Pornography, porno, porn

Thoughts on a weedy field

Bibliographic Data

ID13086374
AuthorsAmanda C De C Williams (0000-0003-3761-8704, University of California, Berkeley, corresponding author)
Year2014
Volume1
Issue1-2
Pages24-40
Publication date2014-01-02
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenuePorn Studies (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2326-8743 • E-ISSN: 2326-8751
PublisherTaylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/23268743.2013.863662
OpenAlexW2115196625
LanguageEN
Citations received32
References cited62

This article provides an overview of the state of ‘pornography, porno, porn’ studies grounded on a critique of my own anthology and other significant texts. It notes the (over)abundance of work on gay pornography versus the surprising paucity on heterosexual pornographies; the under-representation of soft core; the near non-existence of an ‘archive’; and the need for more original single-authored books. Finally, the article makes a plea that criticizes the very title of this journal in the casual, too-comfortable use of the terms ‘porno’ and now ‘porn’ that risk aligning the academic field too closely with the industry, thus eliding critical distance and suggesting that the field is automatically ‘pro-porn,’ which it should not be

Casual · Criminology · Field (mathematics · Media studies · Plea · Political science · Politics · Pornography · Psychoanalysis · Representation (politics · Sociology · American and British Literature Analysis · Law · Literature: history, themes, analysis · Psychology · Sexuality, Behavior, and Technology

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub