My Sexual Entertainment, My Vote: How Attitudes Toward Condom Use in Pornography Related to Support for California’s Condom Law

Original Paper

Abstract

In 2016, Californians voted down Proposition #60, which aimed to mandate condom use in pornography. Using an online survey administered through Amazon’s Mechanical Turk, this study assessed how California citizens’ sexual entertainment preferences and viewing behaviors relate to their support for regulation. Findings generally suggest some aversion to condom use in pornography, especially among heterosexual males. Data suggest the more pornography one watches, the more averse one is to condoms in pornography, as well more opposed to regulation. Results varied more by gender than sexual orientation. Implications for third-person effects in relation to highly stigmatized topics are discussed.

Keywords

Adult entertainment Pornography Condom use Voting Media and social science 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

Kyla Garrett Wagner declares that he/she has no conflict of interest. Joseph M. Cabosky declares that he/she has no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. Brosius, H. B., & Engel, D. (1996). The causes of third-person effects: Unrealistic optimism, impersonal impact, or generalized negative attitudes towards media influence? International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 8(2), 142–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. California Proposition 60: The California Safer Sex in the Adult Film Industry Act, California. (2015). Retrieved from https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/initiatives/pdfs/15-0004%20(Safer%20Sex)_8.pdf?.
  3. Davison, W. P. (1983). The third-person effect in communication. Public Opinion Quarterly, 47(1), 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Downing, M. J., Jr., Schrimshaw, E. W., Antebi, N., & Siegel, K. (2014). Sexually explicit media on the Internet: A content analysis of sexual behaviors, risk, and media characteristics in gay male adult videos. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 43(4), 811–821.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Downing, M. J., Schrimshaw, E. W., Scheinmann, R., Antebi-Gruszka, N., & Hirshfield, S. (2017). Sexually explicit media use by sexual identity: A comparative analysis of gay, bisexual, and heterosexual men in the United States. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 46(6), 1763–1776.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gaither, G. A., Rownkranz, R. R., Amato-henderson, S., Plaud, J. J., & Bigwood, S. J. (1996). The effect of condoms in sexually explicit narratives on male sexual arousal. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 22(2), 103–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gorman, S., Monk-Turner, E., & Fish, J. N. (2010). Free adult Internet web sites: How prevalent are degrading acts? Gender Issues, 27(3–4), 131–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Grudzen, C. R., Elliott, M. N., Kerndt, P. R., Schuster, M. A., Brook, R. H., & Gelberg, L. (2009). Condom use and high-risk sexual acts in adult films: A comparison of heterosexual and homosexual films. American Journal of Public Health, 99(S1), S152–S156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gunther, A. C. (1995). Overrating the X-rating: The third-person perception and support for censorship of pornography. Journal of Communication, 45(1), 27–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kraus, S. W., & Rosenberg, H. (2016). Lights, camera, condoms! Assessing college men’s attitudes toward condom use in pornography. Journal of American College Health, 64(2), 139–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kyes, K. B. (1990). The effect of a “safer sex” film as mediated by erotophobia and gender on attitudes toward condoms. Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality, 8(4), 1–18.Google Scholar
  12. Kyes, K. B., Brown, I. S., & Pollack, R. H. (1991). The effect of exposure to a condom script on attitudes toward condoms. Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality, 4(1), 21–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Lee, B., & Tamborini, R. (2005). Third-person effect and internet pornography: The influence of collectivism and internet self-efficacy. Journal of Communication, 55(2), 292–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lee, C., & Yang, S. (1996). Third-person perception and support for censorship of sexually explicit visual content: A Korean case. Sungkok Journalism Review, 7, 21–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lo, V. H., & Paddon, A. (2001). Third-person effect, gender differences, pornography exposure and support for restriction of pornography. Asian Journal of Communication, 11(1), 120–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lo, V. H., & Wei, R. (2002). Third-person effect, gender, and pornography on the internet. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 46(1), 13–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lo, V. H., Wei, R., & Wu, H. (2010). Examining the first, second and third-person effects of Internet pornography on Taiwanese adolescents: Implications for the restriction of pornography. Asian Journal of Communication, 20(1), 90–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Mowlabocus, S., Harbottle, J., & Witzel, C. (2014). What we can’t see? Understanding the representations and meanings of UAI, barebacking, and semen exchange in gay male pornography. Journal of Homosexuality, 61(10), 1462–1480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Nelson, K. M., Eaton, L. A., & Gamarel, K. E. (2017). Preferences for condomless sex in sexually explicit media among Black/African American men who have sex with men: Implications for HIV prevention. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 46(4), 977–985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Pauly, M. (2016). California’s Fight Over Condoms in Porn Is About to Climax. Mother Jones. Retrieved from http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/10/condoms-porn-ballot-initiative-proposition-60.
  21. Peter, J., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2006). Adolescents’ exposure to sexually explicit material on the Internet. Communication Research, 33(2), 178–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Sullivan, G. (2014). How making actors wear condoms could kill California’s porn business. The Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/08/06/how-making-actors-wear-condoms-could-kill-californias-porn-business/?utm_term=.5aae5ee79d1b.
  23. The New York Times. (2017). California Proposition 60—Condoms in pornographic films initiative—results: Rejected. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/california-ballot-measure-60-adult-film-health-reqs.
  24. Vannier, S. A., Currie, A. B., & O’Sullivan, L. F. (2014). Schoolgirls and soccer moms: A content analysis of free “teen” and “MILF” online pornography. The Journal of Sex Research, 51(3), 253–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Wright, S. S., & Kyes, K. B. (1996). The effects of safer-sex stories on college students’ attitudes toward condoms. Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality, 8(4), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Zhao, X., & Cai, X. (2008). From self-enhancement to supporting censorship: The third-person effect process in the case of Internet pornography. Mass Communication and Society, 11(4), 437–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of North Carolina at Chapel HillChapel HillUSA
  2. 2.University of North Carolina at Chapel HillDurhamUSA

Personalised recommendations