Sex Roles

, Volume 43, Issue 11–12, pp 917–926 | Cite as

Kept Under the Hood: Neglect of the Clitoris in Common Vernacular

  • Shirley Matile Ogletree
  • Harvey J. Ginsburg


Even though the “clitoris” is the organ homologous to the “penis,” this term may not be commonly used as the female counterpart to the penis. We conducted three studies to examine the usage of terminology for female sexual anatomy. In the first study 57 books in a university computer database for “sex instruction” were examined for the inclusion of terms such as penis, clitoris, vagina, vulva, and uterus. Penis was mentioned more often than either the clitoris or vulva in these books. In the second and third studies we investigated the terminology used by college students as well as their sexual attitudes and knowledge. Participants in the studies were Euro-American (76%/76%, Study 2/Study 3 respectively), Hispanic (18%/14%), and African American (4%/7%); students reported that they were overwhelmingly taught vagina as the female counterpart to the penis. Believing that the inner portion of the vagina is the most sexually sensitive part of the female body correlated with negative attitudes toward masturbation (Study 2) and agreement with sex myths (Studies 2 and 3).


College Student Social Psychology Negative Attitude Female Body Sexual Attitude 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Allgeier, E. R., & Allgeier, A.R. (2000). Sexual interactions (5th ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.Google Scholar
  2. Atkins, A. (1998, August). The gender divide. Parenting, 147, 149.Google Scholar
  3. Barstow, D. (1999). Female genital mutilation: The penultimate gender abuse. Child Abuse and Neglect, 23, 501–510.Google Scholar
  4. Bem, S. L. (1998). An unconventional family. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Bennett, P. (1993). Critical clitoridectomy: Female sexual imagery and feminist psychoanalytic theory. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 18, 235–259.Google Scholar
  6. Boyd, B. M. (1999, April/May). Outside the box. Ms., IX (3), 52–53.Google Scholar
  7. Burn, H. J. (1969). Better than the birds, smarter than the bees: No nonsense answers to honest questions about sex and growing up. Nashville: Abingdon Press.Google Scholar
  8. Coventry, C. (2000, October/November). Making the cut. Ms., X (6), 52–60.Google Scholar
  9. Davis, C. M., Blank, J., Lin, H., and Bonillas, C. (1996). Characteristics of vibrator use among women. The Journal of Sex Research, 33, 313–320.Google Scholar
  10. Ellis, H. (1931). More essays of love and virtue. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, Doran, & Co.Google Scholar
  11. Freud, S. (1927). Some psychological consequences of the anatomical distinction between the sexes. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 8, 133–142.Google Scholar
  12. Hyde, J. S., & DeLamater, J.D. (2000). Understanding Human Sexuality (7th ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  13. Irvine, J.M. (1995). Sexuality education across cultures:Working with differences. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.Google Scholar
  14. McCammon, S., Knox, D., & Schacht, C. (1998). Making choices in sexuality: Research and applications. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.Google Scholar
  15. Miller, W. R., & Lief, H. I. (1976). Masturbatory attitudes, knowledge, and experience: Data from the Sex Knowledge and Attitude Test (SKAT). Archives of Sexual Behavior, 5, 447–467.Google Scholar
  16. Oliver, M. B., & Hyde, J. S. (1993). Gender differences in sexuality: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 29–51.Google Scholar
  17. Rosen, R.C., & Leiblum, S. R. (1995). Treatment of sexual disorders in the 1990s: An integrated approach. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 63, 877–890.Google Scholar
  18. Siecus. (1998, June 22). [On-line].Available: Scholar
  19. Sprecher, S., Barbee, A., & Schwartz, P. (1995). “Was it good for you, too?”: Gender differences in first sexual intercourse experiences. The Journal of Sex Research, 32, 3–15.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shirley Matile Ogletree
    • 1
  • Harvey J. Ginsburg
    • 1
  1. 1.Southwest Texas State UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations