Abstract
The article deals with a number of Internet sites claiming to specialize in providing pornography for heterosexual women, as a vehicle to examine the nascent “gaze” and visual parameters of heterosexual female sexuality. The focus here is semiotic—looking at visual coding of website images rather than audience reception (i.e., whether heterosexual women are actually the main consumers of women’s porno). Motivation for this decision is discussed. Theoretically, the article draws from Butler’s performative notions of sexuality in anchoring discussion. The remainder of the article does a comparative textual analysis of nine pornographic Internet sites, three of which label themselves “for women.” Findings are as follows: “Women’s porno” fuses the matter and anti-matter of men’s homo- and heterosexual pornography, in the process engendering an active, sexually interested, heterosexual female gaze and typifying Butler notion of “insurrectionary speech.”
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Amis, M. (2001, March 17). A rough trade. The guardian, pp. 8–14.
Beggan, J., & Allison, S. (2003). Reflexivity in the pornographic films of Candida Royale. Sexualities, 6(3–4): 301–324.
Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble. New York: Routledge.
Butler, J. (1993). Bodies that matter: on the discursive limits of “sex.” New York: Routledge.
Butler, J. (1997). Excitable speech. New York: Routledge.
Cowan, G., & Dunn, K. (1994). What themes in pornography lead to perceptions of the degradation of women? The Journal of Sex Research, 31(1): 11–21.
DeLauretis, T. (1984). Alice doesn’t: Feminism, semiotics, cinema. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Dentith, S. (1990). Bakhtinian thought. New York: Routledge.
Dworkin, A. (1992). Against the male flood: Censorship, pornography and equality. In C. Itzin (Ed.), Pornography: Women, violence, and civil liberties (pp. 515–535) Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dyer, R. (1992). Don’t look now: The male pin-up. In Screen: the sexual subject. New York: Routledge.
Foucault, M. (1976). The history of sexuality, volume 1. New York: Random House.
Goffman, I. (1976). Gender advertisements. London: MacMillan Press.
Kappeler, S. (1986). The pornography of representation. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Kilbourne, J. (Writer), & S. Jhally (Director) (2000). Killing us softly 3: advertising’s image of women. In S. Jhally (Producer). Toronto: Kinetic video.
MacKinnon, C. (1992). Pornography, civil rights and speech. In C. Itzin (Ed.), Pornography: women, violence and civil liberties (pp. 456–511). London: Oxford University Press.
MacKinnon, C. (1993). Only words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
McNair, B. (1996). Mediated sex. New York: Arnold.
McNair, B. (2002). Striptease culture: Sex, media and the democratisation of desire. New York: Routledge.
Mulvey, L. (1992). Visual pleasure and narrative cinema. In A. Easthope & K. McGowan (Eds.), A critical and cultural theory reader (pp. 158–167). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Russell, D. (1998). Dangerous relationships: pornography, misogyny and rape. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Stewart, S. (1984). The imaginary body. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press.
Weedon, C. (1987). Feminist practice and poststructuralist theory. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
Williams, L. (1989). Hardcore: Power, pleasure and the frenzy of the visible. Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.
Williamson, J. (1978). Decoding advertisements: ideology and meaning in advertising. London: Boyars.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Schauer, T. Women’s Porno: The heterosexual female gaze in porn sites “for women”. Sex Cult 9, 42–64 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12119-005-1007-8
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12119-005-1007-8