Social scientists don't say 'titwank'

Publication Type:
Journal Article
Sexualities, 2009, 12 (5), pp. 629 - 646
Issue Date:
Full metadata record
Drawing on the textual evidence of a number of referees' reports this article maps key differences between the humanities and social sciences approaches to the study of pornography in order to facilitate better understanding and communication between the areas. 1. Social scientists avoid 'vulgar' language to describe sex. Humanities scholars need not do so. 2. Social scientists remain committed to the idea of 'objectivity' while humanities scholars reject the idea - although this may be a confusion in language, with the term in the social sciences used to mean something more like 'falsifiability'. 3. Social science assumes that the primary effects of exposure to pornography must be negative. 4. More generally, social science resists paradigm changes, insisting that all new work agrees with research that has gone before. 5. Social science believes that casual sex and sadomasochism are negative; humanities research need not do so. © 2009 SAGE Publications.
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: