Sex Toys – Something More to Enjoy?

“Sex toys” – the term encompasses everything from dildos and vibrators to whips and floggers, with all sorts of things in between.  Whether you’ve gone into a store to buy them, looked at them online for shits and giggles, or just seen them thrown on the field at sports games, I think most adults are at least somewhat familiar with sex toys in some form. However, despite this widespread knowledge, sex toys are a topic that--like most other topics in sexuality it seems--divides people. Some would have you believe they’re no big deal, walking around with them out in the open, freely, just to make a point, others would have you think they’re ruining our relationships at every turn. So, I think it’s about time we asked, what’s the truth? To vibe or not to vibe? That is the question.

The fact is that near half of all *cis-women are already using one of the industry’s most popular products, vibrators, during masturbation. And the numbers are even higher in queer women (Herbenick et al., 2009)! Most vibrator-using women report that they have more intense orgasms and nearly half say they have multiple orgasms (Davis et al., 1996). Some even say sex toys were integral to the best orgasms of their lives (Fahs, 2014). But women aren’t the only ones who get something out of vibrators; *cis-men can reap the benefits too—but current studies show they’re considerably less likely to do so. Less than one fifth of men report that they use vibrators in solitary sex play (Reece et al., 2009). Although all of the data presented thus far concern the use of sex toys in solitary sexual activity (masturbation), sex toys also have an important role in partnered sexual activity.

Around 40% of people report that they’ve used a vibrator with their partner at some point (Herbenick et al., 2009; Reece et al., 2009). Moreover, 75% of queer female couples have used vibrators, and just as many queer male couples have used sex toys of any kind (Schick et al.,  2011; Rosenberger et al., 2012). And that is perhaps with good reason: vibrator users experience less sexual dysfunction than their non-using counterparts perhaps because their bodies are more primed for sexual response and thus, respond better – think along the lines of “use it or lose it” (Herbenick et al., 2009; Reece et al., 2009). In fact, research has shown that men who had not been able to reach orgasm during partnered sexual activity benefitted from using a penile vibrator – it restored their ability to orgasm with a partner. Likewise, for women, vibrator use can combat the natural downward trend in sexual functioning in domains such as lubrication, pain, and arousal, that comes with age (Nelson et al., 2007; Herbenick et al., 2009). So overall, both men and women who use vibrators tend to be more sexually functional than non-vibrator users.

Now, you might hear some ask, “But won’t a vibrator make me numb to other sensations?”. Well, fear not! Nearly three fourths of all women that use vibrators reported absolutely no side effects! They didn’t experience any of the common concerns such as numbness, irritation, pain, or swelling, and even amongst those that did experience one of these, the most common side effect was numbness which only lasted a day or more in 0.5% of cases (Herbenick et al., 2009). Sorry men, we don’t have any research on vibrator use side effects for you (yet!).

That’s not to say there are no risks with using sex toys. In regards to using vibrators, 1% of women reported vaginal tears, and about 8% reported swelling. They’re small numbers, but they aren’t zero (Herbenick et al., 2009). Vagina-owners also face the unique problem with sex toys of the possibility of bacterial vaginosis, a condition causing unusual smell and discharge, from using improperly cleaned sex toys (Fethers et al., 2009). Bacterial vaginosis can be avoided with proper cleaning, but it remains a possibility.

Now, keep in mind that not all sex toys are created equally. Some are made with high quality medical grade materials, while the material in others can actually be toxic (Biesanz, 2007). Not to mention that some toys are a lot more complicated to use than others, and some can only be used in specific ways. Incorrect toy use can cause some serious problems, such as requiring surgical intervention to remove vibrators and dildos from rectums (Holzer, 2012). This is why sexual health education is important in order to help minimize harmful situations. In fact, people who are more likely to use sex toys are also more likely to know more about how to avoid these and other risks of sexual activity (Herbenick et al., 2009).

That’s not the only sexual health area in which vibrator users have a leg up though. A link has also been found between vibrator use and engagement in serious and important sexual health practices for both men and women; gynecological exams and self-genital exams for women, and testicular exams for men. Using a toy seems to be associated with higher comfort with your body, and this higher comfort might be related to higher comfort levels with doing self-examinations and visiting the doctor to check up on genital health (Herbenick et al., 2009; Reece et al., 2009).

All of this to say: Using sex toys is pretty common (but it might not be for everyone) and doing so is associated with many positive effects in terms of sexual outcomes. It is also important to remember that the inclusion of toys in sex is only one facet in a vast array of potential experiences that make up one’s overall sexuality, and some of these aspects play a much bigger role than a sex toy ever could. Using a sex toy could help, that’s true, but good sex means much more than putting a toy between your legs. Positions, exploration, communication, attraction to your partner(s), and so much more all matter as well (Mark & Herbenick, 2014). A sex toy can’t make up for a deficit anywhere else in one’s sexual well-being. But, if you’re already doing well on all other fronts, maybe a good vibe is all you need.

Colleen Chappell, 5th Year Psychology/Gender Studies BAH. Student at Queen’s University.

*Please note that because of available research on the topic this blog post is unfortunately incredibly trans-exclusionary. All research referenced was done with cisgender individuals and relied heavily on sex = gender assumptions and no research was available on trans-identified individuals’ experiences with sex toys. While I could have chosen to replace the researchers’ gendered language with more gender-neutral language (e.g., referred to people with vulvas and people with penises instead of men and women), I chose to be consistent with the language used in the research papers.

 

References

Zach Biesanz (2007). Dildos, Artificial Vaginas, and Phthalates: How Toxic Sex Toys Illustrate a Broader Problem for Consumer Protection. Law & Ineq. 203

Davis, Clive M., Blank, Joani, Lin, Hung-Yu and Bonilla, Consuelo (1996). Characteristics of vibrator use amoug women. The Journal of Sex Research, 33(4), 313-320.

Fahs, B. (2014). Coming to power: Women's fake orgasms and best orgasm experiences illuminate the failures of (hetero)sex and the pleasures of connection. Culture, Health & Sexuality, 16(8), 974-988.

Herbenick, D., Reece, M., Sanders, S., Dodge, B., Ghassemi, A. and Fortenberry, J. D. (2009), Prevalence and Characteristics of Vibrator Use by Women in the United States: Results from a Nationally Representative Study. The Journal of Sexual Medicine, 6, 1857–1866.

Holzer, Lukas A. (2012), A Rectal Foreign Body. European Journal of Surgical Sciences 3(1), 26-27.

Mark, K., & Herbenick, D. (2014). The Influence of Attraction to Partner on Heterosexual Women's Sexual and Relationship Satisfaction in Long-Term Relationships. Archives Of Sexual Behavior, 43(3), 563-570.

Nelson, Christian J., Ahmed, Absaar, Valenzuela, Rolando, Parker, Marilyn and Muhall, John P., (2007) Assessment of Penile Vibratory Stimulation as a Management Strategy in Men with Secondary Retarded Orgasm, Urology, 69(3), 552-555.

Fethers, Katherine A., Fairley, Christopher K., Morton, Anna, Hocking, Jane S., Hopkins, Carol, Kennedy, Lisa J., Fehler, Glenda, and Bradshaw, Catriona S. (2009). Early Sexual Experiences and Risk Factors for Bacterial Vaginosis. Journal of Infectious Disease, 200 (11), 1662-1670

Reece, M., Herbenick, D., Sanders, S. A., Dodge, B., Ghassemi, A. and Fortenberry, J. D. (2009), Prevalence and Characteristics of Vibrator Use by Men in the United States. The Journal of Sexual Medicine, 6, 1867–1874.

Rosenberger, J.G., Schick, V., Herbenick, D. et al. (2012). Sex Toy Use by Gay and Bisexual Men in the United States. Archives of Sexual Behaviour, 41(2), 449-458.

Schick, V., Herbenick, D., Rosenberger, J. G., & Reece, M. (2011). Prevalence and Characteristics of Vibrator Use among Women who have Sex with Women. Journal Of Sexual Medicine, 8(12), 3306-3315.

Revenge Porn: Making a Living Screwing You

Imagine that you start dating someone, and you and your partner consensually decide to have sex… something that is pretty standard in a relationship. Now, imagine that your partner interprets your consent to have sex with them, as consent for also having sex with all of their friends. While most people would be shocked and appalled by this suggestion, this is exactly the logic of revenge porn advocates, a sickening phenomenon that is taking the internet by storm.

Revenge porn is pornography where sexually graphic images of individuals are distributed without their consent (Citron & Franks, 2014). It includes images obtained without consent or images obtained with consent, but within the context of a private relationship. However, the most common form of revenge porn is when an individual submits an intimate (typically naked) photo of their ex-partner to exact revenge.

The fact that revenge porn exists may come as a shock to most people, but there is an alarming amount of victims sharing their stories. In 2007, a man distributed DVDs showing his ex-girlfriend performing sexual acts, putting them on random car windshields, along with her name and phone number (Citron & Franks, 2014). Holly Jacobs, another victim, had an ex hack her Facebook to post explicit images of her, as well as sent them to various revenge porn websites and her employers (Salter, Crofts, & Lee, 2013).

At this point you may be wondering what kind of person would start such a dehumanizing version of revenge. We can give credit to Hunter Moore, founder of the website “IsAnyoneUp,” where he encouraged people to submit sexually explicit images of themselves or others (Levendowski, 2014). IsAnyoneUp featured more than just nude images, and usually included the victim’s name, social media accounts, and contact information. Soon after its launch it was receiving 35,000 submissions a week, and making more than $13,000 a month in advertising revenue, setting the stage for many other websites similar to it (Stroud, 2014). These websites allow visitors to leave comments, which tend to be sexual, crude and insulting, and to make matters worse, a few of the sites ask victims for money to remove the photos.

As one can probably guess, victims are typically traumatized after finding their intimate photos and personal information on these websites. Victims of revenge porn have lost educational and career opportunities, have had to change their names, and have experienced real life stalking and harassment (Franklin, 2014). A victim describes the impact as follows, “Due to this act, I have had to legally change my name, stop publishing in my field (I am a PhD Student), change my e-mail address 4 times and my phone number 3 times, change jobs, and explain to human resources at my school that I am not a sexual predator” (Salter et al., 2013). To make matters worse, victims are met with little sympathy as they seek help. The police are often unable to charge the distributor as the images were not stolen but shared, and the FBI claims these cases should be handled solely by lawyers as they don’t threaten national security (Franklin, 2014). To top it all off, outsiders argue victims created their own situation by taking and sharing these photos, labelling these victims as stupid and slutty (Laird & Toups, 2013).

There are currently only two cases where a person has been jailed for posting revenge porn online (Salter et al., 2013). Yes, you heard that right, only two! In 2010, a man was convicted in New Zealand for hacking his ex-girlfriend’s Facebook to post a nude photo of her, after changing her privacy settings and password (Salter et al., 2013). The following year, a 20-year-old Australian man was sent to jail for 6 months after uploading naked photos of his ex onto Facebook. At this point, you may be wondering why there hasn’t been harsher consequences for not only those who produce these sites, but for the bitter ex partners who submit these photos.

One of the biggest problems with revenge porn is the limited punishment options. Unfortunately, these websites are legally protected by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act in the United States, which protects freedom of expression and innovation on the internet (Stroud, 2014). This section says that no provider or user of an interactive computer service will be treated as the publisher of any information provided by another person (Stroud, 2014).  Since revenge porn websites are publishing material that was given to them by others, Section 230 protection applies and will render nearly any lawsuit for stalking, harassment, defamation or invasion of privacy dead on arrival (Levendowski, 2014). Although revenge porn seems like a straightforward issue that should easily be penalized, the complex mix of privacy interests, online anonymity, free expression and policies concerning internet regulation calls make it a more complicated issue (Levendowski, 2014).

A few solutions have been put forward to help victims of this act get some justice, including amending Section 230, or pass new laws with hefty penalties for revenge porn uploaders and traffickers (Citron & Franks, 2014). However, as some of you may be aware, changing the law is not an easy process. Because of this challenge, another suggestion has been put forward: using copyright law as protection. Since the majority of revenge porn images are selfies, and copyright laws protect original work, reproducing revenge porn victim’s copyrighted images is illegal (Levendowski, 2014). Revenge porn victims do not need to register their copyrights or hire a lawyer. Victims only need to submit their name and signature, identify the image, provide links to the material, and a written verification that the use is unauthorized (Levendowski, 2014). It is unfortunate that using copyright is the only solution thus far, but it is a step towards justice.

Revenge porn accomplishes nothing. It is quite pitiful, and if people consider it their right to post an image of an ex that broke their heart, then something is wrong with society. With that being said, there are a number issues that revenge porn highlights. First off, it ties into the issue of consent, as many individuals argue that these women should not be sending provocative images if they do not want people to see them. However, this completely conflicts with the parameters of consent, because when we consent to do something in one situation, it is not generalizable to other situations.

Another question is: who is responsible in these situations? While many people argue that it is the ex-lover who is sending in these pictures, the blame has also been extended to include the creators of revenge porn sites and the victims themselves. So who is to blame? Is it the person who sent these intimate photos of themselves in the first place? Is it the bitter ex-lover who needed a way to get back at their ex-partner? Or is it the creators of these sites that use “revenge” as a way to make money? Many argue that the fact the image was initially consensual robs the victim of their innocence—in other words, they brought this on themselves by participating in sexual expression (Slane, 2013). This line of reasoning also calls into question everything we understand about trust and respect in an intimate relationship. It makes perfect sense to trust your partner enough to send “sexy” images. However, if we blame the victims who “should have known better,” then what does this say about trust? Should we always be skeptical of our partners?  Revenge porn also reifies the issue of a “double standard”, whereby society has different reactions to a situation depending if the person is male or female. Revenge porn punishes women for engaging in activities that men undertake with minimal negative (and often positive) consequences (Franklin, 2014); women are told they are stupid or slutty for taking these pictures, whereas men are met with praise.

Hailey Ward, BAH Psychology, Queen’s University

 

References

Citron, K. D., & Franks, A. M. (2014). Criminalizing Revenge Porn. Wake Forest Law Review, 49(345). Retrieved from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2368946

Franklin, Z. (2014). Justice for revenge porn victims: Legal theories to overcome claims of civil immunity by operators of revenge porn websites. Cal. L. Rev.102. Received from http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/calr102&div=41&g_sent=1&collection=journals

Laird, L., & Toups, H. (2013). Victims are taking on 'revenge porn' websites for posting photos they didn’t consent to. Aba Journal99(11), 1-10.

Levendowski, M. A. (2014). Using Copyright to Combat Revenge Porn. NYU Journal of Intellectual property & Entertainment Law, 3. Retrieved from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2374119

Salter M., Crofts, T. & Lee M. (2013). Beyond Criminalization and responsibilisation: Sexting, gender and young people. Current Issues in Criminal Justice, 24. Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu/4585975/Responding_to_revenge_porn_Gender_justice_and_online_legal_impunity

Slane, Andrea. (2013). Sexting and the law in Canada. The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 22(3). http://www.utpjournals.press/doi/full/10.3138/cjhs.22.3.C01

Stroud, S. R. (2014). The dark side of the online self: A pragmatist critique of the growing plague of revenge porn. Journal of Mass Media Ethics29(3). Retrieved from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08900523.2014.917976