

Category 8: Bravado 81 100

Bravado 31 38.27

Bravado + Personal Reflections 14 17.28

Bravado + Race, Ethnicity, and Nationality 9 11.11

Bravado + Critical Misogyny 8 9.88

Bravado + Complimentary Misogyny 6 7.41

Bravado + Degradation and Violence 5 6.17

Bravado + Who, What, and Where 4 4.94

Bravado + Video Narrative 4 4.94

Category 9: Generic Misogyny 49 100

Category 10: Uncodeable Comments 40 100

Note. This table does not account for the 44 comments that were coded using 3, 4, or 5 categories.

99

As noted above, a total of 10 thematic categories emerged upon analysis of the data.

Descriptions of each thematic category are discussed below as well as examples of comments

coded using each thematic category as well as comments coded across multiple thematic

categories. It is important to note that each comment that is used in the synopses below is written

verbatim or exactly as it appeared within the data source without correcting for offensive

language, incorrect spelling, and/or grammatical errors.

Complimentary misogyny. The first and most common thematic category to emerge

from the data is Complimentary Misogyny. While the use of the misogynistic terminology is

inherently problematic, many commenters who used misogynistic commentary within their

comments did so in a complimentary fashion. In other words, misogynistic terms were often

accompanied by flattering anecdotes about pornographic performers including praise for their

sexual performances, their appearance, and/or their overall demeanor. Indeed, the words sexy,

beautiful, and gorgeous often appeared alongside misogynistic terminology while commenters

espoused their affection for the performer or performers therein. For example, these

complimentary, albeit misogynistic, comments manifest as:

“sexy bitch” (comment 193)

“What a sexy cunty sex whore she is. Love the jewelry, she is rich and tanned, and such a

slut girlwhore...” (comment 278)

“shit these bitches are sexy as fuck!” (comment 438)

“what a gorgeous slut” (comment 944)

“India is one fucking hot slut, Incredible ass, nice tits” (comment 1237)

100

All of these comments speak favorably about physicality as well as appearance. Still more, other

comments within this category intersect with those from Personal Reflections, in that the

commenter is using complimentary descriptive words, while also speaking from a first-person

perspective. The following comments highlight this intersection:

“That bitch is sexy. I would love to meet her...” (comment 1190)

“She's such a cute cunt... I'd cum on her asshole all night long.” (comment 1131)

Comments coded using the Complimentary Misogyny thematic category also intersected

with those coded using the Race, Ethnicity, and Nationality thematic category, favorably

describing women in the videos in relation to their physical appearance as well as race, ethnicity,

and/or nationality. The following comments highlight how complimentary descriptive words are

used in conjunction with misogynistic terminology and racial descriptive terms.

“damn hottest Asian bitch ever!” (comment 61)

“Black sluts r so sexy” (comment 602)

“Gorgeous black bitches.” (comment 716)

“white girls are the best most beautiful whores…” (comment 961)

“sexy german bitches” (comment 1010)

These comments highlight how commenters often favorably use both misogynistic terms as well

as descriptive markers of race, ethnicity, and nationality.

In sum, this thematic category highlights that while misogyny is inherently problematic

and harmful to women, many commenters opted to use this harmful terminology in conjunction

with seemingly flattering anecdotes.

Personal reflections. The second largest thematic category that emerged from the

pornographic video comments was “Personal Reflections.” This theme described any comment

101

wherein the commenter spoke from the first-person perspective including statements about what

the commenter would do or has done as well as those comments indicating some personal

affiliation with the performer therein. While some of these comments are more graphic than

others, there are many which denote how the commenter would have sex with the performer

within the video. The following highlight how these comments manifest.

“id run up in that skank like that,whores like that are hard to find where i live” (comment

638)

“That bitch must eat Hella wendys also...Nah i ain't mad at u bruh i would hit thatass

too.” (comment 1170)

“I'd love to ass fuck this sweet white slut...” (comment 1214)

These comments show how commenters make statements from a first-person perspective about

how they would have sex with the performers depicted in the video. Some commenters even

went as far as to denote someone in their own personal lives who they have engaged in sexual

relations with. For example, the individual commenting in comment 1234 states that they had sex

with a friend’s wife and as a result, she became pregnant, despite the fact he believed she was

using birth control at the time.

“i did a white friends wife and now she knocked up by me i thought shes was on the pill

fucking whore.” (comment 1234)

In terms of thematic category intersections, comments coded as Personal Reflections,

also overlapped with Degradation and Violence. Comment 643 highlights this intersection,

denoting how the commenter wishes their wife was “getting cock like that,” so they could “join

in” and “rape her slut ass”

“i wish that was my wife getting cock like that so ican join in and rape her slut ass”

(comment 643)

102

This comment highlights how commenters may discuss sexuality in relation to those within their

personal lives as well as how there is the potential for degrading and violent language to be used

while doing so.

Still more, Comment 151, shows how a commenter denotes they would have sex with the

performer in the video all while calling her a “fat bush pig” and then stating they would “beat the

bitch.” Thereby highlighting the intersection between the following thematic categories:

Degradation and Violence, Critical Misogyny, and Personal Reflections.

“id fuck the ass out of that fat bush pig then id beat the bitch” (comment 151)

Comments 110 and 642 highlights how commenters would like to act upon women within a

sexual situation rather than with women.

“Sweet Jesus, I wish I was the one to knock up these young cunts!” (comment 110)

“i would fuck this bitch till she cant walk no more” (comment 642)

These comments do not overtly signify how the commenters would act in a sexual manner in

conjunction with women, but rather act upon women.

One commenter even discussed personally using women for both sex and money. Indeed,

Comment 97 highlights how the commenter would not only have sex with the female performer

when he is “bored,” but also he would go as far as to sell her to other men for profit (e.g. “make

sum bread off dis slut). This comment overlaps with the theme, Degradation and Violence, as

the commenter is talking about using the women depicted in the video, not only for sex, but to

make a profit by selling both her body and sexuality.

“she a hood bitch but i would fuks wit her i will fixs her up n make sum bread off dis slut

n fuk her when i bored” (comment 97)

103

Comment 909 also highlights how a commenters personal views overlap with Degradation and

Violence, as the commenter expresses how they have engaged in intrafamilial sexual violence

with their sister and how their “sexual appetite” has gravitated toward their daughter and her

“slutty” friends.

“I have experience with my sister, fucked her in every hole and came all over her body.

now that my sexual appetite is mostly for my daughters and there slutty friends”

(comment 909)

In sum, this theme highlights how commenters often speak from a first-person perspective and

how this first-person narrative often overlaps with other thematic categories.

Who, what, and where. The next thematic category to emerge from an analysis of the

pornographic video commentary data is one wherein commenters used misogynistic terminology

to inquire or post about the specific performer within the video. These comments specifically

focused on asking, presumably other commenters, who the performer was in the video or,

conversely, regaling others with the names of the performers. This thematic category also

involved commenters inquiring where they can find similar pornographic material. The

following comments illustrate the types of inquiries made by commenters in the sample:

“What is this sexy nasty sluts name? Where are her other videos?” (comment 393)

“What is this stupid whore's name?” (comment 612)

“name of Asian slut?” (comment 818)

“Who is this dirty bitch?” (comment 876)

Other comments within this theme include those who are stating who the performer is in

the pornographic video – even going so far as to personally reflect on if and how they knew the

performer therein. For example:

“what's her name, reminds me of a hoe in Trinidad and Tobago” (comment 392)

104

“I rented that stank pussy hoe before. Her name is Cristina” (comment 364)

This personal reflection upon who the performer is within the video also extends to commenters

denoting where they think the performer lives. For example:

“I think this old bitch's name is Cala. She has free gangbangs at her house in Corona if

anyone lives in Socal area.” (comment 485)

“I LOOOVVVEEE THIS BITCH AND SHE FROM DA HOOD WAZUP CHI-

TOWN!!!” (comment 489)

Still more, other commenters appear to assist others with finding the performer in the video.

“On jerkteen.com can you found some storyes about this bitch” (comment 606)

“jessica jean young, find her methed up slutty stripper ass in L.A. on any street corner or

just look her up on fb” (comment 634)

“who is she? I think she's really sexy in that hot damaged slutty way!!! just the way I like

them” (comment 729)

In sum, this category highlights how many commenters often use misogynistic terminology to

request information about those features in the video as well as to share with others the

information they possess about the performers. This thematic category speaks to how many

commenters causally use misogynistic terminology as descriptives to garner information.

Race, ethnicity, and nationality. While not the most common in the dataset, many

comments involved terms or phrases referencing race, ethnicity, and/or nationality. These

comments either made note of the performer’s race, ethnicity, and/or nationality or otherwise

referred to race, ethnicity in some way within the comment. For example, the following

comments highlight how race, ethnicity, and nationality are weaponized by the commenter to

espouse misogynistic views.

“... she's just a czech cunt who likes to spread her legs ;)” (comment 120)

105

“AAAHAHAHAA.. LOOK AT THAT! muslim girls save their pussy for the hubby but

the ass is open for business!! it's ok if u r a whore though, guys love ass :)” (comment

554)

“stupid white bitches” (comment 636)

Some commenters even chose to use racial slurs (e.g. “jap,” “nigger,” “yellow,” and “white

trash”) in conjunction with misogynistic terminology within their comments. The following

comments demonstrate this fact:

“fuck yeah pound that sweet jap pussy...safe to say this fucking asian slut won't be going

back to tiny cocks” (comment 590)

“Another good little white trash slut take black cock, like she should.” (comment 888)

“Adriana Nichole is such a nice sweet nigger whore! Great to see white women drinking

nigger cum and getting anally fucked by big fat niggerdicks!” (comment 951)

“fuk that yellow bitch” (comment 1325)

Accordingly, comment 1027 denotes the usage of multiple racial slurs coupled within

misogynistic terminology. The commenter also goes as far to say that all “spics” (e.g. a

pejorative slur referencing Spanish-American people) should be deported, as they are decidedly

not welcome in “our country.”

“Ape face looking spic whore. We need to deport all the spics. We dont need sluts in our

country.” (comment 1027)

Moreover, these themes of racialized misogyny overlapped with other themes found

within the sample such as Degradation and Violence. Comment 560 illustrates this point wherein

the commenter denotes that black men should “slap” “black whores” “hard.”

“Vile disgusting shit - black men do not fuck black whores with rubberRam it in her cunt,

ass and mouth raw and if she objects slap her hard…” (comment 560)

106

This comment, steeping in racialized misogyny, shows how, in a single comment, statements

calling for abusive behaviors intersect with those about race. Still more, Comment 678

highlights how women, denoted here as “white trash hoes,” “deserve” rough sex from multiple

men.

“Fucking sluts, white trash hoes. they only deserved to be gangbanged and rough sex.”

(comment 678)

Overall, while the racialized theme is not the most dominant in the sample, it nonetheless

highlights how interconnected misogynistic terminology is with terminology related to race,

ethnicity, and nationality.

Critical misogyny. While some misogynistic terms were coupled with complimentary

language, many were used to describe women in insulting or critical ways. Accordingly, this

thematic category includes comments that denote criticisms regarding physical appearance,

intelligence, and/or sexual ineptitude. For example, in comment 200, the commenter denotes the

performer a “stupid American bitch” without a brain; insulting the person therein based on

intelligence and national origin.

“Stupid American bitch without brain...” (comment 200)

Further, comment 116 criticize the “bitch” in the video, stating that she looks like a

young boy due to her breast size.

“eww what the fuck the bitch has no fuckin tits what so ever. she looks like a 5yr old boy.

UGLY!!” (comment 116)

Comment 323 is also critical of the performers physical appearance, denotes how she looks like a

“nasty ass crack whore” who belongs on the streets (a likely reference to street prostitution).

“this bitch should do every one a favour and stop doin porn she now looks like a nasty ass

crack whore that belongs on tthe side streets” (comment 323)

107

The following comments also highlight how the commenters are critical of the fact that the

performer depicted in the video is “ugly.”

“This bitch is fucking ugly. She needs to back to work for Hillary Clinton.” (comment

408)

“What an ugly fat bitch…” (comment 718)

“How did she make it to porn? Guess any bitch can do porn dont matter where u are from

or how ugly you are.” (comment 871)

“Like my wife. Ugly bitch” (comment 1019)

Still more, another comment shows how Critical Misogyny and Race, Nationality, and Ethnicity

intersect wherein the comment states that the “jewish slut” has “horrendous cellulite.” While this

was one of the only comments that reference people of Jewish descent, it nonetheless highlights

how ethnicity is used as a critical descriptive marker for this commenter.

“I reckon her flaws would be exposed after they realize this jewish slut has horrendous

cellulite” (comment 1159)

Moreover, in one comment, the commenter was both critical while simultaneously using

complimentary language.

Sexy bitch.....but lazy! (comment 985)

While this was the only comment of its kind, it does denote how commenters could hold multiple

views on a single performer simultaneously.

All in all, the comments within the thematic category, Critical Misogyny, highlight how

critical language and viewpoints are often coupled with misogynistic terminology and how

disapproval is often expressed in a gendered fashion.

Degradation and violence. Perhaps the most salient for this study, the next thematic

category that emerged from the analysis of the pornographic video comments is aptly named,

108

Degradation and Violence. Comments within this thematic category are those that contain

degradation, dehumanization, and/or violence. In other words, these comments were not only

degrading and indicative of hostile misogynistic views, but also, in some comments, overtly used

dehumanizing language and condoned abuse and physical violence – largely, toward women.

For example, comment 139 denotes how the commenter believes the female performer

“deserves no respect” and how she should have been physically slapped until she “broke the fuck

down.”

“She deserves no respect. Should've slapped the bitch around and made her talk about her

dad until she broke the fuck down.” (comment 139)

This comment not only shows how the commenter believes this woman should be treated, but

also how said treatment should involve the use of physical violence and degradation. Similarly,

comment 1200 also speaks about a female performer being physical abused, including being

“slapped” and “thrown around” all while “choking.” Graphically referring to a specific

performer, the commenter degrades her and wishes to view her being treated “like the slut that

she is.”

“oh my god, Aletta is one hell of a fucking whore..want her to be treated like the slut that

she is, being slapped around and thrown around, cum dripping from every hole and

choking her fucking mouth..” (comment 1200)

Still more, the next commenter denotes how a young woman’s body was “tore open” and that

they “love” it that the performer is crying and states that the act “hurts so bad.” This commenter

even goes as far as to laugh at the notion that the performer is in pain.

“He really tore that asshole open. Awesome!And I love how the slut's crying “it hurts so

bad!" hahaha” (comment 1088)

109

Some of the comments coded within this thematic category degrade women by

insinuating or directly stating that women are worthless or otherwise wasteful, even going as far

as to denote them as literal garbage. The commenters denoted below demonstrate this:

“what a worthless whore” (comment 89)

“what a worthless fucking whore” (comment 233)

“Worthless piece of shit. You were so cute before you got your tits blown up, now you're

just a whore.” (comment 169)

“what a fuckin bitch.fucking woman waste of human life...” (comment 398)

“I love seeing nasty sluts spit on like worthless whores...” (comment 493)

“Yes! do your job! worthless whore!” (comment 679)

“Charmane Star is a worthless whore.” (comment 685)

“April O'Neal is a worthless whore.” (comment 707)

“I so love a girl who is nothing but a piece of trash and knows it....Love ass licking

whores and covered in her own puke is a real plus.” (comment 1002)

The final comment in this group, Comment 1002, is particularly poignant, as the commenter not

only speaks to her relative worth, but goes as far as to describe her as “nothing but a piece of

trash.”

Moreover, comment 403 shows how, in a single comment, a woman can be the victim of

racialized misogyny as well as dehumanization (i.e. via referring to her as “it” and a “piece of

meat”). Indeed, appearing to normalize sex trafficking and the viewing of pornography depicting

sex trafficking victims, the comment espouses their love for such content.

“This piece of meat has some nice titties on it! I love seeing the trafficked asian cunts

forced to fuck.” (comment 403)

110

Combining multiple thematic categories, this comment speaks to how some commenters view

both women and sex trafficking as well as how this commenter enjoys watching sex that is

forced.

Some comments even denote, using misogynistic language, how women are being “used”

within the videos. The act of being “used” by big black cocks (BBC) speaks to how women are

objectified or otherwise referred to as objects for men’s sexual consumption.

“This is amazing! Two sluts getting used over over again by BBC…” (comment 561)

Still more, a few commenters even went as far to make degrading generalizations about

all women using misogynistic terminology. For example, in comment 800 the commenter refers

to all women as “whores” and in comment 1003 the commenter states that every woman is for

sale, “it’s just a matter of how much.”

“...like I always said.... all women are whores!” (comment 800)

“I love whores. Every woman's cunt is for sale, it's just a matter of how much” (comment

1003)

Speaking to how commenters view women globally, these comments highlight how misogynistic

views about women are not isolated to those found within pornographic websites, but rather are

generalized to all women by some commenters.

Some commenters even espoused personal reflections of sexual assault and rape. For

example, in comment 334 the commenter states that “ill rape that bitch senseless” and in

comment 907 another commenter states, “Instead punishing that bitch, just RAPE that bitch!”

Moreover, Comment 296 shows how some viewers like to watch pornography depicting acts of

forced sex. “I love to watch forced blow jobs! Suck it bitch!!!” Still more, in comment 473, the

commenter writes, “This bitch just needs to be gang raped by a dozen black cocks and learn why

111

she has a pussy between her legs.” Lastly, comment 1246 shows how this commenter would like

to watch more videos that involve male performers luring women into a car to be raped.

“OMFG , i wanna watch the videos at video end, when he lure other girls in car and rape

them white bitches” (comment 1246)

Comment 28 also highlights a comment with themes of Degradation and Violence and Personal

Reflections wherein the commenter states how violence would be perpetrated against “that bitch”

for “fucking up” his orgasm. The commenter goes on to state he would “rape her bitch ass” and

proceed to ejaculate inside of her to ensure she becomes pregnant. According to the commenter,

the subsequent pregnancy would ensure that the woman would “always remember her error;” her

error being disrupting his orgasm.

“I would of SOCKED the shit outta that bitch for fucking up my nut. Then i would Rape

her bitch ass nut inside her and get her stupid ass prego so she will always remember her

error!” (comment 28)

All of the comments making explicit statements involving sexual violence speak to how many

commenters casually view sexual violence and, perhaps more troublesome, how these

commenters desire to engage in sexual violence against women.

In sum, this thematic category shows how degradation and violence are used in

conjunction with misogynistic language within internet pornography commentary with many

commenters going as far as to espouse degrading views involving sexual violence.

Video narrative. There were other comments, denoted here as Video Narrative, which

seemed to simply regurgitate, albeit using colorful and misogynistic language, what was

happening in the pornographic video. This thematic category also included comments that point

to a specific segment in the video. Comment 506 denotes that the female performer within the

video was a “hot slut,” but the video itself was of poor quality:

112

“Hot slut, but no sound and shitty film quality. (comment 506)

The same rhetoric can be found in comment 441 and 1292.

“sexy bitch. bad camera.” (comment 441)

“I can't fuckin fap to that music. bitch is pretty hot though” (comment 1292)

Comment 1249 also denotes that while the video is not great, they like the sexual acts depicted

therein, specifically, “white sluts” having anal sex with black men.

“Not a great video, but do love big black cocks in white sluts, especially their assholes”

(comment 1249)

Some commenters even discuss the video narrative in relation to themselves. For

example, in comment 692, the commenter notes that he was close to achieving orgasm, but then

the female performer there vomits, thereby seemingly ruining the act.

“I was 2 seconds from cumming then she pukes.. fuckin bitch...” (comment 692)

Comments 589 and 663 simply denote how the female performer was performing in the video.

“Lil bitch was fuckim the shit out her self” (comment 589)

“bitch is a ferocious cocksuckershe really loves giving head and goes at it so

aggressivelyenjoyed her little bit of fucking too” (comment 663)

Some commenters even denote specific time points within the videos that of are

importance to them. The following comments illustrate this point.

“Loved 19:52 where she gagged what a good whore loved how that face got filled wit

nuttin but NUTTTTT AHHHHHA slut!!” (comment 771)

“Damn, that slut at 17:15 goes to work on that black cock like a serious pro...” (comment

1024)

“She gave him a bitch stare at the 53:56 mark, like move bitch” (comment 1029)

“17 10 watch the white bitch dragged across the room” (comment 1213)

113

It is important to note that Comment 1213 was also coded using the Degradation and Violence as

well as the Race, Ethnicity, and Nationality thematic categories, as the comment not only speaks

to a specific segment in the video but refers to a “white bitch” getting dragged across the room.

Lastly, another commenter states how this video is a “jackpot” because the filmmaker not

blur out the female genitalia. In doing so, he refers to the women therein as “Japanese bitches”

thereby also being coded using the Race, Ethnicity, and Nationality thematic category.

“Japanese bitches whose pussies and assholes aren't blurred out? Jackpot.” (comment

1329)

In sum, this thematic category illustrates that some commenters simply comment about the

narrative of the pornographic video they just watched – adding contextual information depending

upon the content.

Bravado. The next thematic category, Bravado, involves any pornographic video

comment wherein the commenter references either the male performer in the video, the size of

their penis and/or their sexual prowess, or both. For example, the commenter may indicate that

they could perform better than the male performers depicted in the video or may otherwise

involve comparing the size of one’s penis in proportion to a performer in the video. It may also

involve commenters referencing male performers in favorable or demeaning ways.

For example, some commenters opted to comment upon the size of the performer’s penis

and how their penises were larger in comparison. These comments often overlapped with racial

descriptive terminology. The following comments highlight this phenomenon:

“My dick is bigger. Can I paint myself black and fuck hot white sluts for a living.”

(comment 134)

“This hoe is always talkin about white guys havin small dicks. My dicks bigger than both

the nigs here, and Im not huge.” (comment 199)

114

More still, comment 285 shows how one commenter boasts about the size of his penis.

“I'll be your big daddy bitch. me and my 12 inches.” (comment 285)

Moreover, some commenters espoused an appreciation for the male performer in the

pornographic video by commending the performers for their sexual prowess. For example:

“He tore that bitch off. That is how you fuck a woman doggystyle.” (comment 24)

“ANY MAN WHO FUCKS THESE TWO SUPERWHORES AT THE SAME TIME

DESERVES A ROUND OF APPLAUSE.” (comment 734)

“Yes sir thats how you lay pipe n'make a bitch hola” (comment 870)

“Good stuff, he really knows how to use his cock on a whore.” (comment 1210)

Yet another commenter indicated that the male performer in the video could “do better” than the

woman he was engaged in sexual relations with in the video and accordingly, he should “ditch

the skank.”

“Bitch made him wear a comdum and she never even got on top to work for her dick.

You can do better dude. Ditch that skank” (comment 783)

While there were few comments wherein the male performers were explicitly criticized,

two commenters openly denounced the male performer’s actions within the pornographic videos.

For example, in comment 1313, a commenter uses a racial slur to demean the male performer

who fails to perform in a specific way.

“Shut up, nigger! Get back to slappin' whore ass” (comment 1313)

Similarly, comment 1001 shows how this commenter states that the male performer “can’t fuck,”

but that the commenter would “wreck this nasty girls’ shit.”

“Dude can't fuck but I would wreck this nasty girl's shit. Fucking hot slut.” (comment

1001)

115

There was also a comment that boasted that if one did not have at least two “hoes,” they

had no game. In other words, procuring more women equated to one’s sexual prowess.

“Got me plenty of these kind of Hoe's hah. If you dnt have at least 2 u got no game u feel

me.” (comment 81)

In sum, those comments coded as Bravado highlight how the commenters make comparisons

between themselves and the pornographic performers, boast about the relative size of their

penises, and either applaud or condemn the male performers in the video.

Generic misogyny. There were also pornographic video comments that involved the use

of misogynistic terminology without any true context or associated descriptive information.

Thus, this category has been denoted as Generic Misogyny in that it is nonspecific in nature and

comparably generic in relation to other thematic categories. In other words, commenters opted to

use misogynistic terms within their commentary, but did not do so in a manner that could be

readily coded into other categories using the surrounding descriptive information. For example,

commenters may use a misogynistic term in isolation or simply state, without any other

contextual markers, things like, “what a skank.” This is best exemplified by the comments

below:

“what a slut” (comment 179)

“Whore !!!!” (comment 375)

“they are all whores” (comment 571)

“slut….” (comment 585)

“Bitch…” (comment 1055)

“bitch” (comment 1101)

“what a skank.” (comment 1165)

116

While comments such as these were overtly nonspecific compared to other comments in the

sample, they exemplify the way in which commenters use misogynistic terminology when

commenting upon pornographic videos.

Uncodable comments. Lastly, the analyses found that a total of 49 pornographic video

comments in the sample were categorized as Uncodeable Comments. These comments were

either too fragmented to reasonably interpret or were otherwise indecipherable due to pervasive

spelling and grammar errors. Comments 40, 58, 694, and 1328 illuminate this reality:

“sec sec sec sec!!!!yo yo this some real HO SHIT DAWG THIS GIRL-HECTIK

SLUTTER SEC SEC u lil horny SSSlutter this wilde very verynice editing…” (comment

40)

“,~ha hoe it`s nice” (comment 58)

“charlie slut” (comment 694)

“I got two. Bitches that persweeive your inter freak at your service” (comment 1328)

The use of this code is in line with previous social media research, as scholars have found that

the language used within internet commentary may not always be readily interpretable by the

reader due to lack of personal context, significant spelling and grammatical errors, as well as the

use of slang or otherwise nonsensical terms, symbols, and/or phrases (Clark & Araki, 2011;

Drouhard, Chen, Suh, Kocielnik, Pena-Araya, Cen, & Aragon, 2017; Oh, Kwon, & Rao, 2010).

Therefore, previous scholars have readily encountered this phenomenon in their research using

social media commentary and subsequently had to code for those online comments that were

rendered uncodable.

In conclusion, these thematic categories illustrate the variety of ways and means that

misogynistic terminology is both espoused and pointedly used within pornographic video

commentary within the XVideos.com website. Along with providing a means to thematically

117

analyze and quantify the existence of various themes within pornographic video comments, this

qualitative analysis paves the way to assess interactions across content within a pornographic

website – specifically, user interactions involving misogynistic terminology. This becomes

important within the context of the existing literature and adds to our understanding of how

interactions take place with pornography within the online spaces where it is housed. Moreover,

the qualitative analysis builds upon the findings from the quantitative components of the study,

denoting how interactions with pornography vary across multiple dimensions. A discussion of

the findings across both the quantitative and qualitative analyses performed in this study is

provided in the next chapter.

118

CHAPTER FIVE

DISCUSSION

Research within online spaces has been growing in many fields, including criminal

justice and criminology. In accordance, acting as an amalgam between critical criminological

research on expressions of gender inequality and misogyny as well as communications

scholarship on mass media, the purpose of the current study is to examine how misogynistic

terminology impacts user interaction with pornographic videos within the pornographic hub

website, XVideos.com - a pornographic website garnering an average of 100,000,000 visitors per

day (XVideos.com, 2017). While previous scholarship has broadly examined pornographic

content as well as the impact of pornography consumption via laboratory studies, survey data,

interviews, and internet search interest, the current study builds upon the previous literature by

assessing user interaction with pornography within the online spaces where it is housed. In doing

so, this study employs both quantitative and qualitative analyses to answer questions relating to

the presence of misogynistic terminology as expressed in pornographic video titles and

comments and user interaction via views, ratings, and comments on pornographic videos.

Accordingly, this section will discuss the meaning of the results from said analyses, place the

results within the context of the existing literature, and denote limitations as well as avenues for

future research.

A Dearth of Misogynistic Terminology

Given the recent scholarship about the astounding levels of misogyny found within

various online spaces (Bartlett et al., 2014), it was surprising within the context of this study that

most of the textual data associated with pornographic videos were not ripe with misogynistic

119

terminology. In fact, only a small fraction of pornographic video titles and comments contain any

of the misogynistic terms denoted in the study (e.g. bitch, whore, hoe, cunt, slut, and skank).

Thus, while some scholars argue that the mere act of watching pornography laden with violence

toward women is inherently misogynistic (Dines, 2010; Jensen, 2010) and much of the content of

the broad category of “mainstream pornography” has been proven to be misogynistic as well as

objectifying and violent toward women (Sun & Diamond, 2012; Vannier, 2014), results from this

study suggests that user interactions with the pornography within XVideos.com does not fall in

line with this sentiment. This finding is in contrast to previous research that has shown the vast

majority of those who consume and interact with internet pornography are likely doing so in an

overtly misogynistic manner using hostile sexist rhetoric (Dines, 2010; Dines, 2017). Thus, given

the size and scope of the consumer base within XVideos.com and the size of the dataset collected

for this study, this finding calls into question previous assertions that all pornography consumers

are acting in a blatantly misogynistic manner when consuming pornography, when in fact many

user interactions simply do not contain misogynistic terminology, at least how it has been

defined in this study.

However, while there may be a relatively small amount of misogynistic terminology as

defined by the current study employed within video titles and textual comments within

XVideos.com, this in no way means the potential harms inherent to the production and

consumption of pornography as suggested in previous research are a moot point. Rather, this

finding highlights that, while the content of pornography consumed within pornographic

websites may very well be misogynistic in nature and awash with violence toward women, and

pornography consumption is linked to attitudinal and behavioral changes, user interactions with

pornographic content within XVideos.com is not always akin to these findings. However, it is

120

nonetheless important to note that while misogynistic terminology is relatively limited within

this sample, it does not negate the harm inherent to it, as the use of such terminology, no matter

how minimal, is still reflective of prevailing patriarchal cultural norms and serves to sustain

structural inequities between men and women (Adams & Fuller, 2006; Jane, 2014; Kelly 1988).

Moreover, though the current study shows that within textual data associated with

pornographic videos there is a relatively small amount of misogynistic terminology employed

overall and even fewer instances wherein commenters employed violent rhetoric in conjunction

with misogynistic terms, one must step back when analyzing said results and view the

phenomenon on a larger scale given the sheer number of people who utilize XVideos.com and

other Porn 2.0 websites. In other words, these results may be misleading and suggest that

misogynistic terminology and violence is largely unproblematic within these spaces. However,

much like how Fisher, Daigle, and Cullen (2010) suggest that statistics regarding offline sexual

violence may seem minuscule within certain studies, it is important to understand how much

when examined in a different light, perhaps across time and within a larger population of cases

misogyny and violence flourish. Indeed, examining data across time and on a larger scale will

allow scholars to ascertain whether misogynistic terms and violent rhetoric increase or decrease.

In other words, bringing the use of misogynistic terminology and violent rhetoric to scale within

Porn 2.0 websites such as XVideos.com shows that there this is indeed a palpable issue.

Misogyny and Pornographic Video Metadata

Another important finding within this study related to the research question, “What is the

relationship between the number of views, video ratings, and the number of comments on

pornographic videos and misogynistic terminology in video titles?” While the results from this

study indicated that there was no significant relationship between misogynistic video titles and

121

video ratings, results did show that videos with misogynistic terminology within the titles had

both fewer views and comments. The latter finding is surprising within the context of the current

literature on pornographic video marketing, as many popular pornographic videos have titles that

use sexist (and sometimes racist) rhetoric (DeKeseredy, 2015). Indeed, the fact that there were

fewer views and comments upon videos with titles containing misogynistic terminology may

suggest that many consumers within XVideos.com find no appeal in videos advertised with the

use of such terms. If this is indeed the reason for these inverse relationships, it may show that

many consumers are not interested in content that is marketed in a blatantly misogynistic

manner.

Yet, despite these findings, it is important to keep in mind that previous research on

internet interactions more generally has highlighted that many factors go into a user’s decision to

view, rate, and comment upon varying forms of online content (Wyrwoll, 2014). For instance,

interactions with a pornographic video may be based on a combination of variables like video

categories, “screen grabs” (a photographic image displayed as a preview of video content), and

perhaps most importantly, the content depicted within the pornographic video itself. Thus, while

this study does show that misogynistic terminology is linked to fewer views and comments on

pornographic videos and is not related to video ratings, it does not mean that misogyny does not

play a role in user interactions, but rather that many factors may influence that interaction.

Misogynistic Terminology and Pornographic Video Categories

In addition to gaining insight into the relationship between misogynistic terminology and

videos views, ratings, and comments, the next set of findings are related to the presence of

misogynistic terminology within pornographic video titles and comments and what categories

those videos are placed in. While, to my knowledge, there is no previous research detailing the

122

connection between misogynistic pornographic video titles and comments in relation to

pornographic video categories, we can begin to explore the findings within the context of what

types of content are generally depicted within these video categories. Though this study cannot

and does not detail what each video depicted specifically in terms of content, we can begin to

make general inferences on the content based on the category it was placed into given the

likelihood that videos are placed into respective categories given the dominant representations

within the video (Wyroll, 2014). Thus, detailed below, are the key findings in regard to the

relationship between pornographic video categories and pornographic video titles and comments.

Race and Pornographic Video Categories

Highlighting the intersection between various facets of oppression, results show the

aggregated variable, Race, was significantly more likely to contain misogynistic commentary

within pornographic video commentary compared to other videos. As noted earlier, the variable,

Race, is an aggregate of the following categories with overarching themes indicative of the

racial, ethnic, and nationality of the performers therein: Asian Woman, Black sex, Black woman,

Exotic, Interracial, and Latina. This finding is congruent with previous scholarship, as it has been

consistently noted that pornography frequently depicts performers of color using both

misogynistic and racist tropes; painting women of color as hyper-sexualized and fetishized

objects of male desire and violence (Cowan & Campbell, 1994; DeKeseredy, & Funk, 2017;

Dines, 2010; Gossett & Bryne, 2002; Jensen, 2007; Mayall & Russell, 1993; Miller-Young,

2010). In fact, many have argued that pornography remains the only major form of mass media

that is apathetic toward the obvious nexus between misogyny and racism and that there is an

insidious and blatant interdependent relationship between different forms of oppression in the

pornography industry (Dines, 2010; DeKeseredy, 2011; Jensen, 2010; Mayall & Russell, 1993;

123

Smith and Luykx, 2017). For example, Jensen (2011) notes that stereotypical and overtly racist

representations of people of color dominate online pornographic content (e.g. the hot Latina, the

Asian geisha, and the animalistic black woman) and that the degradation of women is intensified

by the racist tropes therein (p. 31). Jensen’s (2007) sentiment is echoed by Gossett and Bryne’s

(2002) finding that women of color tend to be the object of male-perpetrated violence within

pornographic videos. In other words, the objectified representations of performers of color is

indicate of a devaluation based on sex as well as race and highlight that pornography is not

simply about the sexual acts therein, but rather who is performing said sexual acts within

pornographic videos; highlighting the eroticization of both the performer’s racial composition

and sexuality.

Hooks (2015) refers to this differentiation based on skin color as "commodification of

otherness" and states that cultural norms “perpetuates the idea that there is pleasure to be found

in the acknowledgment and enjoyment of racial difference" (p. 21). Hooks (2015) also notes the

“seduction of difference" when she states, “when race and ethnicity become commodified as

resources for pleasure, the culture of specific groups, as well as the bodies of individuals, can be

seen as constituting an alternative playground where members of dominating races, genders,

sexual practices affirm their power-over in intimate relations with the Other" (Hooks, 2015, p.

23). Thus, the findings that videos categorized using race were more likely to have misogynistic

commentary within XVideos.com is perhaps unsurprising given the content of the films and the

inherent connection between pornography consumption and the fetishization, objectification, and

commodification of people of color within pornography.

The same results regarding the relationship between misogynistic terminology and

racialized pornographic video categories, however, were not consistent across pornographic

124

video titles containing misogynistic terminology. This finding suggests that those who title the

films may be constructing their perceptions of the racialized content differently than those who

are commenting on it and/or those who title the pornographic films uploaded to XVideos.com

are attempting to strategically market their pornographic videos in a way that appeals to the vast

majority of those who visit XVideos.com, rather than those who specifically seek out content

demeaning people of color in misogynistic ways. Either way, the use of misogynistic

terminology as it relates to user interactions with pornographic content shows that misogyny

intimately connected to race, at least in relation to pornographic video commentary within

XVideos.com.

Misogyny and Pornographic Constructions of Age

Another important finding of the current study related to pornographic constructions of

age. While there was no significant relationship between videos categorized as Teen and

pornographic video titles containing misogyny, pornographic videos categorized as Teen were

significantly less likely to have misogynistic terminology within their comments. This is

somewhat congruent with the previous literature, as Teen pornography is more likely to depict

young women in submissive positions to men in respect to age as well as social status, sexual

experience, and physicality; with female performers sometimes going as far as to feign childlike

mannerisms and behaviors (Jensen, 2010; Peters et al., 2013; Vannier et al, 2014). Thus, it is

possible that consumers view the young women within these films in a more paternalistic (and

thereby less overtly hostile) way, as they conform to societal tropes regarding younger women

being sexually submissive to men. In other words, female performers within these films may not

threaten male sexual supremacy given their age (and perhaps, physicality, demeanor, and social

standing) and therefore may not fall victim to any misogynistic backlash. Indeed, this sentiment

125

is compatible with previous literature on misogyny more generally in that women who conform

to gendered norms around sexuality are less likely to be subject to gendered hostility and

misogynistic epithets (Manne, 2018). However, more research is needed to examine why age

plays a role in how consumers interact in a misogynistic manner with pornography.

Misogynistic Terminology and Expressions of Male Dominance

Previous research suggests that heterosexual pornography found online is often

constructed around male-centric pleasure, orgasm, and dominance and often depicts sexual acts

that are indicative of such constructions (Sun et al., 2017). Accordingly, another prominent

finding within the current study was that pornographic videos using misogynistic language are

more likely to use that language with videos categorized as Blowjob. Extremely popular within

the realm of internet pornography, this category is indicative of female-to-male oral sex; often

with women displayed in physically submissive positions compared to men during the sexual act

(Dines, 2010; Jensen, 2007).

This finding is especially notable given the recent research on the practice and meaning

of depictions of female to male oral sex (and well as facial ejaculation) within heteronormative

pornography (Sun et al., 2017). According to Sun et al (2017), heterosexual male consumers are

sometimes attracted to pornography depicting female-on-male oral sex in relation to the pleasure

they derive from both dominating and humiliating women; by watching them give oral sex to

men (and, again, sometimes ejaculate on their faces) in a physically submissive stance (Sun et

al., 2017). The power dynamics often inherent to this act, at least how it is constructed and

performed within pornographic videos, becomes especially important within the current study, as

it highlights that user interaction with pornography containing elements of male dominance such

as this are more likely to contain misogynistic commentary. Thus, this finding adds to the

126

existing literature highlighting how certain sexual acts depicted in pornography, chiefly ones

potentially glorifying heterosexual male physical and sexual dominance, are related to misogyny

both in terms of content and as this study indicates, via commentary.

Misogyny and Fetish Pornography

Another notable finding of the current study is related to the aggregated category, Fetish.

This aggregated variable consists of categories that are frequently conceptualized within the

pornography industry as representative of fetish genres (Ogas & Gaddam, 2011), including

Pissing, Squirting, Feet, Heels, BDSM, Oiled, and Stockings. This study found that those videos

categorized as Fetish were substantially more likely to contain misogynistic terminology within

both pornographic video titles and comments. One possible explanation for the consistency in

this finding across both pornographic videos titles and comments lies in the nature of the videos

themselves and potential the consumer base they attract. If these videos are indeed niche genres

within the pornography industry, intuitively one can assume that this attracts consumers who

enjoy a particular set of niche, pornographic interests. And, while the Fetish genres represent a

diverse, albeit highly specific, sampling of pornographic kink (ranging from those explicitly

focusing on intimate objects like stockings or high heels to those whose focus is bondage,

domination, sadism, and machoism [e.g. BDSM]), it seems that nonetheless the specific nature of

these fetishes taken collectively is associated with misogynistic terminology, at least within

XVideos.com. This finding speaks to the complexity of interactions with pornographic videos

within XVideos.com, highlighting that specific types of pornography are significantly more

likely to garner user interactions involving misogynistic epithets via both title and commentary.

Misogyny and Gay Pornography

127

Lastly, given that previous research highlights that misogynistic terminology is largely

lobbed at women by men, it is hardly surprising that those videos categorized as Gay did not

have titles or comments laden with misogynistic terminology. In fact, videos categorized as Gay

are significantly less likely to have misogynistic terminology in both the titles and comments.

There are two possible explanations for this finding that are consistent with the previous

literature. First, pornography depicting gay sex is more likely to be sought out by gay men (and

to a lesser extent, women [“Girls Who Like Boys,” 2016]) compared to heterosexual men, and

these two groups are less likely to espouse misogynistic vitriol directed at women within online

spaces compared to heterosexual men (Brennan, 2017; Jane, 2014). Second, the content of those

videos categorized as Gay are likely to contain little, if any, misogynistic violence toward

women enacted by men given the nature of the pornographic material and audience. Indeed,

internet pornography marketed to heterosexual men is more likely to contain verbal and physical

violence toward women perpetrated by men compared to other types of pornography (Dines,

2010; Fritz & Paul, 2017). Therefore, if there is indeed a connection between misogynistic

language and consuming pornography with misogynistic elements and violence toward women,

it would likely not be found in relation to videos that simply do not contain such content. This

assertion is firmly rooted in the existing literature that states that videos highlighting sexual

relations with gay men, by their very definition and practice, are less likely to contain violence

toward women; though this is not to say that gay pornography does not contain exploitative

themes and/or violence inflicted by men upon other men (Brennan, 2017; Fritz & Paul, 2017;

Ogas & Gaddam, 2011). Overall, this finding suggests that misogynistic epithets are significantly

less common in videos depicting sex between gay men and that certain types of pornography

128

depicting pornographic heterosexuality are more likely to elicit misogynistic reactions than

others.

All in all, these findings related to pornographic video categories are consistent with

previous researcher’s assertions that those who utilize the sex industry are not a homogenous

group nor is the sex they consume (Jeffreys, 2009; Monto, 2010). Indeed, the results of this

segment of the current study suggest that those who interact with online pornography within

XVideos.com and the pornography being consumed cannot be monolithically conceptualized, as

those who title pornographic videos are using misogynistic terminology in ways that differ from

those consuming and commenting upon such content. This finding is further substantiated by the

fact that the use of misogynistic terminology in the textual data associated with pornographic

videos found within the XVideos.com space varies across pornographic videos categories.

Misogynistic Terminology and Pornographic Video Comments

The aim of the qualitative portion of this study was to examine what themes emerged

when examining textual data in the form of pornographic video comments that contained

misogynistic terminology. The results of this content analysis show that many themes emerged.

Backhanded Compliments

While other scholars have found that misogynistic terminology found in online spaces is

often used in conjunction with hostile and violent sentiments (Anderson & Cermele, 2014;

Barlett et al, 2014; Fulper et al., 2014, Jane, 2014), the current study found that those who use

misogynistic terminology with pornographic video comments do so, by and large, in conjunction

with seemingly flattering anecdotes. For example, words like “sexy,” “gorgeous,” “hot,” and

“beautiful” were often used in conjunction with misogynistic terminology. This finding is similar

to that from Pihlaja’s (2016) study of comments on popular pornographic videos within Pornhub,

129

wherein his results indicated that video commenters often used words indicative of praise in their

commentary. The contradictory messaging behind these statements suggest that backhanded

praise is often inherent to misogynistic user interactions within pornographic video commentary,

at least within videos containing comments within the XVideos.com website. This finding is

consistent with previous literature on mass media more generally, in that misogynistic sentiments

within hip-hop lyrics sometimes contain misogynistic slurs rooted in the sexual objectification of

women coupled with superficially favorable anecdotes about women (Weitzer & Kubrin, 2009).

However, just because these words are used somewhat flippantly in certain contexts and

with a seemingly favorable overtone, it does not negate the gendered nature of the language and

the harm such language does to women as a class (Lewis et al., 2016). Put another way,

shrouding misogynistic terminology in complimentary adjectives and sentiments does not serve

to erase the misogyny therein. In fact, much in the same way that stating someone is attractive

despite their race (i.e. You’re pretty for a black girl.) acts as an ostensibly benevolent, albeit

inherently patronizing and demeaning, racial microaggression against people of color (Alim,

2010), using misogynistic terminology coupled with positive statements about a woman’s

physical appearance is still inherently damaging and represents a gender microaggression;

lowering the status of women while also sexually objectifying them. The erasure of the harm

inherent to such statements is particularly impactful, as microaggressions cloaked in pleasantries

are still microaggressions on their face and serve to harm those who are being aggressed against

(Sue, 2010). All in all, while the bulk of the commentary within this study involved the collusion

of misogynistic terminology and complimentary rhetoric, it still represents a pernicious, albeit

shrouded, form of gender inequality and misogyny.

Examining Personal Reflections

130

Findings from the qualitative portion of this study also show that commenters frequently

personally reflect on the material they consume via the use of first-person pronouns and

narratives through the use of “I” statements. This is congruent with previous research on online

communications in that those who utilize various social media spaces tend to use commenting

platforms to express themselves in a personal way and/or to actively or passively identify with

others who may share similar views or consumption patterns, albeit in a relatively anonymized

manner (Jane, 2014; Pihlaja, 2016). Thus, within the context of online pornography, consumers

may be using the commenting feature as an opportunity to share their personal views with other

pornography consumers sans social stigma; stigma that may be present within offline spaces and

without like-minded peers (DeKeseredy, 2015; Jensen, 2007). This becomes especially salient

within this study given that previous research indicates that peer groups may justify, embolden,

and reinforce harmful views and behaviors regarding women (DeKeseredy, 2015). Indeed, users

in this context may feel a sense of ownership of the space they are frequenting and in doing so

find like-minded peers with which to share their personal reflections, no matter how vulgar and

incendiary, without condemnation or judgment. The issue with these personal reflections comes

not from the act of sharing them in isolation, but rather when these types of personalized

comments intersect with misogyny and sometimes, statements supportive of sexual violence.

Accordingly, within the context of online pornography and more specifically user

interaction with online pornography in the form of comments, this finding serves as a powerful

addition to the literature, as it shows that commenters, uninhibited by social stigma and perhaps

empowered by relative anonymity afforded by a pornographic website such as XVideos.com, are

content with offering acutely personal reflections upon the pornography they consume. In doing

so, this highlights the need for ongoing research with online spaces within areas of criminal

131

justice and allied disciplines, as they do not share the same limitations of other studies wherein

participant responses may be inhibited by social desirability and the remaining stigma around

certain topics, including pornography and blatant criminal violence against women. Overcoming

this hurdle in research on pornography is especially important as we move toward examining

more explicitly violent forms of pornography (e.g. rape pornography), as online commenters

may be more willing to discuss their reflections on content, rationales for consumption, and

motivations in doing so. Thus, this finding, couched within the rest of the qualitative data herein,

denotes a willingness to not only consume pornography within XVideos.com but to do so in a

personalized and reflective way, at least when commenting on pornographic videos.

Accounting for Race, Ethnicity, and Nationality in the Comments

Much like results highlight that pornographic video categories associated with content

focused on the racial identity of the performer or performers therein contained, approximately

14% of the comments coded via qualitative analysis that contained misogynistic terminology

also referred to the race, ethnicity, and/or nationality of the performer therein. Findings suggest

that those who use misogynistic terminology often do so while using language indicative of

racial and ethnic identities as well as nationality. While these comments were not always overtly

derogatory, and many contained complimentary language, it still highlights the interconnectivity

of misogyny and race.

The intersections between misogyny and race are consistent with previous literature on

misogyny and mass media more generally, as those who have studied hip-hop and rap music

denote that race often overlaps with themes of misogyny, objectification, as well as implicit and

explicit language about violence toward women (Herd, 2015). While previous research has

denoted how racialized, reductive, and oppressive pornography content tends to be (Dines,

132

2007), this study was the first to highlight that consumers of pornography also textually express

these intersections within XVideos.com. This is congruent with previous research indicating that

online comments are often laden with commentary about race, including those that are both

racist and sexist in nature (Graf, Erba, & Harn, 2017; Hughey & Daniels, 2013). However, more

research is needed to explore the relationship between race, ethnicity, and nationality, and

misogyny within pornographic video commentary.

Violent Rhetoric

One of the final findings from the qualitative portion of this study involves the violent

rhetoric found within the pornographic video comments sampled. Results show that less than

twelve percent of the comments studied contained rhetoric consistent with violent themes. This

limited number of violent comments is somewhat surprising, as the bulk of the previous

literature has highlighted that pornography consumption is related to misogynistic attitudes as

well as sexually aggressive behaviors (Malamuth et al., 2012). Yet, while comments containing

misogynistic language and markers of violence were limited in their use within commentary on

pornographic videos within XVideos.com, they are nonetheless important and worthy of

examination within the context of previous literature.

Accordingly, within this study, those who use such rhetoric speak of women as having no

value (e.g. “what a fuckin bitch.fucking woman waste of human life...”), call for physical

violence against women (e.g. She deserves no respect. Should've slapped the bitch around and

made her talk about her dad until she broke the fuck down.”), make affirmatory statements about

consuming pornography depicting rape (e.g. “This piece of meat has some nice titties on it! I

love seeing the trafficked asian cunts forced to fuck.”) and speak of their desire to engage in rape

(e.g. “ill rape that bitch senseless”). This finding is perhaps unsurprising within the existing

133

literature as previous research has shown that those who use misogynistic terminology may also

be prone to making statements supportive of gender-based violence, including threats of rape

(Anderson & Cermele, 2014; Barlett et al, 2014; Fulper et al., 2014). Moreover, while there is no

way to identify any demographic information associated with commenters within this study,

previous research suggests that men are more likely than women to call for sexual violence

against women within online spaces and do so using misogynistic epithets; unrestrained by social

stigma or control that may be inherent to offline environments (Jane, 2014; Murnen, 2000).

Espousing statements affirming the use of violence against women or questioning

women’s worth as human beings are troubling no matter the context and reinforce and reflect a

culture supportive of sexual violence. Yet, comments laden with misogynistic and violent

rhetoric become especially problematic given previous research suggests that online comments

across a wide variety of spaces can shape both the attitudes and behaviors of others who read

them (Hsueh, & Yogeeswaran, & Malinen, 2015; Weber, 2014; Ziegele et al., 2014). In fact,

Hsueh et al. (2015) note that even brief exposure to comments from those within the same online

space “were sufficient to influence an individual's prejudicial attitudes” (p.568). In other words,

even though there were relatively few comments laden with violence within the XVideos.com

comments sampled, there is still potential for those comments to shape the attitudes and

behaviors of the potentially millions of other pornography consumers within the XVideos.com

website who read them. Considering this research, the findings of this study in regard to violent

online commentary on pornographic videos become even more troubling and worthy of more

examination in future studies, especially in regard to examining those who actively use the social

elements of Porn 2.0 websites.

134

Lastly, after reading every comment containing misogynistic terminology another finding

stood out: there did not appear to be any comments within those containing misogynistic

terminology that appear to refute statements espousing violent rhetoric or racist language. This is

an interesting finding as, among those who use misogynistic terminology, no textual data

suggests that other commenters appear to be policing or gatekeeping this type of harmful

rhetoric, even when it is coupled with language indicative of criminal violence or racist slurs.

This finding is consistent with the results from Pihlaja’s (2016) study of comments on popular

videos on Pornhub in that users on that website did not often directly interact with or challenge

one another. Yet, within XVideos.com specifically, this finding could be reflective of group

norms within that may condone this type of commentary or it could be due to the fact that those

who would be so inclined to openly oppose hateful rhetoric via textual commentary would not

use misogynistic terminology in doing so. Either way, this omission may speak to the norms

within XVideos.com, at least within comments containing misogynistic terminology.

Limitations and Directions for Future Research

Despite the rigorous nature of the current work, this study is not without limitations.

First, the results are only generalizable to XVideos.com pornographic videos with textual

comments and not to other pornographic websites nor to videos within XVideos.com without

textual commentary. While XVideos.com is one of the most prolific and highly sought after

pornographic websites across the world (Alexa.com, 2017), future scholars should expand their

studies to other pornographic hub websites with social networking components inherent to their

structure. This will allow for not only a more nuanced analysis of pornographic hub websites, but

for comparisons to be made across platforms and means of user interaction.

135

Second, the researcher was unable to assess the content of the pornographic videos

associated with the data utilized in this study. Thus, while this study can make generalizations

about pornographic content based on placement in specific categories, future research is needed

to assess whether pornographic video categories correctly categorize the content of the

pornographic films within that category and how these categorizations impact misogynistic

forms of communication. Future scholars can then determine with more specificity the

relationship between pornographic content and user interaction with pornographic videos.

Third, there is potential for survivorship bias within the sample. In other words, it is

possible that data within XVideos.com is self-regulating in that those who oversee the

submission and curation of pornographic videos to the website remove or delete extreme videos

depicting graphic forms of violence and thereby also remove the corresponding data (e.g. titles

and comments). Thus, this study is limited to pornographic videos and the corresponding data

that had not been removed from the website at the time of data acquisition. Accordingly, this

may mean that the results from this study may not be adequately capturing the most graphic and

violent pornographic content and in turn, potentially all the relationships that may exist between

misogynistic terminology and pornographic video consumption. This becomes especially salient

given the previous research suggesting that more violent forms of pornography are related to

both misogyny and aggression (Banyard, 2016). However, it is important to note that this

limitation is likely common to almost all research on internet pornography, especially if

conducted within Porn 2.0 websites that regulate the content therein.

Fourth, in the current study, the researcher did not have access to more refined data

regarding when the pornographic videos were uploaded and commented upon nor who the users

are that are interacting with the pornographic videos. In other words, textual data associated with

136

pornographic videos were studied absent information about when they were posted as well as

what specific user wrote and submitted them. It is also possible, given these limitations, that a

consumer could have uploaded and titled multiple videos and/or made multiple comments per

video. Due to this limitation, it is also possible that some of the commentary examined within

this study could be responses to other commenters rather than comments made directly about the

pornographic video in question.

These limitations, however, become avenues for future research, as those who collect

data from pornographic hub websites in future studies can not only collect and analyze time

point data (e.g. when videos were uploaded and when comments were posted), but also publicly

available information about the specific users who post videos and comments within

pornographic hubs including usernames and possibly even relevant demographic information if it

is available. Gathering and analyzing this data within future research will build upon the current

study and enable scholars to assess user interaction with pornographic videos within a

pornographic website over time and with more refined information about the consumers

themselves.

The final limitation of the study includes the researcher’s inability to translate textual

data that was submitted in languages other than English, as English is the researcher’s native

language. Even if there were qualitative software capable of translating multiple foreign

languages simultaneously across a wealth of data, the software would largely fail to account for

culturally specific internet jargon and sexual slang, as well as the all too common misspellings

and fragmented sentence structure inherent to online commentary. However, this too becomes a

venue for future research, as researchers fluent in languages other than English can translate

textual data from pornographic hub websites like XVideos.com to assess what conclusions can

137

be drawn about user interactions with internet pornography in a variety of foreign languages and

to compare those conclusions to those that have been studied in English. This will provide an

astounding amount of insight into how non-English speakers are interacting with pornography,

albeit still within pornographic hub websites largely available to consumers in the United States.

Indeed, this limitation highlights the need for more cross-cultural data on pornography

consumers and consumption patterns.

While outside the scope of the current study, future researchers can also utilize other

forms of data garnered from pornographic videos and pornographic hub websites such as “screen

grabs” and video “tags.” “Screen grabs” or a photographic snapshot of an online pornographic

video that is visible when one searches for videos within a pornographic hub website, can

provide insight into how consumers are interacting with visual information about pornographic

videos rather than that which is strictly textual like pornographic video titles and comments. In

addition to examining “screen grabs,” future scholars can examine pornographic video “tags.”

Given the thousands of unique, “tags,” or much more refined methods of pornographic video

categorization within pornographic hub websites, future researchers can examine how more

narrowly descriptive pornographic video categorization techniques impact user interaction with

pornographic videos. Pornographic video “tags,” while diverse and potentially onerous to both

organize and analyze, may also provide future scholars with more detailed insight into how

misogynistic language is employed (or how other forms of oppressive language are employed for

that matter) within the context of video categorization and whether those categorizations impact

interactions with pornography within pornographic hubs.

Another avenue for future research is one that examines so-called “women-friendly”

pornographic videos (e.g. erotica, “For Women” content, and/or feminist pornography) to

138

examine user interactions with such content on pornographic websites. While previous research

on “women-friendly” pornography states that the content of such films contains less sexual

objectification and male-instigated violence toward women (Fritz & Paul, 2017), more research

is needed to assess how those who consume such content are interacting within the spaces it is

housed. Moreover, it would be interesting for future scholars to examine interaction with such

categories of pornography given their likelihood of being viewed by women rather than men and

to compare these interactions with other categories of pornography that are predicated on

predominantly heterosexual male viewership.

Moreover, given this study highlights the intersection between misogynistic terminology

and race, yet another means of future research may be the examination of metadata associated

with pornographic videos depicting economic exploitation. Indeed, as videos depicting young

women who appear to begrudgingly exchange sex for assistance or services from men continues

to be a common narrative within internet pornography (Ogas & Gaddam, 2011; Vannier et al.,

2014), research should examine how users interact with this content and whether those

interactions are more likely to contain misogynistic rhetoric given their exploitative narratives

and pornographic tropes.

Lastly, and perhaps most important for the discipline of criminal justice, is the need for

future research to examine how users interact with pornography depicting explicit sexual

violence including rape. While previous research has examined Google search interest for rape-

oriented pornography (Makin & Morczek, 2015; Makin & Morczek, 2016) as well as how

websites catering explicitly to consumers interested in rape-oriented pornography are designed

and marketed (absent information about the consumers therein) (Gossett & Byrne, 2002), more

research is needed to assess user interaction with rape-oriented pornography within the online

139

spaces where it is housed. Even gathering basic demographic information of consumers coupled

with the online commentary they produce in relation to this content, could illuminate the types of

people who are likely to seek out pornographic videos depicting rape in its many iterations and

the ways and means they go about doing so.

In sum, future researchers need to be strategic in how they conceptualize and navigate

their work with internet pornography, as to not simplistically bifurcate both pornographic content

and pornography consumers into either those that are harmful versus those that are not. Rather,

this study suggests that future scholarship should continue to find new ways and means to

address who is consuming pornography within online spaces, what types of pornography are

potentially harmful and in what context they elicit harm, and who is most likely to be impacted.

Much like how communications scholars have called for research on media violence more

generally to move away from if depictions of violence in mass media are harmful to more acutely

conceptualizing and contextualizing the harm (Bushman & Huesmann, 2014, p. 53), scholarship

around pornography must grow and evolve to develop more nuanced perspectives. Moreover,

these perspectives need to be couched within existing theoretical frameworks that account for the

fact that mass media is not produced or consumed within a vacuum, but rather inherently related

to prevailing social and cultural norms as well as structural inequities.

Summary

From communications scholars assessing how pornographic material is constructed and

seated within global mass media to feminist criminologists examining how pornography

intertwines with gender inequity and sexual violence, pornography is a controversial subject that

transcends disciplines. While there have been many previous studies assessing the content of

pornography as well as the impact of pornography on attitudes and behaviors, there has been

140

little in the way of research into how pornography consumers interact with pornography within

the online spaces where it is housed. Indeed, this study is the first of its kind to begin to assess

how misogynistic language, as found in titles and comments, impacts interaction with

pornographic videos within a pornographic hub website. In doing so, this study links macro-level

concepts like gender inequality to individual level expressions of that inequality within online

spaces harboring pornography.

Accordingly, the current study fills three main gaps in the current literature. First, it

empirically examines consumer behavior within a pornographic hub website, specifically in

regard to misogynistic terminology. While previous academic studies have just begun to examine

how consumers engage with pornography in online spaces (Trestian et al., 2013; Tyson et al.,

2015) and commentary about internet pornography more generally (Brennan 2017; Pihlaja,

2016), the current study provides a rigorous and multifaceted assessment of misogynistic user

interaction with pornographic videos within one of the largest and most prolific pornographic

websites in the world using both quantitative and qualitative analysis. By doing so, this study

acts as a baseline for future work seeking to understand how language impacts user interaction

with pornography online. The second gap in the literature addressed by this study is that previous

work has largely treated consumers of the global sex industry as a homogenous group rather

examining possible variations (Jefferys, 2009; Paasonen, 2010). The results from this study

indicate that there is likely some variation across who uploads and consumes pornographic

videos within a pornographic hub website regarding the use of misogynistic terminology and that

to treat all pornographic content and user interaction as equal is to perpetuate an antiquated and

naive understanding of how pornography is both disseminated and consumed. While this study

only begins to explore variations across consumers and means of interaction with pornography, it

141

nonetheless suggests that pornography consumers are not a homogenous group nor is the

pornography being consumed. Finally, this study proves that misogynistic terminology in video

titles and comments is associated with specific categories of pornography, thereby overcoming

previous gaps in the literature that fail to delineate how different categories of pornography

impact interactions with pornographic content.

142

CHAPTER SIX

IMPLICATIONS AND CONCLUSION

One of the major goals of critical criminology and more specifically, feminist

criminology, is to identify, contextualize, address, and work to eliminate gender inequities that

relate to and intertwine with expressions of violence and criminality (Daly & Chesney-Lind,

1988). These gendered power inequities and the language and imagery used to express them are

both manifestations and reflections of gendered violence that echo and preserve the interests of

men to the detriment of women. Indeed, an interplay exists between inequity, language, and

violence, informing how societal structures conceptualize, contextualize, and respond to

misogyny and various expressions of gender-based violence.

Many feminist scholars have previously noted the relationship between patriarchal

norms, gender inequality, and misogynistic language. According to Murnen (2000), misogynistic

language is a form of “societal propaganda” that effectively communicates how men and women

are positioned in society ensuring that men’s interests supersede that of women (p. 319).

Santaemilia and Maruenda (2016) echo this sentiment and note that “language is a male-

controlled system” that has the power to encode harmful messages and beliefs about women and

trivialize women’s experiences of patriarchal violence in its many manifestations (p. 85). Sue

(2010) also notes that misogynistic language is a manifestation of gender microaggression in that

it acts as microassaults against women. Thus, it is important to study this type of language within

various contexts, including and especially those previously associated with gendered expressions

of sexuality, sexual violence, and the global sex industry.

143

One relationship that was largely ignored by previous literature that this study addressed

is the relationship between misogynistic terminology and another form of gender

microaggression, chiefly microinsults. Microinsults, often manifesting as pornography, are the

ways in which women’s bodies are sexually objectified and commodified for male pleasure. This

becomes important within the field of criminal justice, as intersecting microaggressions can

function as a potential “environmental antecedents” to more severe forms of violence including

“legally actionable” sexual offenses (p. 495). Moreover, in terms of pornography specifically,

previous scholarship indicates that merely seeking out pornography can represent “tacit

approval” for gendered violence (Makin & Morczek, 2015, p. 9). Thus, while individual

microaggressions are damaging, the cumulative nature of microaggressions is concerning and the

ways they manifest across various spaces, including those online. This issue becomes especially

salient with the knowledge that these online spaces are often echo-chambers with users lending

support to specific and often deviant ideologies (Herring, 2002).

Thus, much like how racist and homophobic epithets have been used to assess levels of

racism and homophobia (Croom, 2013), misogynistic terminology has been used as a proxy

measure of levels of microaggressions, misogyny, and gender inequity (Adams & Fuller, 2006;

Kelly, 1988). This terminology, described by previous research and within the context of this

study, is the use of the terms bitch, cunt, whore, hoe, slut, and skank, is inherently gendered and

misogynistic; representing tangible expressions of gender inequity. Yet, while research on

pornographic content has shown that the female body is often a conduit for both male pleasure

and sexual aggression within a heterosexual dyad (Jensen, 2007), there has been little in the way

of research around consumer interactions with pornography and more specifically, how

144

consumers interact while using misogynistic terminology. Accordingly, building upon the work

of other scholars (Brennan, 2017; Pihlaja, 2016; Trestian et al., 2013; Tyson et al., 2015), this

study was the first of its kind to examine user interaction with pornographic videos as it

specifically relates to misogynistic terminology within the popular pornographic website,

XVideos.com.

The current study has confirmed that the use of misogynistic terminology in textual data

associated with pornographic videos, impacts user interaction with pornographic content and that

these interactions differ across consumers and types of pornography. This finding is important,

as it highlights the terminology rooted in misogynistic ideals and values impacts user interaction

with pornographic content found on pornographic hub websites. While the findings of this study

can only be generalized to XVideos.com, this website is one of the largest and most accessed

pornographic hub websites in the world (Alexa.com, 2017). Accordingly, the main implications

of this research are discussed below.

Implications

Pornography as a “Public Health Crisis?”

Understanding how gender inequality and misogyny are produced, perpetuated, and

connected to harm and victimization is incredibly important within the context of feminist

criminology. Accordingly, this study’s primary implication and contribution to the literature is

that it develops a baseline that indicates that certain types of pornography elicit different

interactions and reactions from consumers - some laden with misogyny and others, not so much.

It also highlights that more research is needed to understand user interaction with pornographic

videos within online spaces, specifically in relation to misogyny and violence. Considering the

145

internet is the primary means of access between pornographic content and pornography

consumers, this study is just the beginning in terms of our understanding of the ways and means

by which interactions take place with pornographic content. Noting and researching the shifts

with how pornography is disseminated and how it is interacted with (in real time and with other

consumers within online environments) is necessitated to gain more insight into both the medium

and consumers in tandem with emerging technologies. Pornography is not produced or

consumed in a stagnated vacuum, but rather is evolving with emerging technologies and socio-

political landscapes.

Therefore, given the sheer volume of and diversity inherent to pornography within this

technologically saturated landscape and the findings of this study, policy must not myopically

paint the phenomenon with a broad brush nor assume everyone who consumes pornography is

the same. Though nascent conversations have denoted pornography as a “public health crisis”

(Dines, 2017), we must not oversimplify an inherently complex subject. While such

sensationalist claims can certainly help to create the space for necessary conversations about the

potential harms of pornography consumption, it treats pornography and pornography consumers

as homogenous entities, similar in both context and definition. However, this study shows that

there are complex dynamics inherent to pornography consumption and that constructing all

pornography consumers and the content they consume as inherently homogenous by the use of

such blanket statements like “public health crisis” is both hasty and simplistic. Thus, while more

research is needed to effectively delineate what types of pornography are harmful, who is

harmed by pornography consumption, and how to go about addressing these potential harms with

different populations of individuals (e.g. teens, college students, and adults), this study calls into

question previous sentiments doggedly touting pornography as a grave public health concern, at

146

least in how it is current empirically understood. Either way, the impact of the many facets of

internet pornography on public health requires much more nuanced empirical analysis across

disciplines and institutions.

Implications for Criminal Justice

Another implication of this study involves the criminal justice system and the potential

response to online commentary laden with sexual violence. The results of this study indicate that

pornographic video comments sampled contained both misogynistic terminology as well as

violent rhetoric, including commenters who express a desire to engage in criminal sexual

violence (e.g. “i’ll rape that bitch senseless”) as well as those who admit to perpetrating criminal

sexual violence (e.g. “I have experience with my sister, fucked her in every hole and came all

over her body. now that my sexual appetite is mostly for my daughters and there slutty friends.”).

Couched within research that suggests online vitriol containing themes of gendered violence may

be related to criminal violence perpetration within offline spaces (Jane, 2014; Jane 2016), the

current study highlights the need for criminal justice policy to keep up with how violence is

being produced, consumed, and expressed within online spaces. This sentiment is echoed by

Lewis et al. (2016) who state that violent rhetoric within online spaces must be constructed, not

simply as another form of online communication, but rather as threats and potentially criminal

affirmations of violence perpetration. In other words, while the way society (and the criminal

justice system) conceptualizes harm has not always kept pace with how harm manifests within

online spaces, calls for or admissions of criminal sexual violence within this realm must be taken

seriously by criminal justice agencies. While it may be difficult to ascertain who these

consumers are given online user profiles within Porn 2.0 spaces are often anonymized and/or

laden with purposely fictitious demographic information, the criminal justice system must find

147

the means to address the reality that threats or admissions of criminal sexual violence within

online spaces are problematic, potentially criminal given the context, and present a real and

tangible threat to potential victims as well as an overt, gendered threat to women everywhere.

Moreover, given that previous research indicates that pornography is intimately

connected to other forms of sexual exploitation (Banyard, 2016; Bleakley, 2014; Bouche et al.,

2016; Dines, 2010; Hawkins, 2017; Weitzer, 2010), the final implication of this study for the

field of criminal justice is recognition of the relationship between pornography and other

manifestations of the commercial sex industry. While internet pornography is incredibly popular,

normalized within mainstream culture, legal (with the exception of child pornography), and

involves no physical contact between sex workers and consumers (in fact, if any meaningful

contact occurs it is via a technological medium, such as a computer webcam), pornography is

still related to acts deemed criminal by the criminal justice system as well as part and parcel to

the global sex trade (Bleakley, 2014; Hawkins, 2017; Menaker & Franklin, 2018; Weitzer,

2010). Adding credence to this sentiment and the findings of the current research are two recent

studies specifically highlighting how online expressions of the global sex trade are related to

offline manifestations of sexual exploitation.

First, a study by Makin and Bye (2018) using Google Trends data found a link between

internet search interest in Backpage.com, a website commonly used as an online platform for sex

workers to advertise their services, and other manifestations of the illicit sex industry. More

specifically, the study found that an interest in the website, Backpage.com, aligns with known

geographic corridors for both prostitution and sex trafficking when examining the phenomenon

via spatial analysis (Makin & Bye, 2018). Accordingly, at the conclusion of their study Makin

148

and Bye (2018) note that only when we begin to understand how different facets of the global

sex industry intersect will we be able to “interrupt and diminish sexual exploitation” (p. 58).

In addition to Makin and Bye’s (2018) work, Menaker and Franklin’s (2018) study on the

linkage between pornography consumption and prostitution myths (“culturally supported

attitudes that normalize the sexual exploitation of women, justify the existence of prostitution,

and misrepresent the harm experienced by women involved in the sex trade”) also highlights

how various segments of the global sex industry are interconnected (Menaker & Franklin, 2018,

p. 1). The results from Menaker and Franklin’s (2018) study found that pornography

consumption is positively related to prostitution myth endorsement in that the more an individual

consumes pornography the more likely they are to normalize and justify sexual exploitation as

well as misrepresent the detrimental impact of the commercial sex trade (Menaker & Franklin,

2018). Thus, not only does previous research indicate that online expressions of the global sex

industry relate to offline manifestations of sexual exploitation, but emerging research shows that

pornography consumption is intimately linked to attitudes and behaviors which normalize sex

exploitation (Menaker & Franklin, 2018).

Accordingly, the findings of the current study coupled with the work of Menaker and

Franklin (2018) as well as Makin and Bye (2018) indicate that the criminal justice system should

be prepared to address the relationships between different manifestations of the global sex trade

and the impact of those manifestations on victims and consumers alike regardless of whether the

pornography industry is a normalized, powerful, profitable, and legal entity. This issue becomes

especially salient given the current study’s findings that user interaction with pornography is

related to misogyny and expressions of criminal sexual violence via commentary on

pornographic videos. Indeed, understanding the connections within and between the sex industry

149

will undoubtedly assist criminal justice professionals with addressing criminal sexual

exploitation and sexual violence in a more nuanced, purposeful, and comprehensive way.

The Study of Misogyny and Pornography: Accounting for the Researcher

Upon much personal and collegial reflection, another primary implication of this research

is how it highlights the need to recognize and address the emotional labor that goes into

researching expressions of gendered violence. While, as Jane (2017) notes, “To fully grasp the

nature and extent of the problem (of violence toward women within online spaces), we must

bring it into the daylight and look at it directly, no matter how unsettling or unpleasant the

experiences might be,” these experiences nonetheless impact those who are researching them (p.

14). Although this acknowledgement rarely, if ever, enters the dissemination of formal, academic

research and writing within the fields of criminal justice and criminology, I believe that it is

imperative that we, as a discipline, begin to identify and acknowledge this emotionally laborious

process and do so outside the confines of our offices with other scholars who are steeped in the

same literature and practice. Thus, while scholars pursuing this research such as myself are

certainly not ignorant to the fact that the material in question is graphic and laden with implicit

and explicit references to (or, in this case, calls for) sexual violence toward women,

acknowledging the potential perils of such pursuits and the hyper-clinical focus, intellectual

dexterity, and emotional bandwidth required to navigate them before, during, and after research

commences is both crucial and pertinent. Indeed, accepting and articulating this reality is

necessary for all areas of criminal justice and criminology practice, education, and scholarship,

but becomes especially pertinent for those examining issues related to sexual violence. Thus,

rather than viewing such a candid acknowledgment as an unnecessary distraction from the

150

academic rigor inherent to the development and dissemination of research, such sentiments about

the emotional and intellectual architecture required for this research agenda should be par for the

course in future works relating to sexual violence in its many iterations.

Conclusion

Pornography consumption has long been a contentious subject, ripe with starkly

bifurcated empirical inquiry. Accordingly, one of the most important implications of this study is

that provides the empirical basis for future, interdisciplinary study on a topic often laden with

societal divisiveness and scholarly discord. It proves that pornography and more importantly,

pornography consumers, should not be conceptualized in a monolithic manner and that

misogynistic communication styles are indeed associated with pornography consumption and

user interaction with pornographic videos within XVideos.com. Moreover, much like other

critical criminological scholarship that examines structural inequality, the current study adds to

the literature on not only pornography but gender inequality while providing yet another stepping

stone to future work about each topic; highlighting how interactions with pornographic material

within a pornographic hub website can be misogynistic, vary across pornographic genres, and

linked to racialized misogyny and admissions of criminal sexual violence. This addition to the

existing literature serves to elevate empirical conversations about pornography consumption as it

relates to gender inequality, misogyny, violence against women, and other manifestations of the

global sex industry.

151

REFERENCES

Abel, G. G., Barlow, D. H., Blanchard, E. B., & Guild, D. (1977). The components of rapists'

sexual arousal. Archives of General Psychiatry, 34(8), 895-903.

Adams, T. M., & Fuller, D. B. (2006). The words have changed but the ideology remains the

same: Misogynistic lyrics in rap music. Journal of Black Studies, 36(6), 938-957.

Aiello, M. F. (2017). Policing through social networking: Testing the linkage between digital and

physical police practices. The Police Journal, 1-13.

Alim, H. S. (2010). Critical language awareness. In Hornberger, N. H., & McKay, S. L. (Eds.),

Sociolinguistics and language education (pp. 205-231). Tonawanda, NY: Multilingual

Matter/ Channel View Publications.

Alexa.com. (2017). The top 500 sites on the web. Retrieved from Alexa:

https://www.alexa.com/topsites

Allan, K. (2016). The reporting of slurs. In A. Capone, F. Kiefer, & F. Lo Piparo (Eds.). Indirect

reports and pragmatics. (pp. 211-232). Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.

Angeles, L., & Sunanta, S. (2007). “Exotic love at your fingertips”: Intermarriage websites,

gendered representation, and the transnational migration of Filipino and Thai women.

Kasarinlan: Philippine Journal of Third World Studies, 22(1), 03-31.

Antevska, A. & Gavey, N. (2015). “Out of sight and out of mind”: Detachment and men’s

consumption of male sexual dominance and female submission in pornography. Men and

Masculinities, 18(5), 605-629.

152

Anderson, K. L., & Cermele, J. (2014). Public/Private language aggression against women:

Tweeting rage and intimate partner violence. Journal of Language Aggression and

Conflict, 2(2), 274-293.

Attwood, F., Smith, C., & Barker, M. (2018). ‘I’m just curious and still exploring myself’:

Young people and pornography. New Media & Society, 1-22. doi: 1461444818759271.

Baer, J. L., Kohut, T., & Fisher, W.A. (2014). Does Pornography Use Contribute to Antiwoman

Aggression? Re-examination of the Confluence Model Considering Third Variable

Explanations. The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 24(2), 160-173.

Banyard, K. (2016). Pimp state: Sex, money, and the future of equality. New York, NY: Faber &

Faber.

Barongan, C. & Hall, G.C. (1995). The influence of misogynous rap music on sexual aggression

against women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 19, 195-207.

Beaudoin, J., & Ménard, E. (2015). Objects of Human Desire: The Organization of Pornographic

Videos on Free Websites. Knowledge Organization, 42(2), 90-101.

Bergen, R. K., & Bogle, K. A. (2000). Exploring the connection between pornography and

sexual violence. Violence and Victims, 15(3), 227-234.

Black, E. W., Mezzina, K., & Thompson, L. A. (2016). Anonymous social media–Understanding

the content and context of Yik Yak. Computers in Human Behavior, 57, 17-22.

Bleakley, P. (2014). “500 Tokens to Go Private”: Camgirls, Cybersex and Feminist

Entrepreneurship. Sexuality & Culture, 18(4), 892-910.

Bouche, V., Farrell, A., & Wittmer, D. (2016). Identifying Effective Counter-Trafficking

Programs and Practices in the US: Legislative, Legal, and Public Opinion Strategies that

153

Work." US Department of Justice: NCJRS. Retrieved from

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/249670.pdf

Bou-Franch, P. (2016). 'Did he really rape these bitches?' Aggression, women, language. In

P.Bou-Franch (Ed.). Exploring language aggression against women (pp. 1-14).

Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Bowman, N., Lewis, R. J., & Tamborini, R. (2014). The morality of May 2, 2011: A content

analysis of US headlines regarding the death of Osama bin Laden. Mass Communication

and Society, 17(5), 639-664.

Braithwaite, S. R., Coulson, G., Keddington, K., & Fincham, F. D. (2015). The influence of

pornography on sexual scripts and hooking up among emerging adults in college.

Archives of sexual behavior, 44(1), 111-123.

Brennan, J. (2017). Abuse porn: Reading reactions to boy’s halfway house. Sexuality & Culture,

21, 423-440.

Bridges, A. J., & Jensen, R. (2011). Pornography. In Renzetti, Edelson, & Bergen (Eds.),

Sourcebook on violence against women (pp. 133 – 149). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Publications, Inc.

Bridges, A. J., Wosnitzer, R., Scharrer, E., Sun, C., & Liberman, R. (2010). Aggression and

sexual behavior in best-selling pornography videos: A content analysis update. Violence

Against Women, 16(10), 1065-1085.

Brosi, M. W., Foubert, J. D., Bannon, R. S., & Yandell, G. (2011). Effects of women’s

pornography use on bystander intervention in a sexual assault situation and rape myth

acceptance. Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority

Advisors, 6(2), 26-35.

154

Brownmiller, S. (1975). Against our will: Men, women, and rape. New York, NY: Fawcett

Books.

Buchwald, E., Fletcher, P. R., & Roth, M. (Eds.). (2005). Transforming a rape culture.

Minneapolis, MN: Milkweed Editions.

Burgess-Proctor, A. (2006). Intersections of race, class, gender, and crime: Future directions for

feminist criminology. Feminist criminology, 1(1), 27-47.

Bushman, B. J., & Huesmann, L. R. (2014). Twenty-five years of research on violence in digital

games and aggression revisited. European Psychologist, 19(1), 47-55.

Capodilupo, C. M., Nadal, K. L., Corman, L., Hamit, S., Lyons, O. B., & Weinberg, A. (2010).

The manifestation of gender microaggressions. In D. M. Sue (Ed.). Microaggressions and

marginality: Manifestation, dynamics, and impact. (pp. 193-216). Hoboken, NJ: John

Wiley & Sons.

Cappella, J. N. (2017). Vectors into the future of mass and interpersonal communication

research: Big data, social media, and computational social science. Human

Communication Research, 43(4), 545-558.

Caputi, J. (2004). Cuntspeak: Words from the heart of darkness. In C. Stark & R. Whisant (Eds.).

Not for sale: Feminists resisting prostitution and pornography. (pp. 362-385). North

Melbourne, Vic: Spinifex.

Carr, J. L., & VanDeusen, K. M. (2004). Risk factors for male sexual aggression on college

campuses. Journal of Family Violence, 19(5), 279-289.

Carroll, J. S., Padilla-Walker, L. M., Nelson, L. J., Olson, C. D., Barry, C. M., & Madsen, S. D.

(2008). Generation XXX pornography acceptance and use among emerging adults.

Journal of Adolescent Research, 23(1), 6-30.

155

Catalano, D. C. J., & Griffin, P. (2016). Sexism, heterosexism, and trans oppression. In M.

Adams & L.A. Bell (Eds.). Teaching diversity and social justice. (pp. 183-211). New

York, NY: Routledge.

Chung, D. S., & Yoo, C. Y. (2008). Audience motivations for using interactive features:

Distinguishing use of different types of interactivity on an online newspaper. Mass

Communication and Society, 11(4), 375-397.

Christopherson, K. M. (2007). The positive and negative implications of anonymity in Internet

social interactions: “On the Internet, nobody knows you’re a dog”. Computers in Human

Behavior, 23(6), 3038-3056.

Coe, K., Kenski, K., & Rains, S. A. (2014). Online and uncivil? Patterns and determinants of

incivility in newspaper website comments. Journal of Communication, 64(4), 658-679.

Comella, L. (2010). Remaking the sex industry: The Adult Expo as a Microcosm. In Weitzer, R.

(Ed.) Sex for sale: Prostitution, pornography, and the sex industry (pp. 255-306). New

York, NY: Taylor & Francis.

Constantinides, E., & Fountain, S. J. (2008). Web 2.0: Conceptual foundations and marketing

issues. Journal of Direct, Data and Digital Marketing Practice, 9(3), 231-244.

Cowan, G., & Campbell, R. R. (1994). Racism and Sexism in Interracial Pornography A Content

Analysis. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 18(3), 323-338.

Croom, A. M. (2013). How to do things with slurs: Studies in the way of derogatory words.

Language & Communication, 33(3), 177-204.

Cundiff, G. (2013). The influence of rap and hip-hop music: An analysis on audience perceptions

of misogynistic lyrics. Elon Journal of Undergraduate Research in Communications,

4(1).

156

Daly, K., & Chesney-Lind, M. (1988). Feminism and criminology. Justice Quarterly, 5(4), 497-

538.

DeKeseredy, W.S. & Funk, R. E. (2017). The role of adult pornography in intimate partner

sexual violence perpetrator's offending. In L. McOrmond-Plummer, J.Y. Levy-Peck, & P.

W. Easteal. (Eds.), Perpetrators of intimate partner sexual violence: A multidisciplinary

approach to prevention, recognition, and intervention (pp. 134-142). New York, NY:

Routledge.

DeKeseredy, W. S., & Hall-Sanchez, A. (2017). Adult pornography and violence against women

in the heartland: Results from a rural southeast Ohio study. Violence Against

Women, 23(7), 830-849.

DeKeseredy, W.S. & Corsianos, M. (2015). Violence Against Women in Pornography. New

York, NY: Routledge.

DeKeseredy, W. S. (2015). Critical criminological understandings of adult pornography and

woman abuse: New progressive directions in research and theory. International Journal

for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy, 4(4), 4-21.

DeKeseredy, W.S. (2014). Patriarchy.com: Adult Internet pornography and the abuse of

women. In Renzetti, & Bergen (Eds.), Understanding diversity: Celebrating difference,

challenging inequality (pp. 186-199). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

DeKeseredy, W.S., & Schwartz, M.D. (2013). Male peer support and violence against women.

Lebanon, NH: Northeastern University Press.

DeKeseredy, W.S., & Olsson, P. (2011). Adult pornography, male peer support, and violence

against women: The contribution of the “dark side” of the Internet. In Martin, M.V.,

Garcia-Ruiz, M.A. & Edwards, A. (Eds.), Technology for facilitating humanity and

157

combating social deviations: Interdisciplinary perspectives (pp. 34-50). Hershey, PA: IGI

Global.

Dines, G. (2017). Growing Up With Porn: The Developmental and Societal Impact of

Pornography on Children. Dignity: A Journal on Sexual Exploitation and Violence, 2(3),

1-9.

Dines, G. (2010). Pornland: How porn has hijacked our sexuality. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

Dines, G. (2005). Unmasking the pornographic industry: From fantasy to reality. In Buchwald,

Fletcher, & Roth (Eds.), Transforming a rape culture (pp. 105-116). Minneapolis,

Minnesota: Milkweed Editions.

Drouhard, M., Chen, N. C., Suh, J., Kocielnik, R., Pena-Araya, V., Cen, K., & Aragon, C. R.

(2017). Aeonium: Visual analytics to support collaborative qualitative coding. In Pacific

Visualization Symposium (PacificVis) (pp. 220-229). IEEE.

Erjavec, K., & Kovačič, M. P. (2012). “You Do Not Understand, This is a New War!” Analysis

of Hate Speech in News Web Sites' Comments. Mass Communication and Society, 15(6),

899-920.

Fahs, B. & Gonzalez, J. (2014). The front lines of the “back door”: Navigating (dis)engagement,

coercion, and pleasure in women’s anal sex experiences. Feminism & Psychology, 24(4),

500-520.

Fasoli, F., Carnaghi, A., & Paladino, M. P. (2015). Social acceptability of sexist derogatory and

sexist objectifying slurs across contexts. Language Sciences, 52, 98-107.

Feng, T., Guo, Y., Chen, Y., Tan, X., Xu, T., Shen, B., & Zhu, W. (2014). Tags and titles of

videos you watched tell your gender. In Communications (ICC), 2014 IEEE International

Conference on (pp. 1837-1842). IEEE.

158

Fisher, B. S., Daigle, L. E., & Cullen, F. T. (2010). Unsafe in the ivory tower: The sexual

victimization of college women. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Flood, M. (2010). Young men using pornography. In Boyle (Ed.), Everyday pornography (pp.

164 – 178). New York, NY: Routledge.

Flood, M., & Pease, B. (2009). Factors influencing attitudes to violence against women. Trauma,

Violence, & Abuse, 10(2), 125-142.

Foubert, J. D., & Bridges, A. J. (2017). What is the attraction? Pornography use motives in

relation to bystander intervention. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 32(20), 3071-3089.

Fritz, N., & Paul, B. (2017). From orgasms to spanking: A content analysis of the agentic and

objectifying sexual scripts in feminist, for women, and mainstream pornography. Sex

Roles, 1-14.

Fulper, R., Ciampaglia, G. L., Ferrara, E., Ahn, Y., Flammini, A., Menczer, F., & Rowe, K.

(2014). Misogynistic language on Twitter and sexual violence. In Proceedings of the

ACM Web Science Workshop on Computational Approaches to Social Modeling

(ChASM). Retrieved from http://yongyeol.com/papers/fulper2014misogynistic.pdf

Fu, F., Liu, L., & Wang, L. (2008). Empirical analysis of online social networks in the age of

Web 2.0. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 387(2), 675-684.

Funk, R.E. (2006). Reaching men: Strategies for preventing sexist attitudes, behaviors, and

violence. Indianapolis, IN: Jist Life.

Galinsky, A. D., Wang, C. S., Whitson, J. A., Anicich, E. M., Hugenberg, K., & Bodenhausen,

G. V. (2013). The reappropriation of stigmatizing labels: The reciprocal relationship

between power and self-labeling. Psychological Science, 24(10), 2020-2029.

http://yongyeol.com/papers/fulper2014misogynistic.pdf

159

Gartner, R. E., & Sterzing, P. R. (2016). Gender microaggressions as a gateway to sexual

harassment and sexual assault: Expanding the conceptualization of youth sexual violence.

Affilia, 31(4), 491-503.

Girls who like boys who like boys. (2016, May 13). Retrieved from

https://www.pornhub.com/insights/girls-like-boys-who-like-boys

Gorman, S., Monk-Turner, E., & Fish, J. N. (2010). Free Adult Internet Web Sites: How

Prevalent Are Degrading Acts? Gender Issues, 27(3-4), 131-145.

Gossett, J. L., & Byrne, S. (2002). “Click here” A content analysis of Internet rape sites. Gender

& Society, 16(5), 689-709.

Graf, J., Erba, J., & Harn, R. W. (2017). The role of civility and anonymity on perceptions of

online comments. Mass Communication and Society, 20(4), 526-549.

Hald, G., & Štulhofer, A. (2015). What types of pornography do people use and do they cluster?

Assessing types and categories of pornography consumption in a large-scale online

sample. The Journal of Sex Research, 1-11.

Hald, G.M & Malamuth, N.N. (2015). Experimental effects of exposure to pornography: The

moderating effect of personality and mediating effect of sexual arousal. Archives of

Sexual Behavior, 44, 99-109.

Hald, G. M., Malamuth, N. M., & Yuen, C. (2010). Pornography and attitudes supporting

violence against women: Revisiting the relationship in nonexperimental studies.

Aggressive Behavior, 36(1), 14-20.

Hald, G. M., & Koss, M. (2012). Pornography, individual differences in risk and men’s

acceptance of violence against women in a representative sample. Sex Roles, 66(7-8),

427-439.

160

Hall-Sanchez, A. K. (2014). Male peer support, hunting, and separation/divorce sexual assault in

rural Ohio. Critical Criminology, 22(4), 495-510.

Harding, K. (2015). Asking for it: The alarming rise of rape culture--and what we can do about

it. Boston, MA: Da Capo Press.

Hardaker, C., & McGlashan, M. (2016). “Real men don’t hate women”: Twitter rape threats and

group identity. Journal of Pragmatics, 91, 80-93.

Hawkins, D. (2017). It Can't Wait: Exposing the Connections Between Forms of Sexual

Exploitation. Dignity: A Journal on Sexual Exploitation and Violence, 2(3), 1-14.

Hayes, R. A., Carr, C. T., & Wohn, D. Y. (2016). One click, many meanings: Interpreting

paralinguistic digital affordances in social media. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic

Media, 60(1), 171-187.

Hayne, S. C., & Rice, R. E. (1997). Attribution accuracy when using anonymity in group support

systems. International Journal of Human–Computer Studies, 47, 429–452

Henry, N. & Powell, A. (2015). Embodied harms: Gender, shame, and technology-facilitated

sexual violence. Violence Against Women, 21(6), 758-779.

Henry, N., & Powell, A. (2016). Sexual violence in the digital age: The scope and limits of

criminal law. Social & Legal Studies, 25(4), 397-418.

Herd, D. (2015). Conflicting paradigms on gender and sexuality in rap music: A systematic

review. Sexuality & Culture, 19(3), 577-589.

Herring, S.C. (2002). Cyber violence: Recognizing and resisting abuse in online environments.

Asian Women, 14(Summer), 187-212.

Hooks, bell. (2015). Black looks: Race and representation. New York: Routledge.

161

Hughey, M. W., & Daniels, J. (2013). Racist comments at online news sites: a methodological

dilemma for discourse analysis. Media, Culture & Society, 35(3), 332-347.

Hunt, C. A., Gao, J., & Xue, L. (2014). A visual analysis of trends in the titles and keywords of

top-ranked tourism journals. Current Issues in Tourism, 17(10), 849-855.

Hunter, M. & Soto. K. (2009). Women of Color in Hip Hop: The Pornographic Gaze. Race,

Gender, and Class Journal,16 (1/2), 170-191.

Hsueh, M., Yogeeswaran, K., & Malinen, S. (2015). “Leave your comment below”: Can biased

online comments influence our own prejudicial attitudes and behaviors? Human

Communication Research, 41(4), 557-576.

Jane, E.A. (2017). Misogyny online: A short (and brutish) history. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE

Publications Inc.

Jane, E.A. (2015). Flaming? What flaming? The pitfalls and potentials of researching online

hostility. Ethics and Information Technology, 17, 65-87.

Jane, E. A. (2014). ‘Back to the kitchen, cunt’: speaking the unspeakable about online misogyny.

Continuum, 28(4), 558-570.

Jensen, R. (2007). Getting off: Pornography and the end of masculinity. Cambridge, MA: South

End Press.

Jensen, R. (2010). A content analysis of youth sexualized language and imagery in adult film

packaging, 1995-2007. Journal of Children and Media, 4(4), 371-386.

Jensen, R. (2011). Stories of a rape culture: Pornography as propaganda. In M.T. Reist, & A.

Bray (Eds.). Big porn inc: Exposing the harms of the global pornography industry (pp.

25-33). North Melbourne, VIC: Spinifex Press.

162

Jin, S.V., Phua, J., & Lee, K.M. (2015). Telling stories of breastfeeding through Facebook: The

impact of user-generated content (UGC) on pro-breastfeeding attitudes. Computers in

Human Behavior, 46, 6-17.

Jovanovski, N., & Tyler, M. (2018). “Bitch, you got what you deserved!”: Violation and

violence in sex buyer reviews of legal brothels. Violence Against Women, 1-22. doi:

1077801218757375.

Kempadoo, K. (2000). Sandoms and other exotic women: Prostitution and race in the Caribbean.

In M. Marable (Ed.). Dispatches from the Ebony Tower: Intellectuals Confront the

African American Experience (pp. 75-89). New York: NY: Columbia Press.

Kernsmith, P.K. & Kernsmith, P.M. (2009). Female pornography use and sexual coercion

perpetration. Deviant Behavior, 30(7), 589-610.

Kian, E. M., Clavio, G., Vincent, J., & Shaw, S. D. (2011). Homophobic and sexist yet

uncontested: Examining football fan postings on Internet message boards. Journal of

Homosexuality, 58(5), 680-699.

Koo, K. H., Stephens, K. A., Lindgren, K. P., & George, W. H. (2012). Misogyny, acculturation,

and ethnic identity: Relation to rape-supportive attitudes in Asian American college men.

Archives of Sexual Behavior, 41(4), 1005-1014.

Kraska, P.B. & Neuman, W.L. (2012). Criminal justice and criminology research methods. (2nd

ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

Ksiazek, T. B., Peer, L., & Lessard, K. (2014). User engagement with online news:

Conceptualizing interactivity and exploring the relationship between online news videos

and user comments. New Media & Society, 1-19.

163

Lakkaraju, H., McAuley, J. J., & Leskovec, J. (2013). What's in a name? Understanding the

interplay between titles, content, and communities in social media. Association for the

Advancement of Artificial Intelligence, 1(2), 311-320.

Lewis, R., Rowe, M., & Wiper, C. (2016). Online abuse of feminists as an emerging form of

violence against women and girls. British Journal of Criminology, 57(6), 1462-1481.

Loke, J. (2012). Public expressions of private sentiments: unveiling the pulse of racial tolerance

through online news readers' comments. Howard Journal of Communications, 23(3),

235-252.

Ling, J.Q.K. & Dipolog-Ubanan, G.F. (2017). Misogyny in lyrics of Billboard’s top rap airplay

artists. International Journal of Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences, 2(6), 7-13.

Makin, D. A., & Bye, C. (2018). Commodification of flesh: Data visualization techniques and

interest in the licit sex industry. Deviant Behavior, 39(1), 46-63.

Makin, D.A. & Morczek, A. (2016). The Dark Side of Internet Searches: A Macro Level

Assessment of Rape Culture. The International Journal of Cyber Criminology 9(1), 1–23.

Makin, D.A. & Morczek, A. (2015). X Views and Counting: Interest in Rape-Oriented

Pornography as Gendered Microaggression. The Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 1-25.

Mancini, C., Reckdenwald, A., & Beauregard, E. (2012). Pornographic exposure over the life

course and the severity of sexual offenses: Imitation and cathartic effects. Journal of

Criminal Justice, 40(1), 21-30.

Mantilla, K. (2013). Gendertrolling: Misogyny adapts to new media. Feminist Studies, 39(2),

563-570.

164

Malamuth, N. M., Hald, G. M., & Koss, M. (2012). Pornography, individual differences in risk

and men’s acceptance of violence against women in a representative sample. Sex

Roles, 66(7-8), 427-439.

Malamuth, N. M., & Ceniti, J. (1986). Repeated exposure to violent and nonviolent pornography:

Likelihood of raping ratings and laboratory aggression against women. Aggressive

Behavior, 12(2), 129-137.

Malamuth, N. M., Linz, D., Heavey, C. L., Barnes, G., & Acker, M. (1995). Using the

confluence model of sexual aggression to predict men's conflict with women: a 10-year

follow-up study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(2), 353-366.

Manne, K. (2018). Down girl: The logic of misogyny. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Marston, C., & Lewis, R. (2014). Anal heterosex among young people and implications for

health promotion: a qualitative study in the UK. BMJ Open, 4, 1-6.

Massanari, A. (2015). #Gamergate and The Fappening: How Reddit’s algorithm, governance,

and culture support toxic technocultures. New Media & Society, 1-18.

Mathews, P. W. (2017). Cam Models, Sex Work, and Job Immobility in the Philippines.

Feminist Economics, 1-24.

Mayall, A. & Russell, D. (1993). Racism in Pornography. Feminism & Psychology 3(2), 275-

281.

Mazieres, A., Trachman, M., Cointet, J. P., Coulmont, B., & Prieur, C. (2014). Deep tags: toward

a quantitative analysis of online pornography. Porn Studies, 1(1-2), 80-95.

McKimmie, B. M., Masser, B. M., & Bongiorno, R. (2014). What counts as rape? The effect of

offense prototypes, victim stereotypes, and participant gender on how the complainant

and defendant are perceived. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 29(12), 2273-2303.

165

Menaker, T.A., & Franklin, C.A. (2018). Prostitution myth endorsement: Assessing the effects of

sexism, sexual victimization history, pornography, and self-control. Psychology of

Women Quarterly, 1-13. doi: 0361684318754790.

Messner, M.A. (2005). The Triad of Violence in Men’s Sports. In E. Buchwald, P.R. Fletcher, &

M. Roth (Eds.), Transforming a Rape Culture (pp. 23-46). Minneapolis, MN: Milkweed

Editions.

Milburn, M. A., Mather, R., & Conrad, S. D. (2000). The effects of viewing R-rated movie

scenes that objectify women on perceptions of date rape. Sex Roles, 43(9), 645-664.

Monto, M.A. (2010). Prostitutes’ Customers: Motives and Misconceptions. In R.Weitzer (Ed.),

Sex for sale: Prostitution, pornography, and the sex industry (pp. 233-254). New York,

NY: Routledge.

Moreau, C., Boucher, S., Hébert, M., & Lemelin, J. (2015). Capturing sexual violence

experiences among battered women using the revised sexual experiences survey and the

revised conflict tactics scales. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 44(1), 223-231.

Morgan, E. M. (2011). Associations between young adults' use of sexually explicit materials and

their sexual preferences, behaviors, and satisfaction. Journal of Sex Research, 48(6), 520-

530.

Mowlabocus, S. (2010). Porn 2.0: Technology, Social Practice, and the New Online Porn

Industry. In Attwood, F. (Ed.) Porn.com: Making sense of online pornography (pp. 69-

87). New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing.

Miller-Young, M. (2010). Putting hypersexuality to work: Black women and illicit eroticism in

pornography. Sexualities, 13(2), 219-235.

166

Mullins, C. W., & Young, J. K. (2012). Cultures of violence and acts of terror: Applying a

legitimation–habituation model to terrorism. Crime & Delinquency, 58(1), 28-56.

Murnen, S. K. (2000). Gender and the use of sexually degrading language. Psychology of Women

Quarterly, 24(4), 319-327.

Nielsen, L. B. (2002). Subtle, pervasive, harmful: Racist and sexist remarks in public as hate

speech. Journal of Social Issues, 58(2), 265-280.

Ogas, O., & Gaddam, S. (2011). A billion wicked thoughts. New York, NY: Penguin Group.

Oh, H. J., Ozkaya, E., & LaRose, R. (2014). How does online social networking enhance life

satisfaction? The relationships among online supportive interaction, affect, perceived

social support, sense of community, and life satisfaction. Computers in Human Behavior,

30, 69-78.

Oh, O., Kwon, K. H., & Rao, H. R. (2010). An Exploration of Social Media in Extreme Events:

Rumor Theory and Twitter during the Haiti Earthquake. In International Conference on

Information Systems (ICIS). ICIS 2010 Proceedings. 231.

https://aisel.aisnet.org/icis2010_submissions/231

Paasonen, S. (2010). Labors of love: netporn, Web 2.0 and the meanings of amateurism. New

Media & Society, 12(8), 1297-1312.

Pazzani, L. M. (2007). The factors affecting sexual assaults committed by strangers and

acquaintances. Violence Against Women, 13(7), 717-749.

Patton, D. U., Hong, J. S., Ranney, M., Patel, S., Kelley, C., Eschmann, R., & Washington, T.

(2014). Social media as a vector for youth violence: A review of the literature. Computers

in Human Behavior, 35, 548-553.

167

Peter, J. & Valkenburg, P.M. (2016). Adolescents and pornography: a review of 20 years of

research." The Journal of Sex Research 53 (4-5), 509-531.

Pihlaja, S. (2016). Expressing pleasure and avoiding engagement in online adult video comment

sections. Journal of Language and Sexuality, 5(1), 94-112.

Reis, J., Benevenuto, F., de Melo, P. V., Prates, R., Kwak, H., & An, J. (2015). Breaking the

news: First impressions matter on online news. In Proceedings of the 9th International

Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence Conference on Web-Blogs and

Social Media. AAAI.

Romito, P., & Beltramini, L. (2015). Factors associated with exposure to violent or degrading

pornography among high school students. The Journal of School Nursing, 31(4), 280-

290.

Salter, M. (2017). Crime, Justice and Social Media. New York, NY: Routledge.

Santaemilita, J. & Maruenda, J. (2016). The linguistic representations of gender violence in

(written) media discourse. In P.Bou-Franch (Ed.). Exploring language aggression against

women (pp. 82-106). Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Scarcelli, C.M. (2015). ‘It is disgusting, but…’: adolescent girls’ relationship to internet

pornography as gender performance. Porn Studies, 2(2-3), 237-249.

Seto, M. C., Maric, A., & Barbaree, H. E. (2001). The role of pornography in the etiology of

sexual aggression. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 6(1), 35-53.

Shim, J. W., & Paul, B. M. (2014). The role of anonymity in the effects of inadvertent exposure

to online pornography among young adult males. Social Behavior and Personality: An

International Journal, 42(5), 823-834.

168

Shotland, R. L. (1985). A preliminary model of some causes of date rape. Academic Psychology

Bulletin, 7, 187-200.

Siersdorfer, S., Chelaru, S., San Pedro, J., Altingovede, I.S., & Nejdl, W. (2014). Analyzing and

mining comments and comment ratings on the social web. ACM Transactions on the

Web, 8(3), 1-40.

Singer, J. B. (2014). User-generated visibility: Secondary gatekeeping in a shared media space.

New Media & Society, 16(1), 55-73.

Smith, M. (2011). Barely legal: Vagueness and the prohibition of pornography as a condition of

supervised release. St. John’s Law Review, 2(84), 727-757.

Smith, J. G., & Luykx, A. (2017). Race play in BDSM porn: the eroticization of oppression.

Porn Studies, 1-14.

Smith, S. L., & Donnerstein, E. (1998). Harmful effects of exposure to media violence: Learning

of aggression, emotional desensitization, and fear. In R. G. Geen & E. Donnerstein (Eds.)

Human aggression: Theories, research, and implications for social policy (pp. 167-202).

San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Sobieraj, S. (2017). Bitch, slut, skank, cunt: patterned resistance to women’s visibility in digital

publics. Information, Communication & Society, 1-15.

Song, Y., Vallmitjana, J., Stent, A., & Jaimes, A. (2015). Tvsum: Summarizing web videos using

titles. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern

Recognition (pp. 5179-5187). IEEE.

Springer, N., Engelmann, I., & Pfaffinger, C. (2015). User comments: motives and inhibitors to

write and read. Information, Communication & Society, 1-18.

169

Stoleru, M., & Costescu, E. A. (2014). (Re) Producing Violence against Women in Online

Spaces. Philobiblon: Transylvanian Journal of Multidisciplinary Research in

Humanities, 19(1), 95-114.

Sue, D. W. (2010). Microaggressions in everyday life: Race, gender, and sexual orientation.

Hoboken: New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.

Sun, C., Ezzell, M. B., & Kendall, O. (2016). Naked Aggression: The Meaning and Practice of

Ejaculation on a Woman’s Face. Violence Against Women, 23(14), 1710-1729.

Sun, C., Bridges, A., Wosnitzer, R., Scharrer, E., & Liberman, R. (2008). A comparison of male

and female directors in popular pornography: What happens when women are at the

helm? Psychology of Women Quarterly, 32(3), 312-325.

Tanis, M., & Postmes, T. (2007). Two faces of anonymity: Paradoxical effects of cues to identity

in CMC. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(2), 955-970.

Tenenboim, O., & Cohen, A. A. (2015). What prompts users to click and comment: A

longitudinal study of online news. Journalism, 16(2), 198-217.

Thompson, M.P., Kingree, J.B., Zinzow, H., & Swartout, K. (2015). Time-varying risk factors

and sexual aggression perpetration among male college students. Journal of Adolescent

Health, 57, 637-642.

Trestian, I., Xiao, C., & Kuzmanovic, A. (2013, May). A glance at an overlooked part of the

world wide web. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on World Wide

Web (pp. 1379-1386). ACM.

Tynes, B. M., & Markoe, S. L. (2010). The role of color-blind racial attitudes in reactions to

racial discrimination on social network sites. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education,

3(1), 1.

170

Tynes, B. M., Rose, C. A., & Markoe, S. L. (2013). Extending campus life to the Internet: Social

media, discrimination, and perceptions of racial climate. Journal of Diversity in Higher

Education, 6(2), 102.

Tyson, G., Elkhatib, Y., Sastry, N., & Uhlig, S. (2015). Are People Really Social in Porn 2.0? In

ICWSM. Ninth International Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence

Conference on Web and Social Media (pp. 436-444). AAAI.

Tyson, G., Elkhatib, Y., Sastry, N., & Uhlig, S. (2016). Measurements and analysis of a major

adult video portal. ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and

Applications (TOMM), 12(2), 35.

Vasvári, L. O. (2013). Gendered hate speech and political discourse in recent US elections and in

postsocialist Hungary. Comparative Literature and Culture, 15(4), 1-14.

Walker, A., Makin, D.A., & Morczek, A. (2016). Finding Lolita: A Comparative Analysis of

Interest in Teenage Pornography. Sexuality & Culture, 20(3), 657-683.

Weber, P. (2014). Discussions in the comments section: Factors influencing participation and

interactivity in online newspapers’ reader comments. New Media & Society, 16(6), 941-

957.

Weiss, M. D. (2006). Mainstreaming kink: The politics of BDSM representation in US popular

media. Journal of Homosexuality, 50(2-3), 103-132.

Weitzer, R., & Kubrin, C. E. (2009). Misogyny in rap music: A content analysis of prevalence

and meanings. Men and Masculinities, 12(1), 3-29

Weitzer, R. (2010). Sex Work: Paradigms and Policies. In Weitzer, R. (Ed.) Sex for sale:

Prostitution, pornography, and the sex industry (pp. 1-43). New York, NY: Taylor &

Francis.

171

Whisant, R. (2010). From Jekyll to Hyde: The grooming of male pornography consumers. In

Boyle (Ed.), Everyday Pornography (pp. 114 - 133). New York, NY: Routledge.

Wilkinson, E. (2017). The diverse economies of online pornography: From paranoid readings to

post-capitalist futures. Sexualities, 0(0), 1-18.

Wilson, G. (2014). Your brain on porn: Internet pornography and the emerging science of

addiction. Margate, Kent: Commonwealth Publishing.

Williams, A., Oliver, C., Aumer, K., & Meyers, C. (2016). Racial microaggressions and

perceptions of Internet memes. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 424-432.

Williams, M. L., Burnap, P., & Sloan, L. (2017). Towards an ethical framework for publishing

twitter data in social research: Taking into account users’ views, online context and

algorithmic estimation. Sociology, 1-20.

Wright, P. J., Tokunaga, R. S., & Kraus, A. (2015). A meta‐analysis of pornography

consumption and actual acts of sexual aggression in general population studies. Journal

of Communication, 66, 183-205.

Wright, P. J., Sun, C., Steffen, N. J., & Tokunaga, R. S. (2014). Pornography, alcohol, and male

sexual dominance. Communication Monographs, 82(2), 1-19.

Wright, P. J., & Randall, A. K. (2012). Internet pornography exposure and risky sexual behavior

among adult males in the United States. Computers in Human behavior, 28(4), 1410-

1416.

Wyrwoll, C. (2014). Social Media: Fundamentals, Models, and Ranking of User-Generated

Content. New York, NY: Springer.

XVideos.com. (2017, September 6). 100 million unique visitors…in a single day! Yay! [Tweet].

Retrieved from https://twitter.com/xvideoscom/status/905401511374716929

172

Ybarra, M.L. & Thompson, R.E. (2017). Predicting the emergence of sexual violence in

adolescence. Prevention Science, 1-13.

Ybarra, M. L., Strasburger, V. C., & Mitchell, K. J. (2014). Sexual media exposure, sexual

behavior, and sexual violence victimization in adolescence. Clinical Pediatrics, 53(13),

1239-1247.

Ziegele, M., Breiner, T., & Quiring, O. (2014). What Creates Interactivity in Online News

Discussions? An Exploratory Analysis of Discussion Factors in User Comments on News

Items. Journal of Communication, 64(6), 1111-1138.

Zillmann, D., & Bryant, J. (1984). Effects of massive exposure to pornography. In N. Malamuth

& E. Donnerstein (Eds.), Pornography and sexual aggression (pp. 115-138). Orlando,

FL: Academic Press.

“all women are whores”: examining misogyny - WSU ...

Documents

Transcript of “all women are whores”: examining misogyny - WSU ...