What do you think?
Rate this book
Women, Sex, and Pornography: A Controversial and Unique Study
A scientifically researched volume redefines pornography from a woman's perspective and explores sexual "turn-ons" and fantasies, the work done by Masters and Johnson, and other related topics to illuminate men's and women's sexual similarities and differences
- GenresFeminism
Hardcover
First published January 1, 1981
4 people are currently reading
55 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
June 24, 2024
SOME “DIFFERENT” PERSPECTIVES ON FEMINIST ISSUES
Beatrice Eileen Faust (1939-2019) was an Australian author and women’s activist, as well as a former president of the Victorian Abortion Law Repeal Association, and co-founder of the Women's Electoral Lobby and the Victorian Union of Civil Liberties.
She wrote in the first chapter of this 1980 book, “When I discussed the idea of a book about pornography and my publisher asked me to concentrate on pornography and women, I felt like the child ordered to write an essay on a Day at the Beach. She could only put down one sentence---‘It rained, so we didn’t go.’ Most women have no interest in pornography. They can accept differences of opinion on lesbianism, and argue these differences out publicly, but pornography is not even a controversial topic… among women, porn is a nonissue.” (Pg. 4)
She observes, “People who are conservative about porn are usually conservative about lesbianism, abortion, health education, and rape crisis centers. Feminists do not want to appear to be allying themselves with campaigners who oppose some of the most important planks in their platform. Crusading puritans like Anita Bryant, Charles Court, and Mary Whitehouse are not attractive allies for crusading feminists.” (Pg. 9)
She states, “Feminists in both the radical and reformist wings of the women’s movement accept the blanket statement: ‘porn is not about sex, it is about male power over women.’ By adopting such a lazy and shallow approach, feminists lose a crucial insight on female sexuality and sexual politics.” (Pg. 10)
She notes, “Men assume that women are visually roused like all ordinary (male) human beings. When teenage girls shriek over the latest male pop star, androcentric observers think that they are sexually turned on in the same way that men are roused by female strippers. But strippers are usually anonymous while pop stars have a name, an image and a personality… Men react impersonally to the stripper’s body and sexual aura; girls react to the pop star as a person, not as a sexy body. It is very rare to find an anonymous male pinup---let alone a naked, anonymous male pinup---in a girl’s bedroom, a women’s locker room, or an all-women dormitory. Men’s pinups of women are much more likely to be both anonymous and naked.” (Pg. 32)
She acknowledges, “Some of us have even worn …stilt-heeled shoes… Some are now wearing platform soles or high-heeled boots with the latest thing in lightweight corselets. The history of these devices, their declines and perennial revivals is so familiar as to be tedious---except for one paradox. Critics have never adequately explained why such fashions keep turning up like bad pennies even when women complain that they are uncomfortable, unhealthy, and unemancipated.” (Pg. 52)
She continues, “But there may be method in the madness of women who resist rational dress and defend bizarre fashions. High heels and corsets provide intense kinesthetic stimulation for women, appealing to the sense of touch but extending more than skin deep. These frivolous accessories are not just visual stimuli for men: they are also tactile stimuli for women… Walking in high heels makes the buttocks undulate twice as much as walking in flat heels, with correspondingly greater sensation transmitted to the vulva. Girdles can encourage pelvic tumescence and, if they are long enough, cause labial friction during movement.” (Pg. 53-54) She suggests, “The idea that clothing and cosmetics can be an erotic turn-on for the women who use them, as well as for the men who look on, may seem … farfetched … Yet the diffuse nature of the pleasure and well as the orgiastic urgency are consistent with female sexuality.” (Pg. 59)
She asserts, “My own reading of the evidence is that pornography DOES arouse aggressive as well as sexual feelings but that this is not translated into antisocial---particularly antiwoman---behavior except possibly in a tiny minority of cases.” (Pg. 81)
She argues, “It would seem that women’s need for intimacy in sexual relations originates in the balance of hormones to which they were exposed in utero. Men’s tolerance of impersonal sex derives from a different balance of the same hormones. Since the mother, the fetus and the placenta all contribute hormones during gestation, there is a great deal of room for variation in both sexes. Women’s indifference to visual and psychogenic stimuli relate to lowered exposure to androgen and those women who overlap with males in their mode of erotic arousal have probably picked up a little extra androgen.” (Pg. 112-113)
She notes, “Ms., the feminist glossy [magazine], is considered an extraordinary success… Ms. refuses to accept sexploitative advertising, refuses to criticize other women, refuses to wash feminist dirty linen in public by discussing sectarian controversy that still occurs within the feminist movement… Part of Ms.’s success in attracting nonmovement readership lies with this policy of feminist commitment that shuns sectarianism. It promotes feminist goals by wall of intelligent articles and backup publicity for women’s issues… and pro-woman activities of every kind.” (Pg. 158)
She comments, “Women have accepted new freedoms in abortion, birth control, living together, masturbation, and loving other women… If women reject the freedom to enjoy pornography and even male cheesecake, it must be because---no matter what permissions society gives---women do not want it.” (Pg. 175)
She concludes, “We need to admit that differences between males and females exist and that they derive from an interaction of culture with biology. At the same time, we need to remember that some women have a masculine sexual style and some men veer to the feminine. Stereotyped views of masculinity and femininity are obsolete. But the most urgent need is to get the issue of sex differences in sexuality out of the closet.” (Pg. 204)
This book will interest women interested is some “fresh” ideas (circa 1980) about feminism and women’s issues.
Beatrice Eileen Faust (1939-2019) was an Australian author and women’s activist, as well as a former president of the Victorian Abortion Law Repeal Association, and co-founder of the Women's Electoral Lobby and the Victorian Union of Civil Liberties.
She wrote in the first chapter of this 1980 book, “When I discussed the idea of a book about pornography and my publisher asked me to concentrate on pornography and women, I felt like the child ordered to write an essay on a Day at the Beach. She could only put down one sentence---‘It rained, so we didn’t go.’ Most women have no interest in pornography. They can accept differences of opinion on lesbianism, and argue these differences out publicly, but pornography is not even a controversial topic… among women, porn is a nonissue.” (Pg. 4)
She observes, “People who are conservative about porn are usually conservative about lesbianism, abortion, health education, and rape crisis centers. Feminists do not want to appear to be allying themselves with campaigners who oppose some of the most important planks in their platform. Crusading puritans like Anita Bryant, Charles Court, and Mary Whitehouse are not attractive allies for crusading feminists.” (Pg. 9)
She states, “Feminists in both the radical and reformist wings of the women’s movement accept the blanket statement: ‘porn is not about sex, it is about male power over women.’ By adopting such a lazy and shallow approach, feminists lose a crucial insight on female sexuality and sexual politics.” (Pg. 10)
She notes, “Men assume that women are visually roused like all ordinary (male) human beings. When teenage girls shriek over the latest male pop star, androcentric observers think that they are sexually turned on in the same way that men are roused by female strippers. But strippers are usually anonymous while pop stars have a name, an image and a personality… Men react impersonally to the stripper’s body and sexual aura; girls react to the pop star as a person, not as a sexy body. It is very rare to find an anonymous male pinup---let alone a naked, anonymous male pinup---in a girl’s bedroom, a women’s locker room, or an all-women dormitory. Men’s pinups of women are much more likely to be both anonymous and naked.” (Pg. 32)
She acknowledges, “Some of us have even worn …stilt-heeled shoes… Some are now wearing platform soles or high-heeled boots with the latest thing in lightweight corselets. The history of these devices, their declines and perennial revivals is so familiar as to be tedious---except for one paradox. Critics have never adequately explained why such fashions keep turning up like bad pennies even when women complain that they are uncomfortable, unhealthy, and unemancipated.” (Pg. 52)
She continues, “But there may be method in the madness of women who resist rational dress and defend bizarre fashions. High heels and corsets provide intense kinesthetic stimulation for women, appealing to the sense of touch but extending more than skin deep. These frivolous accessories are not just visual stimuli for men: they are also tactile stimuli for women… Walking in high heels makes the buttocks undulate twice as much as walking in flat heels, with correspondingly greater sensation transmitted to the vulva. Girdles can encourage pelvic tumescence and, if they are long enough, cause labial friction during movement.” (Pg. 53-54) She suggests, “The idea that clothing and cosmetics can be an erotic turn-on for the women who use them, as well as for the men who look on, may seem … farfetched … Yet the diffuse nature of the pleasure and well as the orgiastic urgency are consistent with female sexuality.” (Pg. 59)
She asserts, “My own reading of the evidence is that pornography DOES arouse aggressive as well as sexual feelings but that this is not translated into antisocial---particularly antiwoman---behavior except possibly in a tiny minority of cases.” (Pg. 81)
She argues, “It would seem that women’s need for intimacy in sexual relations originates in the balance of hormones to which they were exposed in utero. Men’s tolerance of impersonal sex derives from a different balance of the same hormones. Since the mother, the fetus and the placenta all contribute hormones during gestation, there is a great deal of room for variation in both sexes. Women’s indifference to visual and psychogenic stimuli relate to lowered exposure to androgen and those women who overlap with males in their mode of erotic arousal have probably picked up a little extra androgen.” (Pg. 112-113)
She notes, “Ms., the feminist glossy [magazine], is considered an extraordinary success… Ms. refuses to accept sexploitative advertising, refuses to criticize other women, refuses to wash feminist dirty linen in public by discussing sectarian controversy that still occurs within the feminist movement… Part of Ms.’s success in attracting nonmovement readership lies with this policy of feminist commitment that shuns sectarianism. It promotes feminist goals by wall of intelligent articles and backup publicity for women’s issues… and pro-woman activities of every kind.” (Pg. 158)
She comments, “Women have accepted new freedoms in abortion, birth control, living together, masturbation, and loving other women… If women reject the freedom to enjoy pornography and even male cheesecake, it must be because---no matter what permissions society gives---women do not want it.” (Pg. 175)
She concludes, “We need to admit that differences between males and females exist and that they derive from an interaction of culture with biology. At the same time, we need to remember that some women have a masculine sexual style and some men veer to the feminine. Stereotyped views of masculinity and femininity are obsolete. But the most urgent need is to get the issue of sex differences in sexuality out of the closet.” (Pg. 204)
This book will interest women interested is some “fresh” ideas (circa 1980) about feminism and women’s issues.
December 26, 2024
A very wise and nuanced book. A real eye opener for my 20 year old self.
November 30, 2025
Interesting in a historical context of the development of the discourse in thinking around women’s sexuality in Australia. But you know it is 45 years old so pretty bloody outdated!
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews