Introduction
Defining pornography might seem straightforward at first glance, but delve into the subject, especially from an interdisciplinary perspective, and you’ll uncover a surprisingly complex landscape. This article explores the multifaceted nature of “What Is Pornography” by examining research conducted with a panel of leading experts from diverse academic fields. Understanding the nuances of pornography’s definition is crucial, particularly when investigating its impact on audiences and society. The rise of digital media and easy access to sexually explicit material has amplified the urgency of this discussion, making it essential to bridge the gaps between different disciplinary viewpoints.
While research into pornography and its effects has spanned decades, a universally accepted definition remains elusive. Disciplines like psychology, humanities, and social sciences each bring unique perspectives, sometimes leading to conflicting data and interpretations. This article draws upon a Delphi panel study of 38 prominent pornography researchers from various disciplines to shed light on these definitional challenges and propose a path forward for interdisciplinary research. The core question we address is: can we find common ground in defining pornography, or should we embrace the diverse interpretations offered by different fields of study?
The Psychological Perspective: “Sexually Explicit Materials Intended to Arouse”
Within psychology, a prevailing definition of pornography centers on two key elements: explicitness and intent to arouse. Psychologists often define pornography as “sexually explicit material intended to arouse,” emphasizing depictions of exposed genitals and sexual behaviors designed to elicit sexual arousal. This definition highlights the explicit nature of the content, moving beyond mere nudity to encompass overt sexual acts. However, even within psychology, debates arise. Some researchers broaden the scope to include nudity without explicit sexual contact, while others maintain that pornography must depict sexual acts or aroused genitalia. This distinction can lead to disagreements, for example, on whether publications like Playboy, which features nudity but not always explicit sexual acts, should be categorized as pornography.
Furthermore, the “intent to arouse” component is also subject to interpretation. Some psychologists consider the creator’s intention as central, defining pornography as material designed to cause arousal. Others focus on the effect on the consumer, suggesting that material becomes pornography if it actually leads to sexual arousal, regardless of the creator’s original intent. Interestingly, a significant number of psychology researchers, even in recent studies, do not explicitly provide a definition of pornography, indicating the ongoing challenges in establishing a definitive consensus even within this single discipline.
The Humanities Perspective: Pornography as a Cultural Construct
In contrast to the psychological focus on inherent textual characteristics, humanities disciplines approach pornography as a more fluid and culturally contingent concept. Researchers in fields like cultural studies, media studies, and literary studies argue that pornography is not a fixed “thing” but rather a “concept” or “argument” shaped by cultural, historical, and social forces. This perspective emphasizes the heterogeneity of pornography, acknowledging the vast array of texts and practices that can be considered pornographic, including materials not originally intended for sexual arousal. For instance, a shoe catalog used for fetishistic purposes can function as pornography, highlighting that the use and context are as crucial as the content itself.
Humanities scholars stress that definitions of pornography are not neutral descriptions but are embedded in power dynamics. What is labeled as pornography, and by whom, is often tied to social control and the regulation of knowledge and desire. Historically, the concept of pornography has been used to police certain forms of expression and maintain social hierarchies. This perspective suggests that defining pornography is less about identifying inherent qualities and more about understanding the cultural and political processes that designate certain materials as such. Therefore, from a humanities standpoint, a rigid, universal definition of pornography is not only impractical but also overlooks the dynamic and culturally specific nature of the concept.
The Delphi Panel: Seeking Expert Consensus
To investigate these divergent definitions, a Delphi panel study was conducted, bringing together 38 leading pornography researchers from a wide array of disciplines. The Delphi method is a structured communication technique used to gather expert opinions and achieve consensus on complex issues. Panel members were selected based on recommendations from an advisory group of senior academics with expertise in sexual development, health, and media studies. The diverse panel included experts from psychology, communication studies, cultural studies, media studies, human geography, history, literary studies, film studies, gender studies, cultural anthropology, sociology, and public health.
In the first survey round, panelists were asked to provide their own open-ended definitions of pornography. Analysis of these responses revealed two dominant themes, reflecting the psychological and humanities perspectives discussed earlier. Based on these themes, a second survey was conducted, presenting panelists with two potential definitions:
- “Sexually explicit materials intended to arouse.” (Reflecting the psychological perspective)
- “Pornography is not a thing but a concept, a category of texts managed by institutions led by powerful groups in society in order to control the circulation of knowledge and culture, changing according to geographical location and period.” (Reflecting the humanities perspective)
Panelists were asked to rate their agreement with each definition on a Likert scale, allowing for nuanced responses beyond simple agreement or disagreement.
Delphi Panel Results: Two Definitions, Diverse Agreement
The results of the Delphi panel revealed a fascinating pattern of both agreement and divergence. In the first round, while no two researchers offered identical definitions, common threads emerged. Over three-quarters of respondents included “explicit” in their definitions, and just over half mentioned “intention to arouse” or similar phrasing. However, less than half combined both elements without caveats, highlighting the complexity even within seemingly shared definitional components.
The second survey round, presenting the two synthesized definitions, showed that a majority of panelists (21 out of 27) agreed or strongly agreed with “Sexually explicit materials intended to arouse.” However, a significant portion (15 out of 27) also agreed or strongly agreed with “Pornography is not a thing but a concept.” Interestingly, over half of the respondents agreed with both definitions, suggesting that these seemingly incompatible perspectives might not be mutually exclusive in the eyes of experts.
Analyzing the data by disciplinary background revealed further nuances. Social scientists showed a higher mean agreement with both definitions, while humanities researchers leaned more strongly towards the “pornography as a concept” definition and showed less agreement with the “sexually explicit materials intended to arouse” definition. This disciplinary divide underscores the influence of academic training and epistemological approaches on how pornography is conceptualized.
Discussion: Embracing Definitional Pluralism in Pornography Research
The Delphi panel’s findings confirm that a single, universally accepted definition of pornography remains elusive. This is not necessarily a weakness, but rather a reflection of the complex and multifaceted nature of pornography itself. The differing perspectives from psychology and humanities highlight the need for researchers to be explicit and self-reflective about the definitions they employ, depending on their research questions and disciplinary approaches.
For empirical research aiming for replicable data, such as surveys and content analyses, the “sexually explicit materials intended to arouse” definition offers a practical starting point. It provides a working definition that allows for data collection and analysis, even if it is acknowledged as incomplete or provisional. However, researchers should be aware of the limitations of this definition and recognize that it may not capture the full spectrum of what constitutes pornography in diverse cultural contexts or individual experiences.
For research in humanities disciplines, where the focus is often on cultural meaning, historical context, and power dynamics, the “pornography as a concept” definition is more relevant. This perspective encourages critical examination of how pornography is constructed, regulated, and contested within specific social and historical contexts. It allows for a deeper understanding of the cultural work that definitions of pornography perform, rather than seeking to impose a fixed and potentially limiting definition.
The panel’s responses suggest a way forward: embracing definitional pluralism. Instead of striving for a single, unified definition, researchers can acknowledge and strategically utilize different definitions depending on their research goals. This approach requires transparency and justification – researchers should clearly state which definition they are using and why it is appropriate for their study. By embracing this flexibility, interdisciplinary research can benefit from the richness of diverse perspectives while maintaining rigor and clarity in its investigations of “what is pornography.”
Conclusion: Navigating the Complexities of Defining Pornography
In conclusion, defining pornography is not a simple task with a single answer. The research presented here, drawing from a Delphi panel of leading experts, demonstrates the inherent complexities and disciplinary variations in understanding “what is pornography.” While a definition centered on “sexually explicit materials intended to arouse” resonates with many, especially in empirical fields like psychology, humanities perspectives rightly emphasize the culturally constructed and historically contingent nature of pornography.
Moving forward, the most productive path for pornography research, particularly in interdisciplinary contexts, may be to embrace definitional flexibility. Researchers should be encouraged to select and justify their chosen definition based on their research objectives, disciplinary background, and the specific questions they seek to answer. This self-reflective and transparent approach will foster richer dialogue, more nuanced research, and a deeper understanding of the complex phenomenon we call pornography. The ongoing conversation about “what is pornography” is not a barrier to research, but rather a vital aspect of its intellectual richness and societal relevance.
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by the Australian Research Council Discovery grant, DP 170100808. We extend our sincere gratitude to the Delphi panel members and the Advisory Group for their invaluable contributions to this study.
