Critical Criminological Understandings of Adult Pornography and Woman Abuse: New Progressive Directions in Research and Theory 1

Abstract

There is a small, but growing, social scientific literature on the racist and violent nature of contemporary adult pornography. However, considerably more empirical and theoretical work needs to be done to advance a critical criminological understanding of how such hurtful sexual media contribute to various forms of woman abuse in intimate relationships. The main objective of this article is to briefly review the relevant literature and to suggest a few new progressive empirical and theoretical directions.

Full text

www.crimejusticejournal.comIJCJ&SD20154(4):4‐21 ISSN2202–8005


©TheAuthor(s)2015
CriticalCriminologicalUnderstandingsofAdultPornography
andWomanAbuse:NewProgressiveDirectionsin
ResearchandTheory1
WalterSDeKeseredy
WestVirginiaUniversity,USA;QueenslandUniversityofTechnology,Australia



Abstrac
t

Thereis a small,but growing, social scientificliterature on theracistandviolentnatureof
contemporary adult pornography. However, considerably more empirical and theoretical
workneedstobedonetoadvanceacriticalcriminologicalunderstandingofhowsuchhurtful
sexualmediacontributetovariousformsofwomanabuseinintimaterelationships.Themain
objectiveof thisarticleistobriefly reviewthe relevantliterature and to suggest a few new
progressiveempiricalandtheoreticaldirections.

Keywords
Pornography;criticalcriminology;womanabuse;gender;feminism.



Introduction
Criticalcriminologicalworkonadultpornographyconsumptionanditsviolentconsequencesis
limitedcomparedtotheamountofprogressiveintellectualattentiongiventoothermajorsocial
harms, such as racist police practices, mass incarceration, and environmental crime. In fact,
criminologists in general ‘have not been fleet of foot’ in dealing with Internet porn (Atkinson
andRodgers2014:1).Thisisdue,inpart,tothefactthatnumerous academics and
university/collegeadministratorsviewpornographyasatopicunfitforacademicinquiry(Ullen
2014).Nevertheless, thispaper is one of agrowing groupof scholarly articles,book chapters,
andmonographs onpornographythatchallengethisorthodoxbelief.Pornographyrequiresin‐
depth,interdisciplinaryanalysesforreasonsprovidedhereandinothersources(Kipnis1996).
Allthesame,there are differentlearnedunderstandings, some ofwhichsharply disagree with
mycriticalcriminologicalposition,onethatisintunewiththose of anti‐pornography radical
feministssuchasDines (2010), Funk (2006),andJensen(2007).Itisbeyondthescopeof this
articletoreproducedebatesbetweenthosewhofindvalueinadultpornographyandthosewho
sharplyoppose it.Rather,themainobjectiveistwofold: (1)tobrieflyreviewtheextantcritical
criminologicalliteratureonthelinkagebetweenpornographyandwomanabuse;and(2)to
suggestsomenewprogressive directions inresearchandtheory. It is first necessarytodefine
criticalcriminologyandpornography.


WalterSDeKeseredy:CriticalCriminologicalUnderstandingsofAdultPornographyandWomanAbuse

IJCJ&SD5
Onlineversionviawww.crimejusticejournal.com  ©20154(4)
Definitionofcriticalcriminologyandpornography
Criticalcriminology
Criticalcriminologyisapolyglotofconcepts,theoriesandinterpretationsaboutcrime,deviance
andsocialcontrol(Donnermeyer2012).Evenso,themanytypesofcritical criminologycanbe
summed up as perspectives that view the major sources of crime astheunequalclass,
race/ethnic and gender relations that control our society (DeKeseredy 2011, Young 1988).
While variants of critical criminology such as green criminology, left realism, feminism and
cultural criminology have different origins, use different research methods and have diverse
politicalbeliefs, asFriedrichs (2009) notes, ‘The unequal distribution of power or of material
resourceswithincontemporarysocietiesprovidesaunifyingpointofdepartureforallstrainsof
criticalcriminology’(p.210).Still,‘thereisnopartyline’(Currie2008:vii).

Another feature all critical criminologists share is passionate opposition to prisons and other
draconianmeans of socialcontrol.Theprimary policygoalsareradicalstructuralandcultural
changes. Nevertheless, these transitions will not happen soon in the present neo‐liberal era,
whichiswhymany, if notmost,critical scholars and activistspropose short‐termsolutions to
crimewhilesimultaneouslykeepingtheireyesonbroadertransitions.

Twootherthingsbringcriticalcriminologiststogether.Thefirstis years of rigorous research
usingavarietyofmethodsincludingsurveys,ethnography,narrative,deconstructionandother
qualitativemethods(DeKeseredyandDragiewicz2014;Lynch,Michalowski,andGroves2000).
Criticalcriminologistsstudya myriadoftopicsrangingfromviolenceagainstwomeninprivate
places,topredatorystreetvictimization,tocorporatecrime.Theadditional commonalityisthe
broadeningthedefinitionofcrimetoincludepoverty,humanrightsviolations,thestate’sdenial
ofadequatesocialservices(forexample,healthcare),stateterrorism,racism,imperialismand
corporatecrime(Elias1986;ReimanandLeighton2013;SchwendingerandSchwendinger
1975).

Ofall the scholars who publicly identify themselves as critical criminologists or who could be
categorizedassuch,feministsarethemostactivelyinvolvedinthestudyofandstruggleagainst
pornography.Ontheonehand, defining feminism isnotaneasytaskandthereareatleast12
typesoffeminism(Renzetti20122013).Ontheotherhand,allleadingexpertsinthefieldagree
withtheassertion that‘feminism is not merely aboutadding womenonto the agenda’(Currie
andMacLean1993:6).Here,IofferDalyandChesney‐Lind’s(1988)conceptualization,whichis
still one of the most widely read and cited offerings in the critical criminological literature.
Feminism refers to a ‘set of theories about women’s oppression and a set of strategies for
change’(DalyandChesney‐Lind1988:502).

Feministscholarsmostinvolved in pornographyworkareradicalfeminists,such as Gail Dines
(2010)andRobertJensen(2007).Radicalfeministscontendthat the most important set of
socialrelationsinanysocietyisfoundinpatriarchyandthat,throughouttheworld,femalesare
themostoppressedsocialgroupwhile,regardless of their race/ethnicity and social class,men
alwayshavemorepowerandprivilege(Renzetti2013).Additionally, pioneering radical
feminist scholars Catharine MacKinnon (1983, 1989), Susan Brownmiller (1975), Andrea
Dworkin (1981), and Diana Russell (1990) made an argument that many feminists still agree
withtoday:pornisviolent,eroticizesmaledominanceandfemale submission, and ‘thereby
reinforcesandcauseswomen’ssubordination’(Bart1985:284).Radicalfeministsalsocontend
thatpornography‘liesaboutwomen’ssexuality’(Lacombe1988:41).

While these claims are shared by most anti‐porn feminists, there is no consensus about the
development and implementation ofpoliciesthattargetporn,and conflicting feminist policy
responseshaveexisted for decades.Nonetheless, the earlyworkof radical feministsadvanced
howpornographyisnowperceivedinmanyacademicandothercircles.Yetradicalfeminismis

WalterSDeKeseredy:CriticalCriminologicalUnderstandingsofAdultPornographyandWomanAbuse

IJCJ&SD6
Onlineversionviawww.crimejusticejournal.com  ©20154(4)
frequently criticized for overlooking how gender inequality intersects with other types of
inequality,suchasracismandsocialclassinequality(Burgess‐Proctor 2006; Renzetti 2013).
This is true for some radical feminists but the most prominent present‐day ones who study
porn, such as Dines (2010) and Jensen (2007), cannot be accusedofthis.Onthecontrary,
race/ethnicityis anintegral part of their analyses. Furthermore, thereis agroup ofanti‐porn
critical criminologists heavily influenced by radical feminism that also addresses some key
micro‐levelvariablessuchasmalepeersupport(DeKeseredyandOlsson2011;DeKeseredyand
Schwartz2013;Hall‐Sanchez2014).Originallydevelopedbyme26yearsago(seeDeKeseredy
1988), this concept is defined as the attachments to male peers and the resources that these 
menprovidethatencourageandlegitimatewomanabuse.

Pornography
Wenowliveina‘post‐Playboyworld’(Jensen 2007),onefeaturingthedegradation,abuseand
humiliation of women in a way never seen before in the mass media. Translated from Greek,
‘pornography’means ‘writingabout prostitutes’(Katz 2006). Not to be confused with erotica,
which is ‘sexually suggestive or arousing material that is freeofsexism,racism,and
homophobiaandisrespectfulofallhumanbeingsandanimalsportrayed’ (Russell 1993: 3),
pornography hurts on numerous levels. Women and men are represented in many different
waysinpornography,buttwothingsallpornographicimagesofandwritingsaboutthemhave
incommonisthatfemalesarecharacterizedassubordinatetomales and the primary role of
actresses and models is the provision of sex to men (DeKeseredy and Schwartz 2013; Funk
2006).

PornographyhasnoticeablychangedoverthepastfewdecadesduetotheInternet.Much,ifnot
most,ofthe adult pornographyeasily accessible onthiselectronic technology is,as Gail Dines
(2010: xi) (among many others) defines it ‘gonzo – that genre which is ... today one of the
biggestmoney‐makersfortheindustry–whichdepictshardcore,body‐punishingsexinwhich
womenare demeaned and debased’. Theintent hereis not tomoralizeortoengagein‘Shock
Theater’.Hence,explicitexamplesarenotprovided.Butkeepinmindthatacommonfeatureof
new pornographic videos is painful anal penetration as well as brutal gang rape and men
slappingorchokingwomenorpullingtheirhairwhiletheypenetratethemorally,vaginally,and
anally(DeKeseredy2015;DinesandJensen2008).

Such images are part‐and‐parcel of today’s adult Internet pornography but violent sexual
imagesareavailable elsewhere. For instance,Bridges,Wosnitzer, Scharrer,Sun, and Liberman
(2010)examined304scenesin50ofthethenmostpopularpornographicDVDsandfoundthat
nearly90 containedphysical aggression(mainly spanking,gagging and slapping)and roughly
50 per cent included verbal aggression, primarily name‐calling.Males constituted most of the
perpetratorsandthetargetsoftheirphysicalandverbalaggression were ‘overwhelmingly
female’. Moreover, female targets often appeared to show pleasure or responded neutrally to
maleaggression.Tomakemattersworse,asthepornindustrygrows and attracts an ever
growingconsumerbase,itisgenerating even more violentmaterialsfeaturingdemeaningand
dehumanizingbehaviorsneverbeforeseen(Brosi,Foubert,Bannon,andYandell(2011).Infact,
as Dines states in a 2010 interview with TheGuardianJournalist Julie Bindel, pornographers
‘areall looking for something more extreme, more shocking’ (Bindel2010:4).Dinesalsotold
Bindelin2010 that sherecently interviewed aprominent pornographer. During that time,his
latest film was playing in the background and it included a scene of a woman being anally
penetratedwhilekneelinginacoffin.

Inresponsetothecommonstatement‘Onecanonlywonderwhatisinstorenext’,somecritical
criminologists,such asAtkinson andRodgers (2014), point scholarsandactiviststotherapid
emergence of the ‘gorno’ or ‘gore porn’ genre of movies, such as HostelandSaw. Such films
combine sadism, torture and porn, and they generate huge revenues for their producers and

WalterSDeKeseredy:CriticalCriminologicalUnderstandingsofAdultPornographyandWomanAbuse

IJCJ&SD7
Onlineversionviawww.crimejusticejournal.com  ©20154(4)
distributors.Thattherearesequelstotheaboveandsimilarmoviesisapowerfulcommentary
onhowviolentpornographyhasseepedintomainstreampopularculture.

Itisnotonlyanti‐pornscholarsandactivistswhoassertthatviolentsexisnowanormalpartof
the industry. Even porn producers admit that is the current status quo. Consider Rob Zicari
(stagenameRobBlack).HeonceownedExtremeAssociates,acompanythatproducedviolent
pornsographicthatmanyintheindustryostracizedhim.In2009,afterasix‐yearlegalbattle,
he and his wife Janet Romano (who directed porn under the name Lizzey Borden) were
sentenced by US federal authorities to one year and a  day in prison for distributing obscene
materials. Black recently granted an interview with journalist Richard Abowitz (2013) who
askedhim,‘IfIunderstand,youaresayingthethingstheindustry marginalizedyouforfilming
beforegoingtojail,mixingviolenceandsex,thatapproachis routinely filmed now?’ Black
answered:

Yes.Not only some:that is what the industry is today. The industry is Extreme
Associates. The industry is what I did. By they pushed it even further. They
pushedittothepointwhereyoucan’tdefendit.BecausewhatIdidwasfantasy.I
wasabletopreachitasamovie.Itisaguyinacostume.Nowyouhave
companiesthatdoitintheguiseofBDSM.Youputagirlonadogchainandchain
her to a wall and them keep her there for two days and take a cattleprod and
electrocuteheranddoallthisundertheguiseofadocumentary.Youaretaking
the element of the movie out. Now, you are doing torture. You are taking the
fantasy out. Now all of the sudden it’s let’s do this under the guise of BDSM.
(BlackinAbowitz2013:1)

Much of today’s pornography is also  racist. Consider the following titles of videos uncovered
duringaGooglesearchusingthewords‘racistporn’on3September2014.Myhuntproduced
22,000,000resultsin0.40 seconds andtwosalientexamplesofthetitles listedareRacistBitch
isForcedtoHaveSexwithaBlackManandCocogetsInterracialFacial.Notsurprisingly,manyof
theracist videosoffer stereotypicalimages ofthe ‘sexuallyprimitive black male stud’ (Jensen
2007:66).Menandwomenofcolorarecertainlynottheonlypeopletoberaciallyexploitedby
pornographers. There is much consumer demand for videos featuring Latinas and Asian
women.NotethesefilmsfeaturedonthewidelyusedsiteXvideos.com:LatinaSignsUptoDoa
RoughPornTapeWithSomeMeanWhiteGuys, SexyLatinaRidesaBlackBullinFrontofher
Husband,andMySoAsian.Regardlessofawoman’sracial/ethnicbackground,herracemakes
herappear‘sluttier’than‘regular’whitewomenfeaturedinporn(Dines2010).

Porn consumers can find almost anything that suits their fancy on the Internet, including
teenageboyshavingsexwithfemaleseniorcitizens and men having sex withwomenwhoare
sevenmonths pregnant(Vargas‐Cooper 2011). True, human beings havehadordesiredwhat
manywouldconsidertobedebasedorcriminaltypesofsexforcenturi es, but Internet porn
now allows people to ‘flirt openly’ with sexual acts that were alwaysdesiredbutwerelong
consideredtaboo,deviant or against thelaw.And any groupofpeopleis ‘ripe for thepicking’,
includingruralpopulations.ThousandsofwhatDeKeseredyandSchwartz (2009) refer to as
‘thefalseimagesofrurallife’arefoundoncountlesscyberpornsites. SimplyconductaGoogle
searchusing thewords‘ruralgonzoporn’.On11September2012,DeKeseredy,Muzzatti,and
Donnermeyer’s (2014) hunt uncovered 108,000,000 results, with most of the videos being
freely and easily accessible. Examples of the movie titles listed in their search are Rural
Discipline,FuckRuralMilf,RaunchyRuralGrannyCreamed,RuralSWMichiganMilfs,Rural
JapaneseMilfs,RuralSouthernWifeGetsEbonyCock,andMaturefarm.

Insum,inafewdecades,pornographymovedfromalucrativeundergroundbusiness withties
toorganizedcrimetoahugecorporate‐capitalistindustrythatoperatesopenly(Jensen2007).
TheswiftgrowthoftheInternethasalsoglobalizedaccesstopornographicmaterialsonwomen

WalterSDeKeseredy:CriticalCriminologicalUnderstandingsofAdultPornographyandWomanAbuse

IJCJ&SD8
Onlineversionviawww.crimejusticejournal.com  ©20154(4)
and other potentially vulnerable groups in converged online and offline environments. Such
mediacanbediffusedtomillionsofpeopleinonlysecondsduetofasterwaysofdisseminating
digital media productions, and the Internet facilitates access for those seeking pornographic
content,whetheritislegallyrecognizedornot.Whatusedtoberather difficulttoaccessanda
secret phenomenon is now accessible for larger groups and has subsequently become a huge
businesswithoperationsaroundtheworld.

Fouryears ago,there were over four million pornography sites on theInternet (Dines 2010),
withasmanyas 10,000 added everyweeksince then (DeKeseredy andSchwartz2013).Allof
this is extremely profitable. Pornography, too, is the ‘quietest big business in the world’
(Slayden2010),anditisdifficulttoaccuratelydeterminethegrowthandvalueofthisindustry
because its profits are not usually monitored through conventional business authorities
(Maddison 2004). Still frequently cited in the extant literature, though, is the statement that
worldwidepornography revenues fromavarietyof sources (for example, Internet, sex shops,
videosrentedinhotelrooms,andsoon)arehigherthanUS$97billion annually (Ropelato
2010). This is more than the combined revenues of Microsoft, Google, Amazon, eBay, Yahoo,
Apple,Netflix, and Earthlink(DeKeseredy 2015; Zerbisias2008: l. 3).More recentevidence of
thegrowthofadultpornographyistheemergenceofamateuronline ‘tubes’, such as YouPorn,
XTube,andPornoTube, all modeled afterthewidelyusedandpopularYouTube.YouPornhad
15millionusersafterlaunchingin2006andwasgrowingatamonthlyrate of 37.5 per cent
(Mowlabocus2010;Slayden2010).WhatSchwartzandDeKeseredy(1997)stated17yearsago
stillholdstruetoday:rarearemenwhoarenotexposedtopornographicimages.Evenifpeople
gooutoftheirwaytoavoidporn,itfrequently‘popsup’onpeople’scomputermonitors when
theyareworkingor‘surfingtheweb’forinformationthathasnothingtodowithsex.

Howmanypeoplenowviewadultpornographyregularly?Tobeexpected, answers to this
questionvary depending on thedefinitions and methods used by researchers in the field. For
example, a national representative sample survey of US adults foundthat64percentofmen
and42percentofwomenviewpornographyatleastmonthly(DigitalJournal2014).A recent
Cosmpolitian.Com(2014)surveyof4,000menand4,000 womenfoundthatmorethan30per
centofthemaleandfourpercentoffemalerespondentswatchedporndailyand71percentof
men ages 18‐24 watch it at least once a month, with 93 per cent of all the respondents
identifying themselves as heterosexual. Consider, too, some researchers estimate that 70 per
centofAustralianmenconsumepornonline(Elsworthy2014).

Turningnowtoyouth,anationalUSstudy of undergraduateandgraduatestudentsages18to
26uncoveredthat69percentofthemaleand10percentofthe female participants view
pornographyatleastonceamonth(Carrollet al. 2008). The consequencesof youth, as well as
adults, watching gonzo are hardly trivial, which one of the keypoints of thisarticle.Note the
results of a recent qualitative, longitudinal study of young people’sexperienceswith
heterosexual anal sex. Conducted in three different sites in England, this project involved
individual and group interviews with 130 men and women ages 16 to18.Themainreason
respondentsgaveforhavingsuchsexwasthatmenwantedtoimitate what they saw in
pornographyand it often appeared, especiallyfor women, ‘painful,risky, andcoercive’ (Lewis
2014:1).

Whetherornotresearcherseverobtainanabsolutelyaccurateestimateofthepercentageof
peoplewhoconsumeadultpornography,mostleadingexpertsonthe topic agree withRobert
Jensen’scontentionthat ‘It’s becomealmostas common ascomicbookswereforyouandme’
(citedinGillespie2008:a.3).Infact,turningagaintoyouth,studieshaveshownthatalmostall
boysinNorthernEuropehaveatsomepointintheirlivesbeenexposedtopornographyand42
percentofInternetusersages10to17intheUShadviewedcyberporn (Hammaren and
Johansson 2007; Mossige, Ainsaar, and Svedin 2007; Wolak, Mitchell,andFinkelhor2007).
Thesearenotinnocentusers whoaccidentallycome acrosssexuallyexplicitimages,voicesand

WalterSDeKeseredy:CriticalCriminologicalUnderstandingsofAdultPornographyandWomanAbuse

IJCJ&SD9
Onlineversionviawww.crimejusticejournal.com  ©20154(4)
texts.Noraretheyconstantlybombardedwithsuchmaterial.Rather, they make a conscious
efforttolocateandchoosetoconsumeanddistributepornography,andunfortunatelysomeof
the consumers will commit criminal acts, including violently attacking female partners
(DeKeseredyandSchwartz2013).

Briefly, it should be mentioned that there are scholars who fundamentally disagree with my
interpretation of porn and an unknown number of academics find somevalueinsuchmedia.
Forexample,Weitzerassertsthat‘pornographymightcontributetothesexeducationofsome
or many viewers ... or it might lead to mutually pleasurable sexual experiences for male and
femaleviewersalike’(Weitzer2011:667).Paasonen(2010)states that some variants of
pornographychallengewhatWeitzerreferstoas‘conventionalpowerrelations’.Similarly,some
feministsembracethepost‐modernistviewthatpornographycanbesubversiveandliberatory
(Williams1989).Additionally,somesex‐positive feminists contendthatpornographyisjustas
importanttowomenastomen,andthereisnothinginherentlydegradingtowomenaboutsuch
media (McElroy 1995, Strossen 2000). Lehman is another example ofapro‐pornscholar.He
states:

Ifpositionsonpornography are staked out in the‘pro’or‘anti’fashion, I clearly
comedownonthesideofpro‐porn.Ibelievepornographycanbecomplex,
meaningful, and pleasurable and that it should be studied to enhance our
understandingofsexualityandculture,nottofuelhysteria.(Lehman2006a:20)

Many younger female members of the general population also find value in pornography
(Attwood 2005; Ciclitira 2002; Hald and Malamuth 2008). This isdue,inlargepart,totheir
‘internalizing porn ideology, an ideology that often masqueradesasadviceonhowtobehot,
rebellious,andcoolinordertoattract(andhopefullykeep)aman’.Relatedtothisproblemis
thatscoresofyoungwomen,especiallyNorthAmericanfemaleundergraduates, accuse anti‐
pornfeminists of ‘denying them the free choice toembrace our hypersexualizedporn culture’
sinceas‘risingmembersofthenextgeneration’selite’,theysee‘nolimitsorconstraintson
themaswomen’(Dines2010:100).

Pornographyandwomanabuse
Thetermwomanabuseheremeansthephysical,sexualandpsychologicalabuseofawomanby
hercurrentorformermalepartner. There is an unsettlingtruththateven many feministanti‐
violence activists and practitioners rarely discuss: pornography plays a key role in women’s
experiencesofmale violence inprivateplaces.Aswell,amongthelarge,international group of
woman abuse scholars, very few of them research and theorize theconnection between porn
andintimate adultviolence. In the words of Shope, ‘[t]he paucityofresearchontheeffectsof
pornography on battered women is disturbing in light of the research findings linking
pornography to sexually aggressive behavior, especially among angered men’ ( Shope 2004:
66).However,thingsareslowlychanginginthesocialscientificcommunity.

Thebulkofearlystudieswerenotconductedbycriticalcriminologists,employedexperimental
designsinlaboratorysettings,anduncoveredthatexposuretomoregraphicandviolentimages
changedpeople’sattitudes towardwomenandrape(forexample,BriereandMalamuth1983;
Linz1989).Untilthe1990s,therewaslittleinformationontheextenttowhichgraphicsexual
imageryaffectsmen’saggressiveorviolentbehavioroutsidethelabsetting.Nonetheless,there
were some attempts at imaginative alternative methodology. Feminist journalism scholar
RobertJensen(1995,1996),forexample,usedpersonalhistoriesandnarrativeaccountsofmen
who used porn as a masturbatory aid, some of whom were sex offenders. In another early
attempttolook at‘real world’ effects,Demare, LipsandBriere (1993)tiedthe use ofsexually
violentpornographytoaself‐reportedlikelihoodofcommittingrapeorusingsexualforce.Still,

WalterSDeKeseredy:CriticalCriminologicalUnderstandingsofAdultPornographyandWomanAbuse

IJCJ&SD10
Onlineversionviawww.crimejusticejournal.com  ©20154(4)
this only measures a self‐reported proclivity, which may or may not be related to actual
behavior.

Early‘realworld’studies
DianaRussell(1982,1990)sparkedamovementtoconductfeministsurveysoftherelationship
between porn consumption and violence against women. She is thefirstscholartodevelopa
large‐scale,representativesamplesurveythatincludedthisquestion:‘Haveyoueverbeenupset
byanyonetryingtogetyoutodowhatthey’dseeninpornographicpictures,moviesorbooks?’
Ten per cent of the 930 women in San Francisco sample answered ‘yes’ and subsequent
Canadian studies t hat used the same question yielde d percentages of ‘yes’ responses ranging
from8.4to24.0percent(DeKeseredy and Schwartz 1998; HarmonandCheck1989;Senn
1993). Moreover, 6.8 per cent of the 1,307 men in DeKeseredy and Schwartz’s national
representative sample of Canadian college men admitted that they had upset their dating
partnersbytryingtogetthemtoimitateporn.

Some feminist studies show that women who had suffered other types of victimizatio n were
alsolikelytoreportthattheyexperiencedthisbehaviorasabusive.Russell(1990),forexample,
found that for the women in her sample who were married and hadbeenrapedbytheir
husband,the proportion that answered the above questionin her survey rose to 24 per cent.
HarmonandCheck(1989)discoveredthatwomenwhohadbeenphysicallyabusedwerethree
timesmorelikelytobehave beenupsetbybeingaskedtoimitatepornography (10.4percent)
thanwomenwhohadnotbeenphysicallyabused(3.6percent).Additionally,DeKeseredyand
Schwartz’s(1998)foundasignificantrelationshipbetweenbeing upset by men’s attempts to
imitatepornographicscenesandsexualvictimization.Ofthosewhoweresexuallyabused,22.3
percent had alsobeen upsetby attempts toget themto imitate pornographicscenarios. Only
5.8 per cent of the women who were not victimized reported being upset by pornography.
ThesestatisticsarecomparabletothoseobtainedbyItzinandSweet’s (1992) report of the
BritishCosmopolitanSurvey.

Again,fully6.8percentofthemeninDeKeseredyandSchwartz’s study reported that they
upsettheirdatingpartnersbygettingthemtoimitatepornography.Themenweremorelikely
to admit to being forcible sexual victimizers if they also admitted to upsetting a woman this
way.Almostfourtimesasmanyupsetters(9.3percent)asnonupsetters (2.4 per cent) also 
admittedtocommittingaforciblesexualvictimizationafterhighschool.

OfDeKeseredy and Schwartz’s female respondentswho reported beingphysically abused ina
dating relationship, 15.4 per cent revealed being upset by pornography. Only 4.5 per cent of
those who were not physically victimized reported being upset. One third of all men in their
samplewhoadmittedtoupsettingawomanwithrequeststoimitatepornographyalsoadmitted
tophysicallyabusingawomanafterhighschool.Ofthosewhodidnotadmittoupsettinga
woman,17.2percentadmittedtophysicalabuse.

Three other relevant studies are worth mentioning here. Bergen(1996) asked a somewhat
different question than Russell’s (1990) but found that about one third of the marital rape
survivorsinhersamplehadhusbandswhoviewedpornographyandforcedthemtoactout
what they had seen. Sommers and Check (1987) found that women whowereinbattered
womenshelterswereconsiderablymorelikelytoreportbeingmadeupsetinthismannerthan
mature undergraduates were. Though different questions were used, Cramer and McFarlane
(1994)uncoveredsupportforthefindingthatbatteredwomenhaveaspecialproblem.In
studyingbatteredwomenwhowerefilingcriminalchargesagainst their husbands, theyfound
that40percentofhusbandsusedpornography,andthattheuse
 of these materials was
significantlyassociatedwiththeparticipantsbeingaskedorforcedtoparticipateinviolentacts.


WalterSDeKeseredy:CriticalCriminologicalUnderstandingsofAdultPornographyandWomanAbuse

IJCJ&SD11
Onlineversionviawww.crimejusticejournal.com  ©20154(4)
Theseearlyfeministstudiesarecommendedforextendingpornresearch beyond theartificial
realmofthelab,andtheyproducedimportantresultsfortheerainwhichtheyweredone.Even
so, a significant pitfall in all social scientific work of this kind is that the researcher has no
controloverthenatureofthesexuallyexplicitmaterial,orthedefinition being appliedbythe
respondent. There is no way an investigator can apply a single definition to pornography or
control in any way an individual woman’s or man’s definition of pornography. This is a
perennialprobleminpornographyresearch:pornographyiscommonlyconflatedintoonetype
and, at the time the above studies were conducted, there was very little written on what
McClintock(1995:115)calls‘porn’skaleidoscopicvariorum’,or what Burstyn (1987: 163)
refers to as the ‘large and various discourse we call, all inclusively pornography’. Today,
however,therearescholarlybooksandarticlesthatexaminevariations in erotica and
pornography(forexample,Attwood2010;Lehman2006b;McNair2002).

Thelackofdefinitionalspecificityplacestheresearcheratthemercyoftheclassificationsused
bytherespondent.Nonetheless,thepost‐laboratorystudiesreviewedherewereamongthefirst
‘realworld’ projectstorevealthatpornographyiscorrelatedwithsexualandphysicalviolence
inadultintimateheterosexualrelationships.

Recentresearch
TheInternetasweknowittodaydidnotexistwhenRussellandthosewhofollowedinher
footstepsconductedtheirresearch.Furthermore,pornographydidnothaveanywherenearthe
degreesofracism and violencethatnowexistandaredestinedtoincrease(Bridges andAnton
2013).Furthermore,itisunclearwhetherthemenwhowatchcontemporary porn are more
likely to abuse current or former intimate partners than men who consumed violent sexual
materialsbeforetheadventoftheInternet.Evenso,thereisampleevidenceshowingthatporn
isakeyriskfactorassociatedwithamyriadofabusiveexperiencesinthelivesofmanyadult
andyoungwomen(DeKeseredyandSchwartz2013;Shope2004).

Contemporary critical criminologists were among the first to revealthatmostboyswhofirst
viewpornographydosoattheageof11 (DeKeseredy2015,Dines2010)andmanygrowupto
victimizetheircurrentandformerintimatefemalepartners.Yetagrowingbodyofinternational
researchshowsthatsomepre‐adolescent,adolescentandhighschoolboyswho consumeporn
actually commit sexual offences and/or engage in sexual harassment at those stages in their
lives(Bonino, Ciairano, Rabaglietti,and Cattelino2006; Burton, Leibowitz, and Howard 2010;
Hunter, Figueredo, and Malamuth 2010; Kjellgren, Priebe, Svedin, and Langstrom 2010), a
findingnotuncoveredbythosewhopubliclyidentifythemselves as progressive criminologists
butusefulallthesame.Note,too, that an Italian feministsurveyofhighschoolstudents found
that females exposed to psychological violence committed by family members and to sexual
violence by any type of perpetrator were significantly more likelytowatchpornography,
especially violent porn, than females who were not exposed to such abuse (Romito and
Beltramini2011).Researchdoneacrosstheglobe,then,supportBridgesandAnton’s(2013)
claim that ‘exposure to pornography is particularly problematicforyouthbecausetheyoften
lackhealthysexualrelationshipsthatcounterbalancethedegradinganddepersonalizingimages
ofsexoftendepictedinpornography’(BridgesandAnton2013:194).

‘Realworld’recentcriticalcriminologicalresearchonadults’experienceswithpornographyuse
and its violent consequences is in short supply. The bulk of the empirical work done so far
involvedfeminist scholarsgatheringdatafromrapecrisiscenterworkerswhoconductedface‐
to‐face and phone interviews with sexual and physical assault survivors, and from abused
woman who sought support from battered women’s services (Be rgenandBogle2000;Shope
2004; Simmons, Lehmann, and Collier‐Tennison 2008). Collectively, this research reveals a
strong association between men’s porn consumption and female victimization. For example,

WalterSDeKeseredy:CriticalCriminologicalUnderstandingsofAdultPornographyandWomanAbuse

IJCJ&SD12
Onlineversionviawww.crimejusticejournal.com  ©20154(4)
Shope found that abuser use of porn doubled the  risk of a physicallyassaultedwomanbeing
sexuallyassaulted. 

More recently, using face‐to‐face interviews with 43 rural southeast Ohio women who were
abused during the period while they wanted to or were trying toendarelationshipwitha
husband or live‐in partner, or where such a relationship had already ended, DeKeseredy and
colleagues (see DeKeseredy and Joseph 2006; DeKeseredy and Schwartz 2009; DeKeseredy,
Schwartz, Fagen, and Hall 2006) found that 65 per centof these women’s estranged partners
viewedpornographyand30percentofthesamplestatedthatpornwasinvolvedintheirsexual
abuse. As described in greater length in a subsequent section of this paper, Hall‐Sanchez’s
(2013,2014)exploratory,qualitative,back‐talkstudystronglysuggeststhatmalepornography
consumptioncontinuestobeconnectedtoruralOhiomen’sabusivebehavior.

The electronic and violent pornification of women and girls takes many different shapes and
forms.Onerelativelynewmeansistheuseof‘revengeporn’websitesandblogs.Itisestimated
thattherearenowmorethan2,000suchsitesandthebulkoftheperpetratorsaremale(Hart
2014).Revengepornimagesandvideosaremadebymenwiththeconsentofthewomenthey
were intimately involved with, but then distributed online without their consent typically
followingtheterminationofarelationship(Salter and Crofts 2014). Itisdifficulttoaccurately
determinethe extent of thisproblem,butthedamageisirreparablegiventhatanythingthat is
posted in cyberspacenever really goes away. The same thingcan be said about ‘sexting’ and
many,if not most,ofthetargetsarefemaleadolescents(DeKeseredyandSchwartz2013).This
involves sharing compromising photos, videos or written information with other people via
textsorotherelectronicmedia(Klein2012).

Sextingis form of ‘pornographiccyberbullying’ andit causes manyphysical and psychological
problems,includingsuicideaswasthecasewithayoungCanadiangirlnamedRehtaehParsons.
Shewas raped byfour teenage boysin November 2011and one ofthemtookapictureofthe
atrocityandelectronicallydistributeditamongherschoolandcommunity.Shediedon17April
2013fromsuicideandthiscasemotivatedtheCanadianprovinceofNovaScotiatoproclaimthe
Cyber‐SafetyActon6August2013.

Despite porn being heavily involved in the abuse of many women and girls, the research
communityhasnotkeptpacewiththisburgeoningproblem.Newdirections in critical
criminological research and theory are definitel y needed and it is to some suggestions that I
nowturn.

Newdirectionsinresearchandtheory
Giventhe paucity of research onpornography andviolenceagainstwomen,itisnotdifficultto
suggestnewavenuesofinquiry,someofwhich involvegoing‘backtothefuture’.Forinstance,
therehasyettobeanothernationalrepresentativesamplevictimizationsurveyofadultwomen
thatincorporatesquestionsabouttheircurrentandformermalepartners’pornconsumption.
Smaller‐scale representative sample surveys are also conspicuously absent. It is true that
‘population surveys, in which random samples of women are interviewedabouttheir
experiences of violence using detailed behaviorally specific questions, yield more valid and
reliableestimatesoftheprevalenceofthesephenomenainthepopulation’(Jacquier, Johnson,
and Fisher 2011: 26). Self‐report surveys of men, too, are much needed because they yield
better data on the factors that motivate men to use porn and harmwomen(DeKeseredyand
Rennison2013).Thelackofsurveyresearchonthelinkagebetweenporn and both men’sand
women’sexperienceswithintimateviolenceissomewhatsurprisingbecausethereisasizeable
portionofsurveysthatexamineotherriskfactorsassociatedwithwoman abuse (for example,
separation/divorce,income,malepeersupport,andsoon).


WalterSDeKeseredy:CriticalCriminologicalUnderstandingsofAdultPornographyandWomanAbuse

IJCJ&SD13
Onlineversionviawww.crimejusticejournal.com  ©20154(4)
Needlessto say,morequalitativestudiesofmen andwomenarenecessaryaswell.Replicating
orslightlyrevisingthepersonalhistoryand narrative accountresearchdonebyJensen(1995,
1996)wouldbefruitful.Infact,avarietyofqualitativemethodsenhanceacriticalcriminological
understanding of how porn is related to woman abuse and some new techniques seem
promising.Onemethodinparticular–back‐talkinterviews–atfirstappearsinnovativebutis
rooted in African‐American slavery history (Collins 2000; Hall‐Sanchez 2014). It meant
‘speakingasanequal to an authorityfigure.It meant daring todisagreeand sometimesit just
meanthavinganopinion’(hooks1989:5).Talkingbackalsoinvolvedbearingwitness,‘tobring
forth,toclaimandproclaimoneselfasanintrinsicpartoftheworld’(Collins2000:2).Inthis
current era, back‐talk interviews are becoming known as useful means of collecting rich
contextualdata.Typicallyusedinfeministcommunity‐basedstudies,researchers‘goback’to
the community to present their results as an attempt to get mo re feedbackfrom a sa mple of
communitymembers.AsHall‐Sanchez,afeministwhorecentlyused this approach puts it, in 
back‐talkstudies:

[R]esearchers ‘go back’ to communities, presenting their results to obtain
reactions and additional questions/concerns/suggestions for future research.
These discussions generate rich qualitative interactive data tosupplementa
previousoron‐goingstudyorasnewdatatobefurtheranalyzedonitsown
(Wilkinson 1998). Back‐talk interviews are empowering to participants,
providing an opportunity to exercise a greater role inresearch processes.
Researchers can also reasonably disseminated sensitive issues to potentially
diverse and highly politicized audiences, contributing to a more reflexive and
sociallyresponsibleresearchculture(Frisina2006).(Hall‐Sanchez2014:5)

To date, Hall‐Sanchez (2014) is the first feminist criminologisttousethismethodinarural
womanabusestudy.TenyearsafterDeKeseredyandhiscolleaguescompleted theirruralOhio
project,shepresentedtheirresultstoapurposivesampleof12women. Althoughshe didnot
specificallyaskedabouttheinfluenceofpornography,and,acloseexaminationofherinterview
data with my assistance (see DeKeseredy and Hall‐Sanchez 2014) revealed that it was a
recurringtopicmentionedbysomewomenduringdiscussionsaboutthewaysinwhichtheirex‐
partners’malepeerscontributedtotheirabusiveconduct.Dana,for example, said, ‘Healways
hadafantasyofdoingathreesomeandtalkedmeintoit.Pornwasabigfactor.Hewasn’talways
interested in me perse.Itseemedlikeitwasalwayswithothers’.Anotherrespondent, Gina,
recalls:

Igotcalledstupidalotyouknowandevenifitwasjokingaround,you know,it
becameserious.‘Ohyou’restupid’andthenitjustbecamename‐calling ... ‘Oh ,
you’reafuckinretard’.Youknowitjustgotworseandlike... then it was like
other things he encouraged me to do. Um, him and his friend watchedalotof
pornandencouragedmeandhisfriend’swifetomakeoutsoitwas likethings
thathewantedthathewastryingtogetmetodoforhisownpleasure,youknow.
Itwaslike,evenifIfeltuncomfortable,youknow,justdrinkalittlebitmoreand
itwillbeok,youknow.

MoreinformationonHall‐Sanchez’sporndataisprovidedinanotherpaper(DeKeseredyand
Hall‐Sanchez2014).Nevertheless,itisimportanttonoteherethatwhatmakesherworkunique
isnotonly her back‐talk methodologyandthe pornographydata she elicited butalsothat she
helped close a major gap in rural patriarchal male peer support research. Oddly enough,
althoughweknowthatmanywomenmurderedbytheircurrentandformermalepartnersare
killed with guns and that rural areas have higher rates of gun ownershipthanurbanand
metropolitan places (Donnermeyer and DeKeseredy 2014; Wendt 2009), male peer support
researchers such as DeKeseredy and Schwartz (2009) have paid little attention to hunting‐
related issues. Since Hall‐Sanchez has teamed up with me to do empirical work on the

WalterSDeKeseredy:CriticalCriminologicalUnderstandingsofAdultPornographyandWomanAbuse

IJCJ&SD14
Onlineversionviawww.crimejusticejournal.com  ©20154(4)
relationshipbetweenpornand violence inruralwomen’slives, it islogical to assumethather
novelresearchwillinfluencemeandothermalepeersupportresearcherstodosointhenear
future.

Pornographyisnotsolelyheterosexualinnatureandthereisagrowingbodyofresearchon
violenceinsamesexrelationships(Bake2013;Burger1995;Ristock2011; Williams2004). Is
pornographyapowerfulcorrelateofviolenceinsamesexrelationships?Thusfar,thereareno
reliable answers to this question, which is not surprising since much of criminology is
heteronormative (Peterson and Panfil 2014). Queer criminology is a new variant of critical
criminologyandperhapssomegreatlyneededempiricalandtheoreticalworkwillbegenerated
by scholarsin this field. Thisis not to say, however,that examining the relationship between
pornandviolenceinLGBTcommunitiesshouldbeghettoized.Criticalcriminologistsofallwalks
oflifepotentiallyhavesomethingtosayaboutthisissue.

Unfortunately, critical criminological theoretical developmentshavenotkeptpacewiththe
empiricalliteratureon the relationship betweenpornographyandwomanabuse.Evenleading
contemporary feminist experts, such as Dines (2010), pay scant attention to theorizing this
problem.Thisisnottosay,however,thatherworkandthoseofotherswhoshareheranalysis
(forexample,Jensen2007)iscompletelya‐theoreticalbecauseitisobviouslyheavilyinfluenced
byradicalfeminism.Still,thetimeisnowforcriticalcriminologicalofferingsthatlinkbroader
macro‐level forces with micro‐level determinants. It is not enough to assert that porn and its 
consequencesarefunctionsofcapitalism,racismandpatriarchy.Howdotheseproblemsshape
individual behavior and group dynamics? The male peer support theories crafted by
DeKeseredyandOlsson(2011)andDeKeseredyandSchwartz(2013)attempttoanswerthis
question. There has never been a study specifically designed to test their perspectives but
preliminaryevidenceprovidedby DeKeseredyandSchwartz(2013)stronglysuggeststhatthe
correlationbetweenInternetpornography,malepeersupportandwomanabuseisanemerging
problem,onethatwillonlygetworseinthenearfuture.Still, considerably more research is
necessaryandsoareactualtestsofmale peersupportmodelstoconclusivelydetermine ifthis
isactuallythecase.

As a variant of critical criminology, cultural criminology pays much attention to how media
images shape public perceptions of social problems, ‘thereby reflecting and recreating the
unequalsocialand economic relationsthatarethe hallmark ofadvanced capitalism’ (Muzzatti
2012: 141). What about gender relations and what about porn? Despite offering rich insights
intomediadynamicsandpopularculture,culturalcriminologistshaveyettoexaminetheissues
raisedinthispaper.Yettheyarefullycapableofdoingsoand DeKeseredy, Muzzatti, and
Donnermeyer’s(2014)analysisofthehorrification/pornificationofruralculturerevealsthat a
richunderstandingofhighlydegradingandgrosslydistortedmediarepresentationsofsexuality
andmale‐to‐female violence can be obtainedby merging cultural criminology’s concerns with
those of feminists. Hopefully, one of cultural criminology’s nextstepsistomakepornoneits
centraltopicsofinquiry.

Much critical theoretical food for thought can also be drawn from other types of critical
criminologists.Forexample,thoughtoodetailedandcomplextosummarizeinafewsentences,
Atkinson and Rodgers’ (2014) analysis of  Internet pornography and violent video games
revealsmuchutilityinrevisitingElias‘s(1939)‘civilisingprocesstheory’.Theyassertthatthese
technologies:

… provide alluring and experimental landscapes. In these spaces the outward
veneerofourcultureasintrinsically‘civil’orpacifiedisseenalsotorevealanti‐
socialformsofrealandsimulatedconduct.Suchexperiences,availablethrough
certain strands of gaming and extreme pornography, necessitate a deepened
criminological sensibility prepared to discuss physical and imagined forms of

WalterSDeKeseredy:CriticalCriminologicalUnderstandingsofAdultPornographyandWomanAbuse

IJCJ&SD15
Onlineversionviawww.crimejusticejournal.com  ©20154(4)
harmastheyareenactedwithin‐orboundupwith‐onlineand game spaces.
(AtkinsonandRodgers2014:2)

Although he does not discuss violence, criticalcriminologist Simon Winlow (2014) proposes
another way of thinking about porn. Guided by Badiou (2009, 2012), a French philosopher
heavily influenced by Althusserian Marxism and Lacanian psychoanalysis, he states that porn
consumption:

…reflectsahistoricdrivetowardsan atonalworld(Badiou2009)thatlacks the
structuringlogicofamastersignifiercapableofimposingmeaningonaworldof
perpetualfluxandimponderablediversity.Inthesociologicalsense,itfunctions
as an outcome of selfish individualism: a withdrawal into the cocoon of
subjectivity, free from the threats and obligations that pertain to a genuine
intersubjective encounter. Contemporary postmodern sexuality is then an
increasinglyselfishandsolitaryactivity.(Winlow2014:1968)

Hopefully,thecriticalcriminologicaltheoriesreviewedherewillnotbethelastoftheirkindand
newones willsoonbecrafted.Pornographyand violenceagainstwomencontinuetoaffectthe
socialworldinamyriadofwaysandinnumbersthatwould‘numbthemindofEinstein’(Lewis
citedin Vallee 2007). Hence, the relationship between thesetwosocial problemsisstrongand
mustbe reckoned with empirically andtheoretically.Itisessentialtokeepondoingnewwork
intheareabecause, in thewordsof Atkinson andRodgers(2014: 22), new criticalavenuesof
exploration make us ‘better equipped to understand’ the ‘shifts in the connection between
ourselves,technologies,corporateinterestsandsocial/genderpowerrelations’.

Conclusion
Critical criminological understandings of contemporary porn and its relationship to woman
abuseareina state ofinfancyandsubstantially more scholarlyandpolitical contributions are
needed.Outlinedinthispaperisablueprintformovingforward.Therecommendationsarenot
exhaustivebutareworthpursuing.Yettheultimategoalistopromotesocial chan ge.Critical 
criminology must be distinguishedfromothercriminologicaldiscourses by its practice. If the
advancessuggestedinthispaperandelsewherearetotakerootandassistintheformationof
societies determined to curb porn, then it rests with critical criminologists to advance their
modelsforchangewithinpracticalpoliticalsettings(Currie,DeKeseredyandMacLean1990).

Tobesure, as Gail Dinesobserves,the pornography industryisan‘economicjuggernaut’ and
‘we are so steeped in the pornographic mindset that it is difficulttoimaginewhataworld
without porn would look like’ (Dines 2010: 163). Still, due in large part to the efforts of
progressiveanti‐pornactivistsandscholars, some radicalchangesareoccurring.Forexample,
inthewinterof2013,IcelanddraftedlegislationlimitingInternetaccesstoviolentporn.Iceland
alreadyhaslegislationforbiddingtheprintinganddistributionofpornbutitdoesnotcoverthe
Internet.Thepornindustry,too,maycontributetoitsowncollapse.Possiblytheproducers of
violent and racist sexual media might cross a line that results in outraging most people and
politiciansaroundtheglobe,leading tostrictregulationandhighlypunitiveresponses(Bridges
and Jensen 2011). Regardless of what progressive changes happenandwhentheytranspire,
criticalcriminologistsinvolvedintheanti‐pornmovementstill‘havealotofworktodo’(Jensen
2007:184).




WalterSDeKeseredy:CriticalCriminologicalUnderstandingsofAdultPornographyandWomanAbuse

IJCJ&SD16
Onlineversionviawww.crimejusticejournal.com  ©20154(4)
Correspondence:WalterSDeKeseredy,AnnaDeaneCarlsonEndowedChairofSocialSciences
and Professor of Sociology, Department of Sociology and Anthropology,WestVirginia
University, Morgantown WV 26506, USA; Adjunct Professor, School of Justice, Queensland
UniversityofTechnology,BrisbaneQLD4000,Australia.
Email:walter.dekeseredy@mail.wvu.edu




1 Revised version of a plenary address given at the NationalDeviancyConference, 25‐26 June 2014, at Teesside
University,Middlesbrough,UK.IthankRowlandAtkinson,KerryCarrington,John Foubert, Rus Funk, Steve Hall,
BarbaraHart,JamesPtacek,MartinSchwartz,SimonWinlowandtheanonymousreviewersfortheircommentsand
assistance.



Pleasecitethisarticleas:
DeKeseredy WS (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.DOI:10.5204/ijcjsd.v3i2.184.

Thisworkis licensed undera Creative Commons Attribution4.0 Licence.Asan
openaccess journal,articles arefree touse, withproper attribution,ineducationaland other
non‐commercialsettings.ISSN:2202‐8005



References
AbowitzR(2013)RobBlack,porn’sdirtywhistleblower,spillstradesecrets.TheDailyBeast,21
April.Availableathttp://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/04/21/rob‐black‐porn‐s‐
dirty‐whistlebower‐spills‐trade‐secrets.html(accessed16May2014).
AtkinsonRandRodgersT(2014)Pleasurezonesandmurderboxes:Onlinepornographyand
violentvideogamesasculturalzonesofexception.DeviantLeisure.Availableat
http://deviantleisure.wordpress.com/2014/08/04/the‐draw‐of‐the‐undertow‐exremity‐
otherness‐and‐emergent‐harm‐in‐gaming‐and‐pornography/(accessed10September
2014).
AttwoodF(2005)Fashionandpassion:Marketingsextowomen.Sexualities8:395‐409.
AttwoodF(ed.)(2010)Porn.com:MakingSenseofOnlinePornography.NewYork:PeterLang.
BadiouA(2009)LogicofWords.London:Continuum.
BadiouA(2012)InPraiseofLove.London:Verso.
BakeA(2013)IntimatePersonalViolenceinCanada.Toronto:Pearson.
BartP(1985)Pornography:Institutionalizingwoman‐hatinganderoticizingdominanceand
submissionforfunandprofit.JusticeQuarterly2(2):283‐292.
BergenRK(1996)WifeRape:UnderstandingtheResponseofSurvivorsandServiceProviders.
ThousandOaks,California:Sage.
BergenRKandBogleKA(2000)Exploringtheconnectionbetweenpornographyandsexual
violence.ViolenceandVictims15(3):227‐234.
BindelJ(2010)TheTruthAboutthePornIndustry:GailDines,theAuthorofanExplosiveNew
BookAbouttheSexIndustry,OnWhyPornographyHasNeverBeenaGreaterThreattoOur
Relationships.TheGuardian,2July.Availableat

WalterSDeKeseredy:CriticalCriminologicalUnderstandingsofAdultPornographyandWomanAbuse

IJCJ&SD17
Onlineversionviawww.crimejusticejournal.com  ©20154(4)
http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2010/jul/02/gail‐dines‐pornography(accessed
16May2014).
BoninoS,CiairanoS,RabagliettiE,andCattelinoE(2006)Useofpornographyandself‐reported
engagementinsexualviolenceamongadolescents.EuropeanJournalofDevelopmental
Psychology3(3):265‐288.
BridgesAJandAntonC(2013)Pornographyandviolenceagainstwomen.InSigalJAand
DenmarkFL(eds)ViolenceAgainstGirlsandWomen:InternationalPerspectives:183‐206.
SantaBarbara,Californai:Preager.
BridgesAJandJensenR(2011)Pornography.InRenzettiCM,EdlesonJLandBergenRK(eds)
SourcebookonViolenceAgainstWomen(2ndedn):133‐148.ThousandOaks,Californai:Sage.
BridgesAJ,WosnitzerR,ScharrerE,SunCandLibermanR(2010)Aggressionandsexual
behaviorinbest‐sellingpornographyvideos:Acontentanalysis.ViolenceAgainstWomen
16(10):1065‐1085.
BriereJandMalamuthN(1983)Self‐reportedlikelihoodofsexuallyaggressivebehavior:
Attitudinalversussexualexplanations.JournalofResearchinPersonality17:315‐323.
BrosiM,FoubertJD,BannonRSandYandellG(2011)Effectsofsororitymembers’pornography
useonbystanderinterventioninasexualassaultsituationandrapemythacceptance.Oracle
6(2):26‐35.
BrownmillerS(1975)AgainstOurWill:Men,Women,andRape.NewYork:Simon&Schuster.
BurgerJR(1995)One‐HandedHistories:TheEroto‐PoliticsofGayMaleVideoPornography.
London:Routledge.
Burgess‐ProctorA(2006)Intersectionsofrace,class,gender,andcrime:Futuredirectionsfor
feministcriminology.FeministCriminology1(1):27‐47.
BurstynV(1987)Whothehellis‘we’?InBellL(ed.)GoodGirls,BadGirls:SexTradeWorkers
andFeministsFacetoFace:163‐172.Toronto:TheWomen’sPress.
BurtonDL,LeibowitzGSandHowardA(2010)Comparisonbycrimetypeofjuvenile
delinquentsonpornographyexposure:Theabsenceofrelationshipsbetweenexposureto
pornographyandsexualoffensecharacteristics.JournalofForensicNursing6(3):121‐129.
CarrollJS,Padilla‐WalkerLM,NelsonLJ,OlsonCD,BarryCMandMadsenSD(2008)Generation
XXX:Pornographyacceptanceanduseamongemergingadults.JournalofAdolescent
Research23(1):6‐30.
CiclitiraK(2002)Researchingpornographyandsexualbodies.ThePsychologist15(4):191‐194.
CollinsPH(2000)BlackFeministThought(2ndedn).NewYork:Routledge.
Cosmopolitan.Com.(2014,February20).Thisishowyouwatchporn.Availableat
http://www.cosmopolitan.com/lifestyle/videos/a20835/how‐you‐watch‐porn‐survey/
(accessed16January2015).
CramerEandMcFarlaneJ(1994)Pornographyandtheabuseofwomen.PublicHealthNursing
11(4):268‐272.
CurrieDH,DeKeseredyWSandMacLeanBD(1990)Reconstitutingsocialorderandsocial
control:PoliceaccountabilityinCanada.TheJournalofHumanJustice2(1):29‐53.
CurrieDHandMacLeanBD(1993)Preface.InCurrieDHandMacLeanBD(eds)Social
Inequality,SocialJustice:5‐6.Vancouver:CollectivePress.
CurrieE(2008)Preface.InCarringtonKandHoggR(eds)CriticalCriminology:Issues,Debates,
Challenges:vii‐xii.Portland,OR:Willan.
DalyKandChesney‐LindM(1988)Feminismandcriminology.JusticeQuarterly5(4):497‐538.
DeKeseredyWS(1988)Womanabuseindatingrelationships:Therelevanceofsocialsupport
theory.JournalofFamilyViolence3(1):1‐13.
DeKeseredyWS(2011)ContemporaryCriticalCriminology.London:Routledge.

WalterSDeKeseredy:CriticalCriminologicalUnderstandingsofAdultPornographyandWomanAbuse

IJCJ&SD18
Onlineversionviawww.crimejusticejournal.com  ©20154(4)
DeKeseredyWS(2015)Patriarchy.com:AdultInternetpornographyandtheabuseofwomen.In
RenzettiCMandKennedyBergenR(eds)UnderstandingDiversity:CelebratingDifference,
ChallengingInequality:186‐199.Boston:Pearson.
DeKeseredyWSandDragiewiczM(2014)Introduction:Criticalissuesincriminological
research.InDeKeseredyWSandDragiewiczM(eds)CriticalCriminology,Volume3:1‐5.
London:Routledge.
DeKeseredyWSandHall‐SanchezM(2014).Pornographyandviolenceagainstwomeninthe
heartland:ResultsfromaruralsoutheastOhioStudy.Paperpresentedattheannual
meetingsoftheAmericanSocietyofCriminology,SanFrancisco.
DeKeseredyWSandJosephC(2006)Separation/divorcesexualassaultinruralOhio:
Preliminaryresultsfromanexploratorystudy.ViolenceAgainstWomen12(10):301‐311.
DeKeseredyWS,MuzzattiSLandDonnermeyerJF(2014)Madmeninbiboveralls:Media’s
horrificationandpornificationofruralculture.CriticalCriminology22:179‐197.
DeKeseredyWSandOlssonP(2011)Adultpornography,malepeersupport,andviolence
againstwomen:Thecontributionofthe‘darkside’oftheInternet.InVargasMartinM,
Garcia‐RuizMandEdwardsA(eds)TechnologyforFacilitatingHumanityandCombating
SocialDeviations:InterdisciplinaryPerspectives:34‐50.Hershey,Pennsylvania:IGIGlobal.
DeKeseredyWSandRennisonCM(2013)Newdirectionsinthesocialscientificstudyof
separation/divorceassault.InRichardsKandTauriJ(eds)Crime,JusticeandSocial
Democracy:Proceedingsofthe2ndInternationalConference,2013,Volume1:47‐57.Brisbane,
Australia:CrimeandJusticeResearchCentre,QueenslandUniversityofTechnology.
DeKeseredyWSandSchwartzMD(1998)WomanAbuseonCampus:ResultsfromtheCanadian
NationalSurvey.ThousandOaks,California:Sage.
DeKeseredyWSandSchwartzMD(2009)DangerousExits:EscapingAbusiveRelationshipsin
RuralAmerica.NewBrunswick,NewJersey:RutgersUniversityPress.
DeKeseredyWSandSchwartzMD(2013)MalePeerSupportandViolenceAgainstWomen:The
HistoryandVerificationofaTheory.Boston:NortheasternUniversityPress.
DeKeseredyWS,SchwartzMD,FagenDandHallM(2006)Separation/divorcesexualassault:
Thecontributionofmalesupport.FeministCriminology1(3):228‐250.
DemareD,LipsHMandBriereJ(1993)Sexuallyviolentpornography,anti‐womenattitudes,
andsexualaggression.JournalofResearchinPersonality27(3):285‐300.
DigitalJournal(2014)HowmanyChristiansdoyouthinkwatchporn?Availableat
http://www.digitaljournal.com/pr/2123093(accessed16January2015).
DinesG(2010)Pornland:HowPornHasHijackedOurSexuality.Boston,Massechuttes:Beacon
Press.
DinesGandJensenR(2008)Internet,pornography.InRenzettiCMandEdlesonJL(eds)
EncyclopediaofInterpersonalViolence:365‐366.ThousandOaks,California:Sage.
DonnermeyerJF(2012)Ruralcrimeandcriticalcriminology.InDeKeseredyWSandDragiewicz
M(eds)RoutledgeHandbookofCriticalCriminology:290‐302.London:Routledge.
DonnermeyerJFandDeKeseredyWS(2014)RuralCriminology.London:Routledge.
DworkinA(1981)Pornography:MenPossessingWomen.NewYork:Perigee.
EliasN(1939)TheCivilizingProcess:SociogeneticandPsychogeneticInvestigations.Oxford,UK:
BlackwellPublishing.
EliasR(1986)ThePoliticsofVictimization.NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress.
ElsworthyE(2014)Baretruthsaboutporn.NewcastleHerald,12September.Availableat
http://www.theherald.com.au/story/2553854/bare‐truths‐about‐porn/?cs=303(accessed
16January2015).
FriedrichsDO(2009)Criticalcriminology.InMillerJM(ed.)21stCenturyCriminology:A
ReferenceHandbook,Volume1:210‐218.ThousandOaks,California:Sage.

WalterSDeKeseredy:CriticalCriminologicalUnderstandingsofAdultPornographyandWomanAbuse

IJCJ&SD19
Onlineversionviawww.crimejusticejournal.com  ©20154(4)
FrisinaA(2006)Back‐talkfocusgroupsasafollow‐uptoolinqualitativemigrationresearch:
Themissinglink?Forum7(3):12‐25.
GillespieI(2008)Nowadays,it’sbrutal,accessible:Pornography.LondonFreePress,11June.
FunkRE(2006)ReachingMen:StrategiesforPreventingSexistAttitudes,Behaviors,andViolence.
Indianapolis,Indiana:JistLife.
HaldGMandMalamuthN(2008)Self‐perceivedeffectsofpornographyconsumption.Archives
ofSexualBehavior37(4):614‐625.
Hall‐SanchezAK(2013)TalkingBack:RuralOhioWomen’sReflectionsonViolentIntimate
Relationships.Doctoraldissertation.Manoa,Hawaii:DepartmentofSociology,Universityof
Hawaii.
Hall‐SanchezM(2014)Malepeersupport,hunting,andseparation/divorcesexualassaultin
ruralOhio.CriticalCriminology.DOI:10.1007/s10612‐014‐9251‐6.
HammarenNandJohanssonT(2007)Hegemonicmasculinityandpornography:Youngpeople's
attitudestowardandrelationstopornography.JournalofMen'sStudies15(1):57‐71.
HarmonPAandCheckJVP(1989)TheRoleofPornographyinWomanAbuse.Toronto:LaMarsh
ResearchProgramonViolenceandConflictResolution,YorkUniversity.
HartB(2014)RevengePorn.Portland,Maine:MuskieSchoolofPublicService.
hooksb(1989)TalkingBack:ThinkingFeminist,ThinkingBlack.Cambridge,Massachusetts:
SouthEndPress.
HunterJA,FigueredoAJandMalamuthNM(2010)Developmentalpathwaysintosocialand
sexualdeviance.JournalofFamilyViolence25(2):141‐148.
ItzinCandSweetC(1992)Women’sexperienceofpornography:UKmagazinesurveyevidence.
InItzinC(ed.)Pornography:Women,ViolenceandCivilLiberties:222‐235.NewYork:Oxford
UniversityPress.
JacquierV,JohnsonHandFisherB(2011)Researchmethods,measures,andethics.InRenzetti
CM,EdlesonJLandBergenRK(eds)SourcebookonViolenceAgainstWomen(2ndedn):23‐45.
ThousandOaks,California:Sage.
JensenR(1995)Pornographiclives.ViolenceAgainstWomen1(1):32‐54.
JensenR(1996)Knowingpornography.ViolenceAgainstWomen2(1):82‐102.
JensenR(2007)GettingOff:PornographyandtheEndofMasculinity.Cambridge,Massachusetts:
SouthEndPress.
KatzJ(2006)TheMachoParadox:WhySomeMenHurtWomenandHowAllMenCanHelp.
Naperville,Illinois:SOURCEBOOKS.
KipnisL(1996)BoundandGagged:PornographyandthePoliticsofFantasyinAmerica.New
York:Grove.
KjellgrenC,PriebeG,SvedinCG,MossigeSandLangstromN(2011)Femaleyouthwhosexually
coerce:Prevalence,risk,andprotectivefactorsintwonationalhighschoolsurveys.Journalof
SexMedicine8(12):3354‐3362.
KleinJ(2012)TheBullySociety:SchoolshootingsandtheCrisisofBullyinginAmerica’sSchools.
NewYork:NewYorkUniversityPress.
LacombeD(1988)IdeologyandPublicPolicy:TheCaseAgainstPornography.Toronto:
GaramondPress.
LehmanP(2006a)Introduction:‘Adirtylittlesecret’:Whyteachandstudypornography?In
LehmanP(ed.)Pornography:FilmandCulture:1‐24.NewBrunswick,NewJersey:Rutgers
UniversityPress.
LehmanP(ed.)(2006b)Pornography:FilmandCulture.NewBrunswick,NewJersey:Rutgers
UniversityPress.

WalterSDeKeseredy:CriticalCriminologicalUnderstandingsofAdultPornographyandWomanAbuse

IJCJ&SD20
Onlineversionviawww.crimejusticejournal.com  ©20154(4)
LewisCM(2014)Analheterosexamongyoungpeopleandimplicationsforhealthpromotion:A
qualitativestudyintheUK.BMJOpen.DOI:10.1136/bmjopen‐2014‐004996.
LinzD(1989)Exposuretosexuallyexplicitmaterialsandattitudestowardrape:Acomparison
ofstudyresults.JournalofSexResearch26(1):50‐84.
LynchMJ,MichalowskiRandGrovesWB(2000)TheNewPrimerinRadicalCriminology:Critical
PerspectivesonCrime,Power&Identity.Monsey,NewYork:CriminalJusticePress.
MacKinnonC(1983)Feminism,Marxism,method,andthestate:Towardfeminist
jurisprudence.Signs8(4):635‐658.
MacKinnonC(1989)Sexuality,pornography,andmethod:Pleasureunderpatriarchy.Ethics
992):314‐436.
McClintockA(1995)GonadthebarbarianandtheVenusFlytrap:Portrayingthefemaleand
maleorgasm.InSegalLandMcIntoshM(eds)SexExposed:SexualityandthePornography
Debate:111‐131.NewBrunswick,NJ:RutgersUniversityPress.
MaddisonS(2004)Fromporno‐topiatototalinformationawareness,orwhatforcesreally
governaccesstoporn?NewFormations52(Spring):35‐57.
McElroyW(1995)XXX:AWoman’sRighttoPornography.NewYork:StMartin’sPress.
McNairB(2002)StripteaseCulture:Sex,Media,andtheDemocratisationofDesire.London:
Routledge.
MossigeS,AinsaarMandSvedinC(eds)(2007)TheBalticSeaRegionalStudyonAdolescent
Sexuality(NOVARapport18/07).Oslo,Norway:NorwegianSocialResearch.
MowlabocusS(2010)Industry,socialpractice,andthenewonlinepornindustry.InAttwoodF
(ed.)Porn.com:MakingSenseofOnlinePornography:69‐87.NewYork:PeterLang.
MuzzattiSL(2012)Culturalcriminology:Burningupcapitalism,consumercultureandcrime.In
DeKeseredyWSandDragiewiczM(eds)RoutledgeHandbookofCriticalCriminology:138‐
149.London:Routledge.NewYork:Springer.
PaasonenS(2010)Goodamateurs:Eroticawritingandnotionsofquality.InAtwoodF(ed.)
Porn.com:MakingSenseofOnlinePornography:138‐154.NewYork:PeterLang.
PetersonDandPanfilVR(eds)(2014)HandbookofLGBTCommunities,Crime,andJustice.
ReimanJandLeightonP(2013)TheRichGetRicherandthePoorGetPrison(10thedn).Boston,
Massachusetts:Pearson.
RenzettiCM(2012)Feministperspectivesincriminology.InDeKeseredyWSandDragiewiczM
(eds)RoutledgeHandbookofCriticalCriminology:129‐137.London:Routledge.
RenzettiCM(2013)FeministCriminology.London:Routledge.
RistockJL(ed.)(2011)IntimatePartnerViolenceinLGBTQLives.NewYork:Routledge.
RomitaPandBeltraminiL(2011)WatchingPornography:GenderDifferences,Violenceand
Victimization.AnExploratoryStudyinItaly.Availableat
http://vaw.sagepub.com/content/early/2011/10/11/1077801211424555(accessed13
October2014).
RopleatoJ(2010)Internetpornographystatistics.TopTenReviews.com.Availableat
http://internet‐filter‐review.toptenreviews.com/internet‐pornography‐statistics.html
(accessed19January2015).
RussellDEH(1982)RapeinMarriage.NewYork:Macmillan.
RussellDEH(1990)RapeinMarriage(2ndedn).Bloomington:IndianaUniversityPress.
RussellDEH(1993)AgainstPornography:TheEvidenceofHarm.Berkeley,California:Russell
Publications.
SalterMandCroftsT(2014)Respondingtorevengeporn:Challengingonlinelegalimpunity.In
ComellaLandTarrantS(eds)NewViewsonPornography:SexualityPoliticsandtheLaw.
SantaBarbara,Californai:Praeger.

WalterSDeKeseredy:CriticalCriminologicalUnderstandingsofAdultPornographyandWomanAbuse

IJCJ&SD21
Onlineversionviawww.crimejusticejournal.com  ©20154(4)
SchwartzMDandDeKeseredyWS(1997)SexualAssaultontheCollegeCampus:TheRoleofMale
PeerSupport.ThousandOaks,California:Sage.
SchwendingerHandSchwendingerJR(1975)Defendersoforderorguardiansofhumanrights.
InTaylorI,WaltonPandYoungJ(eds)CriticalCriminology:113‐146.London:Routledgeand
KeganPaul.
SennCY(1993)Theresearchonwomenandpornography:Themanyfacesofharm.InRussell
DEH(ed.)MakingViolenceSexy:FeministViewsonPornography:179‐193.NewYork:
TeachersCollegePress.
ShopeJH(2004)Whenwordsarenotenough:Thesearchfortheeffectofpornographyon
abusedwomen.ViolenceAgainstWomen10(1):56‐72.
SimmonsCA,LehmannPandCollier‐TenisonS(2008)Linkingmaleuseofthesexindustryto
controllingbehaviorsinviolentrelationships:Anexploratoryanalysis.ViolenceAgainst
Women14(4):406‐417.
SlaydenD(2010)DebbiedoesDallasagainandagain:Pornography,technology,andmarket
innovation.InAttwoodF(eds)Porn.com:MakingSenseofOnlinePornography:54‐68.New
York:PeterLang.
SommersEKandCheckJVP(1987)Anempiricalinvestigationoftheroleofpornographyinthe
verbalandphysicalabuseofwomen.ViolenceandVictims2:189‐209.
StrossenN(2000)DefendingPornography:FreeSpeech,SexandtheFightforWomen’sRights.
NewYork:NewYorkUniversityPress.
UllenM(2014)Pornographyanditscriticalreception:Towardatheoryofmasturbation.Jump
Cut:AReviewofContemporaryMedia.Availableat
http://www.ejumpcut.org/archive/jc51.2009/UllenPorn/(accessed23May2014).
ValleeB(2007)TheWaronWomen:EllyArmour,JaneHurshman,andCriminalViolencein
CanadianHomes.Toronto:KeyPorterBooks.
Vargas‐CooperN(2011)Hardcore:Thenewworldofpornisrevealingeternaltruthsaboutmen
andwomen.TheAtlantic,4January.Availableat
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/01/hard‐core/308327/(accessed22
May2014).
WeitzerR(2011)Pornography’seffects:Theneedforsolidevidence.ViolenceAgainstWomen
17(5):666‐675.
WendtS(2009)DomesticViolenceinAustralia.Sydney:TheFederationPress.
WilkinsonS(1998)Focusgroupsinfeministresearch:Power,interaction,andtheco‐
constructionofmeaning.Women’sStudiesInternationalForum21:111‐125.
WilliamsL(1989)HardCore:Power,Pleasureandthe‘FrenzyoftheVisible’.Berkeley,California:
UniversityofCaliforniaPress.
WilliamsL(ed.)(2004)PornStudies.Durham,NorthCcarolina:DukeUniversityPress.
WinlowS(2014)Pornography.InAtkinsonR(ed.)ShadesofDeviance:APrimeronCrime,
DevianceandSocialHarm:166‐168.London:Routledge.
WolakJ,MitchellKJandFinkelhorD(2007)Unwantedandwantedexposuretoonline
pornographyinanationalsampleofyouthInternetusers.Pediatrics119(2):247‐255.
YoungJ(1988)RadicalcriminologyinBritain:Theemergenceofacompetingparadigm.British
JournalofCriminology28(2):159‐183.
ZerbisiasA(2008)Packagingabuseofwomenasentertainmentforadults:Cruel,degrading
scenes‘normalized’forgenerationbroughtupindot‐comworld.TorontoStar:26January.


