A short paper summarising their findings was presented by the four of them in Bangkok on 9 July 2005, the last day of the 1st International Conference of Asian Queer Studies.

In this research by Andrea Goh, Melissa Say, Gerald Tan and Frederick Tong relating to sexually explicit material (SEM), they sought to explore "different groups' perceived utility of SEM to themselves and communities". They also attempted to "understand their attitudes towards restrictions towards SEM."

An anchor point for their study was Singapore's Undesirable Publications Act (UPA), which "restricts material that is 'likely to be injurious to the public good' as measured by 'standards of morality, decency, and propriety that are generally accepted by reasonable members of the community'."

The UPA allows that, "In determining... whether or not any publication is objectionable" some factors shall be considered. Of these, (c) says, "the character of the publication, including any merit, value or importance that the publication has in relation to literary, artistic, social, cultural, educational, scientific or other matters."

The 4 researchers then set out to find if Singaporeans saw any such merit in SEM, and their findings were set out in a manner that echoed the UPA.

A qualitative interview approach was used in order to obtain in-depth understanding of perceptions. More interestingly, the study took care to include gay males and gay females, in addition to straight males and females. All interviewees were between 21 and 30 years old, because "they represent the next generation of Singaporeans who may manifest changing attitudes about sexuality and SEM."

They reported difficulty in recruiting from the gay and lesbian community. In the end they used snowball sampling which was "particularly suited for studying subcultures or dispersed groups of people with specific characteristics or practices."

The interviews were conducted between 3 Dec 2004 and 7 Feb 2005. There were 41 face-to-face interviews; the respondents were predominantly Chinese. The break-up was as follows:

• 10 heterosexual males (of whom 1 was Indian) 
• 10 heterosexual females (of whom 1 was Malay) 
• 12 gay males (of whom 2 were Malay) 
• 9 lesbians (of whom 1 was Malay)

Restrictions on SEM

More than half of the respondents felt that current restrictions were too strict. This opinion came from both the heterosexual and homosexual interviewees, male and female. Respondent #36 (hetero male) said, "SEM should be an option available to us, at least those of age, like above 21."

Respondent #27 (hetero female) said, "the way to protect our children is to educate them how to think sensibly and know their values, not shrink-wrapping or banning anything potentially objectionable that might come their way."

However, respondent #38 (hetero male) was of the view that "having yourself exposed to sex and the casualness of sex, I think it shapes your values of sex in a way."

About a quarter of the respondents, both straight and gay, felt that restrictions are just about right. Interestingly, when probed for their reasons, the heterosexuals tended to offer the view that "there are other [avenues] to go" and that "it's pretty hard to block things on the internet these days." This suggests that they see it as just right, only because escape routes are, in practice, available.

Gays and lesbians tended to offer different reasons why restrictions are just right. They pointed to the possibility of a "backlash" should the general public be more exposed to SEM (and one assumes they were referring to homosexual SEM).

 
Different treatment of material

Some three-quarters of all interviewees felt that sexually explicit content for a gay or lesbian audience should be treated the same way as that for a heterosexual audience. Even in the straight subset, this was the majority opinion.

Respondent #26 (hetero female) said, "sex is sex. Whether it's with someone of the opposite sex or not, I don't think it should matter."

Respondent #15 (lesbian female) feared that "if you open the floodgates" to gay and lesbian SEM, "there would probably be ... some backlash... So if they want to do it, they should do it gradually."

Of the dissenters, respondent #37 (hetero male) provided a somewhat tautological argument. "If it is deemed that homosexual relationships and activities are not natural or illegal, then they should be treated differently."

 
Value of sexually explicit material – artistic

All 22 male respondents found some degree of artistic value in SEM. Respondent #1 (gay male) said it can be "very beautiful.... like a dance, like a choreographed piece."

However, there were also instances when it wes hard to see artistic value. E.g. when "it is really catered to sexual gratification." (Respondent #17, gay male).

However, respondent #15 (lesbian female) said that even the most explicit SEM "teaches people to see beauty" and by banning SEM, people might simply dismiss such material as having little or no value.

Respondent #31 (hetero, female) argued that through such images, one can "explore some emotional background... or some mental processes" thereby deriving artistic value.

As the researchers said in their report, the stigma attached to SEM might occlude its artistic value. For example, respondent #34 (hetero male) said, "when anything is thought of as dirty, it's hard to see any value in it."

Less than half the gay and lesbian respondents saw literary value in SEM. Likewise, only 8 out of 20 heterosexual respondents said SEM had possible literary value.

Respondent #17 (gay male) said, "if hardcore writing, I think the word you want to use is blasé or crude. For a work to have some literary value, I feel it should not be so explicit [and] should leave a lot of room for imagination."

On the other hand, respondent #31 (hetero female) countered that literary value can still be present if "the author is able to word and express all these emotions or whatever physical yearning...."

 
Value of sexually explicit material – scientific

Only one respondent, a gay male, saw any scientific value in SEM. Respondent #16 said such material allowed him to "explore the whole spectrum of human behaviour."

 
Value of sexually explicit material – cultural

The researchers reported that all 12 gay male respondents perceived such material as having some cultural value, it being part of their gay culture, but interestingly, a majority (7 of 9) of lesbians didn't see any cultural value in SEM.

Most heterosexual males (8 of 10) also saw cultural value in SEM.

Respondent #26 (hetero female) felt that SEM "Could be an important part of a guy's culture, but definitely not part of [her] lifestyle."

More bluntly, respondent #41 (hetero male) said, "99% of guys masturbate... it definitely exists in our culture."

Respondent #4 (gay male) was even more succinct "all men are horny."

The gay males were in disagreement as to what extent gay SEM was part of gay male culture. Striking a balance, respondent #16 (gay male) said, "It's part of the gay culture as much as straight pornography is part of the straight culture."

Among the heterosexuals, 'culture' had different connotations from the gays and lesbians. Some interpreted 'culture' as the national or Singapore culture, and 7 heterosexuals did not feel that SEM was part of Singapore culture.

 
Value of sexually explicit material – educational

Most gays and lesbians (16 out of 21) acknowledged that people could learn about sexual practices from SEM.

Respondent #1 (gay male) said it could give you an idea how to do it in bed "so you don't seem like a greenhorn."

To a similar extent, most heterosexuals (17 out of 20) agreed that SEM offered possible value for educating about sexual practices.

Respondent #23 (hetero female): "Watching porn actually allows [people] to explore fantasies."

For a gay male like me, it was interesting to see the comment by respondent #25 (hetero female), that watching porn allowed viewers to "familiarize [themselves] with [their] own anatomy and that of members of the opposite sex." Gee, I never thought of that before. Same-sex lovers like me don't have any need to familiarise ourselves with the anatomy of the opposite sex.

As for the educational value towards safer sex, most gay and lesbian respondents felt that SEM could help convey such messages. Heterosexual respondents were however, equally split on this question.

Respondent #20 (gay male) said the message would be particularly vivid when one sees "a piece of rubber on a 10-inch dick."

One straight male had equally, if not more, eye-popping fantasies. Respondent #34 (hetero male) said, "guys will see that condoms are useful . . . on a dick that’s like 10, 12 inches"

However, respondent #30 (hetero female) brought people back to reality. She questioned how SEM could promote safer sex when "there doesn’t seem to be any emphasis on using condoms or contraception."

 
Value of sexually explicit material – social

Most homosexual respondents (15 out of 21) felt that SEM helped towards their identity formation.

Respondent #15 (lesbian female) said, "It’s good to know that such materials are available. It means that there are people out there who are like you, that there are people who deal with the same issues that I do."

"It was from watching porn that I know I do not like girls," said respondent #6 (gay male).

Respondent #8 (gay male) noted that watching SEM "helps you set the boundaries of what you can accept." By knowing one’s personal boundaries, one is then able to determine one’s preferences, as argued by respondent #17 (gay male) "being sexually aware [is] very important for anybody"

On the other hand, the minority of gay and lesbian respondents believed that their identity formation was primarily an internal process, in which SEM was not necessary.

8 out of 20 heterosexual respondents believed such material was integral to their identity formation.

Respondent #28 (hetero female) said SEM helped her learn "the art of appreciating the expression of sex," while respondent #33 (hetero male) said it helped him to "understand that sex can be beautiful."

Not surprisingly, many of the other heterosexual respondents didn't think they needed SEM for their sexual identity. As respondent #38 (hetero male) said, "Because I’m not homosexual, I find no need to validate [my] sexuality."

However, even among the heterosexuals, SEM could validate their specific tastes and identities. Respondent #28 (hetero female) identified with gothic porn. "It is a huge part of my life, it is part of what’s the main focus in my life, on all things to do with Goth."

As for social awareness, about half of the gay and lesbian respondents argued that SEM might create awareness of the group's existence and place in society. Respondent #14 said, it is this lack of SEM in Singapore that reinforces the way in which "people still treat gay people as a social stigma."

Respondent #15 (lesbian female) suggested it might take time. "You expose people to it, people would mature over time..... to know how to deal with such stuff."

The presence of gay and lesbian SEM in the social space might, according to respondent #2 (lesbian female) "lead to equality that would affirm [our] existence."

Respondent #16 (gay male) likewise believed that SEM could help increase visibility, and "challenge the heterosexual male hegemony on pornography."

Then again, as respondent #11 (lesbian female) said, "It makes people more aware of what’s happening, but not in the very perfect way that we want people to see us."

The heterosexual perspective was much more focussed on how it would impact women, rather than on heterosexuals as a group.

Respondent #36 (hetero male) noted that some porn "is really obviously demeaning to women."

Yet, at least one woman argued that such material might help raise "some underlying social problems like the exploitation of women," like questioning "why the woman [is] always on the bottom" (Respondent #32, hetero female).

Respondent #37 (hetero male) was concerned about how each gender tended to be used. "like for example that of sexual servants and objects, are expected of or limited to females."

But respondent #27 (hetero female) felt "most people do realize that such material involves really exaggerated gender roles,"

 
Value of sexually explicit material – other merits

The researchers also asked if respondents saw other possible merits in SEM. They got quite interesting responses. For example, the researchers said they found that "such material can also play a cathartic role as a replacement for sex with others or as a form of release."

Respondent #27 (hetero female) said SEM can be seen as a better alternative to "trying to sleep around or buying sex."

Respondent #21 (gay male) pointed out that it can be seen as a safer outlet than having unprotected sex and risking exposure to HIV.

Two gay males found political value in SEM, as a measure of a society's liberalism but also in other ways.

Respondent #16 (gay male) mentioned certain images, like an Asian playing the dominant role amongst Caucasians, could suggest the idea of a post-colonial rejection of colonial roles, which could be seen as anti-hegemonic. He said, "There’s the whole reversal of the exoticized Oriental you know, now assuming a position of dominance. I mean, I can’t think of anything more political than . . . the previously-colonized Oriental fucking the ass of the . . . Occidental . . . white master."

The researchers noted that while Singapore's UPA did not specifically name 'political value' as a redeeming value for SEM to escape censorship, this is a permitted argument in the US.

The above merely skims through the study's findings on how Singaporeans perceived merit in sexually explicit material. But the study didn't stop there. For balance, it went on to enquire about harm.

 
Harmful effects - cognitive

Many arguments about how it can be degrading to women are not new, but an important feeling that men might not realise is this by respondent #15 (lesbian female). She was "very much against . . . straight men . . . being turned on by lesbian sex," which she found prevalent in straight porn.

Gay male respondent #16 highlighted that while gay porn subverts the notion that "all gay men are sissies," at the same time, it also imposes a "beauty myth", which is a kind of "beauty fascism."

 
Harmful effects - affective

Interestingly, most males (6 out of 11 gay males and 8 out of 10 straight males) had at some time felt guilty about accessing SEM. This was not the case with most females. There were comments that the struggles were related to religion, while others felt they were cheating on their girlfriends.

 
Harmful effects – behavioural

4 out of 10 straight males and 5 out of 12 gay males confessed to having spent too much time on SEM, at least in the past.

4 respondents (1 gay male, 3 heterosexual males) said their "real-life interactions with people had ever been adversely affected." Ways in which that happened included one's interaction with people in social contexts becoming too sexually overt, as reported by respondent #17 (gay male).

Respondent #38 (hetero male) said "it was porn that drove [him] to expect and hope for more than [he] should" from his girlfriend.

 
Harmful effects – external

The gay and lesbian respondents were concerned that their SEM might reinforce negative stereotypes of themselves in the general community and might therefore lead to a backlash. "Some straight men consuming these images can actually feel threatened," said respondent #16 (gay male).

Heterosexual respondents were more concerned about the negative effects of SEM on behaviour. Respondent #24 was concerned that the young would become "misguided" while respondent #25 was concerned about creating "perverts". Both were hetero females.

The lengthy discussion reviewed their numerous findings, and it's too lengthy to go through their thoughts here. 

However, with respect to harm, they reminded the reader that "while almost all respondents reported finding portrayals of women in SEM degrading, it cannot be extrapolated whether this had the effect on their attitudes towards rape myths and pre-marital and extramarital sex."

On a separate note, pertaining to gays and lesbians, "the question of whether SEM harmed them by promoting the recreational function of sex over its reproductive one, as raised by the conservative-moralists, is a non-issue."

Overall, the researchers found that "there was some acceptance of SEM in Singapore by our respondents," but it would be "premature to reach conclusions about whether the different types of value outweigh the harms in such material."

They hoped that "through these findings, [they] have managed to create a base from which conceptualization of the definitions of value can begin," and consequently "a better interpretation of the treatment of SEM in Singapore might be possible."

* * * * 

 
Yawning Bread thinks that this has been a very needed and useful study. Too much of the discourse on porn comes from agenda-driven posturing. It is laudable that these 4 young men and women have set out to ask what users of porn think about it. What value have they obtained from it? How has porn hurt them?

This is a fine example of getting away from the shibboleth, and looking for knowledge even in areas often considered taboo.

© Yawning Bread