See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/264558246

Porn and sex education, porn as sex education

Article · March 2014

DOI: 10.1080/23268743.2013.863654

CITATIONS READS

35 24,688

1 author:

Kath Albury
UNSW Sydney
34 PUBLICATIONS   529 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Queer Visual/Digital Stereotypes: Combatting Minority Stereotypes in Digital Search Images, Stock Photography and their End Users View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Kath Albury on 06 January 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

This article was downloaded by: [54.152.109.166]
On: 09 September 2015, At: 03:45
Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: 5 Howick Place, London, SW1P 1WG

Porn Studies
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rprn20

Porn and sex education, porn as sex

education
a
Kath Albury
a
Journalism and Media Research Centre, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia
Published online: 21 Mar 2014.

Click for updates

To cite this article: Kath Albury (2014) Porn and sex education, porn as sex education, Porn
Studies, 1:1-2, 172-181, DOI: 10.1080/23268743.2013.863654

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23268743.2013.863654

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
 Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
Downloaded by [54.152.109.166] at 03:45 09 September 2015
 Porn Studies, 2014
Vol. 1, Nos. 1–2, 172–181, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23268743.2013.863654

Porn and sex education, porn as sex education

Kath Albury*

Journalism and Media Research Centre, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
(Received 11 September 2013; accepted 17 October 2013)

Both popular and academic discussions of pornography have explored the

question of sexually explicit texts as pedagogy. While many commentators and
scholars have acknowledged the educational qualities of pornography, there is no
Downloaded by [54.152.109.166] at 03:45 09 September 2015

universal consensus as to what porn teaches its consumers and how it works as an
educator. Pornography is increasingly itself the subject of educational texts, with
‘porn literacy’ being debated as a potential addition to the secondary state school
curriculum in the United Kingdom and Australia. This article presents an
overview of the field of ‘porn as pedagogy’ and pedagogy about porn. It is
modest in scope, relying primarily on recent research and media reportage from
Australasia, North America and the United Kingdom. These Anglophone
countries have significant similarities in respect to the ways pornography is
framed as a moral and/or political issue within public debate (although there are
also notable differences). For this reason, the overview that follows does not seek
to be globally representative, but represents a preliminary foray into a complex
and diverse field.
Keywords: pornography; sex education; health promotion; young people; sexual
health

Introduction
Pornography is a burning issue – the elephant in the room – a more significant issue
with some groups than with others but students seem to have such easy access to this
material and need to be taught to view it critically if they are going to access it and with
a healthy lens that values their own well-being and the well-being of others. (South
Australian teacher, cited in Johnson 2012)

Both popular and academic discussions of pornography have explored the question
of sexually explicit texts as pedagogy. While many commentators and scholars
have acknowledged the educational qualities of pornography, there is no universal
consensus as to what porn teaches its consumers and how it works as an educator.
This question of ‘what porn teaches’ is further complicated when ‘porn consumers’
are considered not as a homogeneous group, but as a diverse set of sub-groups,
which includes same-sex-attracted and heterosexual people of diverse ages,
genders, and cultural, political and religious affiliations (see McKee, Albury, and
Lumby 2008).

*Email: k.albury@unsw.edu.au
© 2014 Taylor & Francis
 Porn Studies 173

Pornography is increasingly itself the subject of educational texts, with ‘porn

literacy’ being debated as a potential addition to the secondary state school
curriculum in the United Kingdom and Australia (Haste 2013; O’Brien 2013; Watt
2013). These debates on porn education tend to presume that young people aged
under 18 should be provided with porn literacy education that promotes critical
disengagement from pornographic texts. In contrast, sexuality education targeting
adults has drawn on pornographic imagery to promote sexual learning – particularly
in relation to safer-sex practices.
This article presents an overview of the field of ‘porn as pedagogy’ (which
primarily addresses adults) and pedagogy about porn (which primarily addresses
secondary school students). It is modest in scope, relying mainly on recent research
and media reportage from Australasia, North America and the United Kingdom.
These Anglophone countries have significant similarities in respect to the ways
pornography is framed as a moral and/or political issue within public debate
Downloaded by [54.152.109.166] at 03:45 09 September 2015

(although there are also notable differences). For this reason, the overview that
follows does not seek to be globally representative, but represents a preliminary
foray into a complex and diverse field.

Pornography, young people and formal education

Since the mid-1990s, online pornography has increasingly been framed as a risk to
young people’s well-being, and a potential risk to their sexual development (Flood
2009; McKee 2010). Researchers in Australia, New Zealand and the United States
have proposed that pornography may be sought out by young people as a source of
informal sexuality education (Tjaden 1988; Allen 2006, McKee 2007). These
researchers argue that where other sources of education are lacking, young people
may be motivated to seek out porn partly to gain access to detailed illustrations of
genitalia or of bodies engaged in sexual acts (Kapsalis 1996; Kubicek et al. 2010). In
addition, they may seek what Michelle Fine (1988) has termed a discourse of erotics,
or instructions on how to initiate sexual activity and perform specific kinds of sex
that may not be described or represented within school-based sex education (Ingham
2005; Allen 2006; Carmody 2009).
While some resources have been developed by third parties for use in school-
based sexuality education (Crabbe and Corlett 2010; Johnson 2012; Bengry-Howell
2012), the discussion of porn in the classroom can be a high-risk proposition for
teachers (Burton 2012; Haste 2013). This is also true in higher education settings.
Porn is an object of inquiry within a range of disciplines (including Women’s and
Gender Studies, Media and Screen Studies, Law, Criminology and Psychology). As
Kirkham and Skeggs put it:

One need not personally ‘like’ commercial pornography or even artistic, avant-garde
representations of sexuality to understand that analyzing it without condemning it plays
an important role in developing feminist [and other kinds of] knowledge. (1996, 5)

Despite this, the study of sexually explicit texts in university classrooms remains
controversial (Reading 2005; Smith 2009).
 174 K. Albury

Pedagogies of sexual identity

Porn can also be a significant source of education for sex/gender diverse young
people, with a range of studies indicating that pornography is a significant source of
explicit information that supports both sexual confidence and positive community
formation for same-sex-attracted people (Waugh 1996; Ruddock and Kain 2006;
Hillier and Harrison 2007; Kubichek et al. 2010). However, while porn is endorsed
by some researchers as a source of ‘positive’ educational content for heterosexual
adults (Watson and Smith 2012), it is widely considered to be a poor educator for
young heterosexuals, particularly young men (Flood 2009; Crabbe and Corlett 2010;
Johnson 2012).
Pornography has been criticized for teaching young heterosexuals to ‘eroticise
inequality’ with respect to gender (Crabbe and Corlett 2010). In this context,
pornography can be viewed in a continuum of other media representations, including
advertising billboards, music videos, and websites, as part of a broader social
Downloaded by [54.152.109.166] at 03:45 09 September 2015

tendency towards the ‘pornographication’ or ‘sexualization’ of popular culture

(Attwood 2009; McNair 2012).

Pedagogies of self-representation and sexual practices

Pornography has been criticized for ‘normalizing’ stylized or ‘pornified’ forms of
corporeality and self-representation. This critique has focused primarily on female
bodies, with both academic researchers and popular commentators linking the
increased accessibility and popularity of pornography with trends in women’s
grooming (specifically in shaping or removing public hair) (Wolf 2003; Fitzpa-
trick 2007).
Health researchers, feminist scholars and popular commentators have also
claimed that pornography has influenced young people’s sexual repertoires in
potentially damaging ways. Researchers have sought to link young men’s consump-
tion of pornography with ‘aggressive’ views towards women, although the definition
of aggressive attitudes and behaviours has been challenged (McKee, Albury, and
Lumby 2008). A number of studies in the fields of sexual health and psychology
linked the consumption of porn to ‘risky’ sexual behaviours among young
heterosexual men and women (for example, Tydén and Rogala 2004; Perrin et al.
2008; Štulhofer, Buško, and Landripet 2010). Critics of pornography have drawn on
this literature to argue that porn has served as a ‘bad educator’ for these young
people (Flood 2009).
However, other researchers and commentators have sought to question the link
between young people’s consumption of sexually explicit material and their actual
sexual behaviours (McKee 2010; Hald et al. 2013). Or they have suggested that the
key question for ‘porn education’ is not so much which practices young people have
seen and can name (or want to try), but whether young people have access to other
forms of education that promotes skills to help them navigate their sexual learning
processes ethically and safely (Allen 2006; Carmody 2009). In the light of these
concerns, it is worth considering whether simply adding a critique of porn to an
existing sex and relationships education programme will address broader cultural
inequities – particularly if other areas of the curriculum do not directly address
questions of power, gender relations and sexual negotiation skills.
 Porn Studies 175

Pornography as (adult) sex education

While discussions of porn as pedagogy for young people tend to assume poor
educational outcomes, sexuality education for adults has drawn on pornographic
images and texts to engage learners. Safer-sex education materials targeting gay men
have drawn on pornographic imagery since the 1980s, and have been found to be
highly effective in promoting acceptance of safer-sex practices (Scott-Sheldon and
Johnson 2006; Leonard 2012). These images have attracted criticism from inside and
outside the gay community. Some critics draw on radical feminist frameworks to
argue that many gay pornographic images feature misogynist or violent language
and imagery (Kendall 2004). Others have protested the overt eroticization of gay
men’s sexual cultures and practices, prompting the AIDS Federation of Australasia
to develop specific policy guidelines in relation to sexually-explicit community health
promotion (Leonard and Mitchell 2000). While the deliberate linking of explicit
Downloaded by [54.152.109.166] at 03:45 09 September 2015

images and texts with sexual health information is relatively rare in health promotion
and health education materials targeting young people, heterosexual adults, or same-
sex-attracted women, one Australian sexual health promotion project targeting
sexually adventurous women has adopted similar strategies (Albury, Constable, and
May 2012). Although the project has been active for less than 12 months and is still
being evaluated, it illustrates some of the ways that a ‘community-driven’ approach
to sexual pedagogy and learning can engage with the tastes and practices of porn
consumers. The media campaign was developed in consultation with a reference
group of women drawn from Sydney alternative sex sub-cultures. The project
website, iloveclaude, is modelled on the social media platform Tumblr, and combines
‘found’ images from soft-core pornography and erotica with commissioned photo-
sets, interviews, expert advice and short videos focused on safer-sex and blood-play
practices (AIDS Council 2012).
Some North American producers of commercial pornography have produced
‘couples’ videos that specifically offer sexually explicit instruction in particular
sexual practices within the genre of ‘educational porn’ (for example, Nina Hartley’s
Guide to Better Cunnilingus; Hartley 1995). Others have also sought to incorporate
safer-sex strategies, including the use of gloves, condoms, and ‘dirty talk as sexual
negotiation’, into their videos, although this appears to be more common in
explicitly queer/lesbian porn production (see Butler 2004; McKee, Albury, and
Lumby 2008). In the United Kingdom, producer Anna Span has collaborated with
health-promotion organization The Pleasure Project to produce heterosexual porn
featuring condoms (Philpott 2004; Naish 2006; Knerr 2008). However, the use of
condoms in both gay and straight pornography is generally not intended as safer-sex
instruction, but as a sexual health precaution for performers (Albury 2013a).
Just as porn that features condoms is seen to model safer-sex within the gay
men’s community, bareback (or condom-less) porn is viewed as pedagogical in a
negative sense – that is, it is suspected of eroticizing and thus promoting practices of
unprotected anal intercourse. Consequently, sexual health organizations in Australia
and the United Kingdom have sought to intervene in public conversations about
barebacking in pornography, with the AIDS Council of NSW (Australia) requesting
that sex-on-premises that seek to conform with safer-sex ‘best-practice’ codes do not
broadcast bareback porn in their screening rooms (AIDS Council of NSW 2008, 5).
 176 K. Albury

The authors of the Porn Laid Bare website, a collaboration between the Terrence
Higgins Trust and the University of Sussex, observe that the interplay between
men’s consumption of bareback pornography and their sexual practices is
complex, and:

A simple ‘ban bareback pornography’ campaign risks alienating [men] who might enjoy
consuming it (but equally be very clear about differentiating the act of barebacking in
from their own sex lives) or could even further endorse or sensationalise bareback
pornography as taboo, forbidden or exciting. (Mowlabocus 2012)

What does porn literacy look like?

The question of what counts as ‘porn literacy’ is not straightforward and intersects
with broader disciplinary debates about porn’s effects on its users (see McKee,
Downloaded by [54.152.109.166] at 03:45 09 September 2015

Albury, and Lumby 2008). As with other forms of media, there are multiple
pedagogies deploying the term ‘critical literacy’, and these multiple approaches may
have very different methods and aims. Within some educational frameworks, media
literacy education may aim to ‘inoculate’ young people against particular kinds of
media content, and in some cases involves ‘denigrating all forms of media and
computer culture’ (Kellner and Share 2005, 372). This approach can lead to
frustration for teachers when young people demonstrate an ability to correctly
identify myths, stereotypes and ‘bad role models’ in commercial media imagery in
the classroom, while simultaneously taking pleasure in what might be termed
subaltern readings of these texts and images, particularly in relation to the ‘coolness’
or ‘sexiness’ of media content (Turnbull 1993; Albury 2013b).
Other forms of media education may encourage students to ‘read’ media texts in
the ways they might read books, to develop ethical and aesthetic criteria for
interpreting media, and/or to develop technical skills in media production (Kellner
and Share 2005, 372). As Buckingham notes, media education programmes focused
on non-pornographic texts often adopt ‘a more student-centred perspective, which
begins from young people’s existing knowledge and experience of media, rather than
the instructional imperatives of the teacher’ (2008, 13). The difficulty for educators
in the field of ‘porn literacy’, however, is that they may not legally distribute the
object of study to their (minor) students, nor may they legally encourage students to
develop alternative pornographic media as a means of developing literacy – a
common strategy within mainstream media education. This means that porn
education (for under-18s at least), neither permits close readings of actual explicit
texts nor allows for direct discussions of specific texts.
As Allen (2011) suggests, young people publicly express interest in pornography
for multiple reasons, which include (but are not limited to): seeking to satisfy
curiosity regarding specific sexual practices, displaying sexual knowledge to peers, or
conforming to normative gender expectations. In an ideal educational setting, porn
literacy education might permit a dialogue that offers the opportunity for educators
to learn more about young people’s sexual cultures, and for both teachers and
learners to extend their knowledge and understanding of the intersections between
mediated representation and lived experiences of sex, sexuality, and gender.
However, most settings are less than ideal, and navigating the topic of
pornography can be difficult or uncomfortable for teachers (Ayala et al. 2008;
 Porn Studies 177

Allen 2011; Haste 2013). Consequently, a number of creatively ‘indirect’ strategies

have been adopted by adults aiming to deliver porn education to young people, in
the context of broader sex and relationships education programmes. These range
from documentary videos promoting critical literacy (Crabbe and Corlett 2010) to
instructional games (Bengry-Howell 2012). These tools may be accompanied by
training and resources, or curriculum guidelines (Johnson 2012; Hewett, 2013). Such
critiques or ‘de-mystifications’ of porn as a media genre are not unique to formal
education. Popular media texts such as the short video Porn Sex vs Real Sex also
promote critical interrogations of pornographic texts, deploying humorous and
allegorical devices rather than literal depictions of genitalia or sex acts (KB Creative
Lab 2013).

Some reflections on porn and pedagogy

Downloaded by [54.152.109.166] at 03:45 09 September 2015

It has not been possible to fully do justice to the range of dissent and debate around
porn as education, and education about pornography. Men and women, boys and
girls are framed quite differently as ‘students’ of porn, as are heterosexual and same-
sex-attracted people. While this review has primarily focused on examples of
research and practice from North America, Australia and the United Kingdom, it
is clear that different cultures (both national and global) have their own relationship
to pornography as pedagogy (for example, see Ramalgun 2012). It is likely that there
may be quite different conversations about what porn teaches, and what could be
taught about porn, within different cultural and sub-cultural contexts.
In their study of the popular reporting of young people’s changing sexual
repertoires (specifically the ‘fellatio epidemic’) in North America, Curtis and Hunt
note the radical changes in broader cultural views with respect to young women’s
sexuality since the 1970s. They also draw attention to the changes in hierarchies of
sexual intimacy and sexual repertoires that have occurred in the past half century,
noting that:

oral sex has been relocated in the regime of sexual practice to the realm of pre- or non-
marital sex – ‘outercourse’ – and its quality as an expression of commitment and
mutuality for the marital relation has been largely eliminated. (Curtis and Hunt
2007,16)

Curtis and Hunt suggest that some of anxiety adults experience in relation to young
people’s interest in ‘alternative’ sexual practices such as oral sex may stem from a
broader anxiety in response to young people’s increased capacity to publicly express
sexual curiosity (and sexual adventurism) without fear of being incarcerated by adult
authorities for being ‘wayward’ or ‘incorrigable’ (2007, 24).
As Kellner and Share argue in their review of prevalent methods and approaches
in critical media literacy education:

cultivating literacies involves attaining competencies in practices in contexts that are

governed by rules and conventions. Literacies are socially constructed in educational
and cultural practices involved in various institutional discourses and practices.
(2005, 369)
 178 K. Albury

Conversations about porn literacy and porn as sex education (particularly with
respect to the question of what young people learn from porn) should also be
understood as conversations about changing cultural rules and conventions regard-
ing sexual self-representation and sexual practice. Academic research to date does
not present a unified picture of what porn teaches, or what porn audiences might
learn from it. While debates are sparked around the inclusion of porn literacy
programmes within school-based sex and relationships education, there is no clear
model of what ‘best-practice’ might look like in this field, or who might be best
suited to deliver it. Further, where other areas of school curriculum do not challenge
sex/gender inequality, or seek to actively promote what Allen (2011) has termed
sexual/social justice, it is unlikely that education programmes which focus exclusively
on pornography will effect significant change.
As Buckingham notes, contemporary ‘mainstream’ media literacy education
‘seeks to begin with … students … existing tastes and pleasures, rather than
Downloaded by [54.152.109.166] at 03:45 09 September 2015

assuming that these are merely invalid or “ideological”’ (2008, 14). While sexuality
education targeting adults (particularly same-sex-attracted men) currently takes this
approach to pornography, education targeting heterosexual young people does not. I
suggest this difference does not solely stem from adult concerns regarding
representations of gendered inequality within pornography, but from the anxieties
alluded to by Curtis and Hunt (2007), regarding young people’s changing
engagements with new sexual practices and sexual cultures.
Future research (and practical inquiry) into pornography and/as sex education
might therefore interrogate the ways that debates about porn education intersect
with other debates around young people’s sexual practices, sexual self-representation
and sexual knowledge. Rather than seeking to set universal definitions regarding
what porn really teaches (or what young people and adults should know about porn),
this line of questioning might seek to take account of the ways that differences in
sexual tastes and cultures might impact on audiences’ reception of pornographic
texts. It might also seek to understand how young people’s readings of pornography
(and their reception of porn education) can reshape the broader curriculum of formal
sex and relationships education. This interrogation would not rule out explicit
critiques of misogynistic, homophobic or racist tropes within pornography, but
might also offer the capacity to open up critically productive conversations about the
boundaries between adult sexual knowledge and young people’s sexual learning; and
the ways popular and institutional discourses define particular forms of sexuality,
sexual identity, and sex/gender expression as ‘legitimate’ (or ‘illegitimate’) know-
ledge for young people.

References
AIDS Council of New South Wales. 2008. ‘Code of Practice.’ Accessed August 20, 2013.
www.acon.org.au/sites/default/files/Code-of-Practice-2007.pdf
AIDS Council of New South Wales. 2012. ‘iloveclaude.’ Accessed September 27, 2013. http://
iloveclaude.com.
Albury, Kath. 2013a. ‘Safe Sex and Free Choice in the US Porn Industry.’ The Conversation.
Accessed September 27, 2013. https://theconversation.com/safe-sex-vs-free-choice-in-the-us-
porn-industry-18606
Albury, Kath. 2013b. ‘Young People, Media and Sexual Learning: Rethinking Representa-
tion.’ Sex Education 13 (S1): S32–S44. doi:10.1080/14681811.2013.767194
 Porn Studies 179

Albury, Kath, Annaliese Constable, and Siri May. 2012. ‘Their Playground, Their Rules:
Interactive Social Media and Health Promotion for Sub-population Groups.’ Poster
presentation at the 1st National Sexual and Reproductive Health Conference, Melbourne,
Australia, November 20–21 2012.
Allen, Louisa. 2006. ‘“Looking at the Real Thing”: Young Men, Pornography, and Sexuality
Education.’ Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education 27 (1): 69–83.
doi:10.1080/01596300500510302
Allen, Louisa. 2011. Young People and Sexuality Education. Basingstoke: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Attwood, Feona. 2009. Mainstreaming Sex: The Sexualization of Western Culture. London
and New York: IB Tauris.
Ayala, Jessica, Jennifer Hewson, Victoria Maldonaldo, and Alla Palagina. 2008. Promoting
Sexual Health for Young Men. Calgary, Alberta: Calgary Sexual Health/University of
Calgary.
Bengry-Howell, Andrew. 2012. ‘Planet Porn: A Resource Pack for Working with Teens
Around Porn.’ Sex Education 12 (3): 370–372.
Buckingham, David. (2008) Media Education: Literacy, Learning and Contemporary Culture.
Downloaded by [54.152.109.166] at 03:45 09 September 2015

Cambridge: Polity.
Burton, Lee. 2012. ‘Underage & Overexposed: Discussing Pornography and Raunch Culture
with Students.’ Screen Education 65: 58–70.
Butler, Heather. 2004. ‘What do you Call a Lesbian with Long Fingers? The Development of
Lesbian and Dyke Pornography’. In Porn Studies, edited by Linda Williams, 167–197.
Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Carmody, Moira 2009. Sex and Ethics: Young People and Ethical Sex. Melbourne: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Crabbe, Maree, and David Corlett. 2010. ‘Eroticising Inequality: Technology, Pornography
and Young People.’ Domestic Violence Resource Centre Victoria Quarterly 3 (Spring): 1–6.
Curtis, Bruce, and Alan Hunt. 2007. ‘The Fellatio “Epidemic”: Age Relations and Access to
the Erotic Arts.’ Sexualities 10: 5–28. doi:10.1177/1363460707072950
Fine, Michelle. 1988. ‘Sexuality, Schooling, and Adolescent Females: The Missing Discourse
of Desire.’ Harvard Educational Review 58 (1): 29–58.
Fitzpatrick, Mike. 2007. ‘Brazilian Bikini Wax and the Designer Vagina.’ The British Journal
of General Practice 57 (545): 1005. doi:10.3399/096016407782604749
Flood, Michael. 2009. ‘The Harms of Pornography Exposure among Children and Young
People.’ Child Abuse Review 18 (6): 384–400. doi:10.1002/car.1092
Hald, Gert, Lisette Kuyper, Phillipe Adam, and John de Wit. 2013. ‘Does Viewing Explain
Doing? Assessing the Association Between Sexually Explicit Materials Use and Sexual
Behaviors in a Large Sample of Dutch Adolescents and Young Adults.’ Journal of Sexual
Medicine 10 (12): 2986–2995. doi:10.1111/jsm.12157
Hartley, Nina. dir. 1996. Nina Hartley’s Guide To Better Cunnilingus. California: Adam
& Eve.
Haste, Polly. 2013. ‘Sex Education and Masculinity: The “Problem” of Boys.’ Gender and
Education 25 (4): 515–527. doi:10.1080/09540253.2013.789830
Hewitt, Candice. 2013. The Sex Educational Supplement, Volume 1, Issue 1, The Pornography
Issue. Accessed August 20, 2013. http://www.flipsnack.com/7EAEEFBA9F7/fdtps1uz
Hillier, Lynne, and Lyn Harrison. 2007. ‘Building Realities Less Limited Than Their Own.’
Sexualities 10: 82–100. doi:10.1177/1363460707072956
Ingham, Roger. 2005. ‘“We Didn’t Cover That at School”: Education Against Pleasure or
Education For Pleasure?’ Sex Education 5 (4): 375–388. doi:10.1080/14681810500278451
Johnson, Bruce. 2012. They Need to Know … A Report on Teacher’s Use of the South
Australian Relationships and Sexual Health Curriculum. Adelaide: University of South
Australia.
Kapsalis, Terri. 1996. Public Privates: Performing Gynaecology from Both Ends of the
Speculum. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
KB Creative Lab. 2013. ‘Porn Sex vs Real Sex: The Differences Explained with Food.’
Accessed September 6, 2013. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v = q64hTNEj6KQ
 180 K. Albury

Kellner, Douglas, and Jeff Share. 2005. ‘Toward Critical Media Literacy: Core Concepts,
Debates, Organizations, and Policy.’ Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education
26 (3): 369–386. doi:10.1080/01596300500200169
Kendall, Christopher N. 2004. Gay Male Pornography: An Issue of Sex Discrimination.
Vancouver: UBC Press.
Kirkham, Pat, and Beverley Skeggs. 1996. ‘Pornographies, Pleasures and Pedagogies in the
UK and US.’ Jump Cut 40: 106–113.
Knerr, Wendy, Kristina J. Ferris, Juliet McEachran, and Annie Philpott. 2008. ‘Promoting
Sexual Health and Rights Through Pleasure: A literature review.’ Unpublished paper,
Oxford: The Pleasure Project.
Kubicek, Katrina, William J. Beyer, George Weiss, Ellen Iverson, and Michele D. Kipke.
2010. ‘In the Dark: Young Men’s Stories of Sexual Initiation in the Absence of Relevant
Sexual Health Information.’ Health Education & Behavior 37 (2): 243–263. doi:10.1177/
1090198109339993
Leonard, William. 2012. ‘Safe Sex and the Aesthetics of Gay Men’s HIV/AIDS Prevention in
Australia: From Rubba Me in 1984 to F** k Me in 2009.’ Sexualities 15 (7): 834–849.
doi:10.1177/1363460712454079
Downloaded by [54.152.109.166] at 03:45 09 September 2015

Leonard, William, and Anne Mitchell. 2000. The Use of Sexually Explicit Materials in HIV/
AIDS Initiatives Targeting Gay Men: A Guide for Educators. Canberra: Australian National
Council of AIDS, Hepatitis C and Related Diseases, Commonwealth of Australia.
McKee, Alan. 2007. ‘“Saying you’ve been at dad’s porn book is part of growing up”: youth,
pornography and education.’ Metro Magazine 155: 118–122.
McKee, Alan. 2010. ‘Does Pornography Harm Young People?’ Australian Journal of
Communication 37 (1): 17–36.
McKee, Alan, Kath Albury, and Catharine Lumby. 2008. The Porn Report. Carlton:
Melbourne University Publishing.
McNair, Brian. 2012. Porno? Chic! How Pornography Changed the World and Made it a Better
Place. London: Routledge
Mowlabocus, Sharif. 2012. ‘Porn Laid Bare.’ Accessed August 20, 2013. http://www.
pornlaidbare.co.uk/health-promotion/
Naish, John. 2005. ‘The Hardcore Way to Safer Sex.’ The Times Online, October 5. Accessed
July 19, 2006. www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,8122-1760915,00.html
O’Brien, Susie. 2013. ‘Victorian State Schools Analyse Pornography as Part of Ground-
breaking New Sexuality Programs.’ Herald Sun, July 23. Accessed August 20, 2013. http://
www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/victorian-state-school-students-analyse-pornography-
as-part-of-groundbreaking-new-sexuality-programs/story-fni0fit3-1226683446977
Perrin, Paul, Hala Madanat, Michael Barnes, Athena Carolan, Robert Clark, Natasha Ivins,
Steven Tuttle, Heidi Vogeler, and Patrick Williams. 2008. ‘Health Education’s Role in
Framing Pornography as a Public Health Issue: Local and National Strategies with
International Implications.’ Global Health Promotion 1 (15): 11–18.
Phillpott, Annie. 2004. ‘Can Safe Sex Be Good Sex? Mixing Pleasure and Prevention.’ In
Choices, December: 18–19. Accessed August 20, 2013. http://www.euro.who.int/__data/
assets/pdf_file/0006/78567/Choices_2004_SHA.pdf
Ramlagun, Pamela. 2012. ‘“Don’t Call Me Weird, but I Normally Watch Porn” – Girls,
Sexuality and Porn.’ Agenda: Empowering women for Gender Equity 26 (3): 31–37.
Reading, Anna. 2005. ‘Professing Porn or Obscene Browsing? On Proper Distance in the
University Classroom.’ New Media and Society 27 (1): 123–130.
Ruddock, Jackie, and Iain Kain. 2006. ‘Seeking Pleasure in Politics of Power: Interrogating
Ideas of Pleasure in The Sex Practices and Choices of Marginalised (Queer) Young People.’
Paper presented at the National HIV and Related Diseases Conference, National Centre for
HIV and Social Research (NCHSR), University of NSW, Sydney, April 20–21.
Scott-Sheldon, Lori, and Blair Johnson. 2006. ‘Eroticising Creates Safer Sex: A Research
Synthesis.’ Journal of Primary Prevention 27 (6): 619–640. doi:10.1007/s10935-006-0059-3
Smith, Clarissa. 2009. ‘Pleasure and Distance: Exploring Sexual Cultures in the Classroom.’
Sexualities 12: 568–585. doi:10.1177/1363460709340368
 Porn Studies 181

Štulhofer, Aleksandar, Vesna Buško, and Ivan Landripet. 2010. ‘Pornography, Sexual
Socialization, and Satisfaction Among Young Men.’ Archives of Sexual Behavior 39 (1):
168–178. doi:10.1007/s10508-008-9387-0
Tjaden, Patricia G. 1988. ‘Pornography and Sex Education.’ Journal of Sex Research 24 (1):
208–212. doi:10.1080/00224498809551413
Turnbull, Sue. 1993. ‘The Media: Moral Lessons and Moral Careers.’ Australian Journal of
Education 37 (2): 153–168. doi:10.1177/000494419303700204
Tydén, Tanja, and Christina Rogala. 2004. ‘Sexual Behaviour among Young Men in Sweden
and the Impact of Pornography.’ International Journal of STDs and AIDS 15: 590–593.
Watson, Mary Ann, and Randyl D. Smith, 2012. ‘Positive Porn: Educational, Medical, and
Clinical Uses.’ American Journal of Sexuality Education 7 (2): 122–145. doi:10.
1080/15546128.2012.680861
Watt, Nicholas. 2013. ‘Gove and Clegg Divided Over Teaching about Internet Pornography
Threat.’ The Guardian. Accessed September 6, 2013. http://www.theguardian.com/politics/
2013/sep/05/gove-clegg-internet-pornography
Waugh, Thomas. 1996. Hard to Imagine: Gay Male Eroticism in Photography and Film from
Their Beginnings to Stonewall. New York: Colombia University Press.
Downloaded by [54.152.109.166] at 03:45 09 September 2015

Wolf, Naomi. 2003. ‘The Porn Myth: In the End, Porn Doesn’t Whet Men’s Appetites – It
Turns Them Off the Real Thing.’ New York Magazine. Accessed September 13, 2009.
http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/trends/n_9437/index1.html

View publication stats