“Is Society a Sex-Parlor?

”:
Examining Pornography’s Effect on 21st
Century Culture.

Benjamin Hayden

ID# 500850

Instructor: Dr. Rebecca Sullivan

Film 405 – L01

 Date of Submission: May 1st, 2009.

“Is Society a Sex-Parlor?”: Examining Pornography’s Effect on 21st Century

Culture in Debbie Does Dallas Films.

In 1979, a team of cheerleaders takes refuge in a locker room. Debbie and her

entourage of bubbly teenage sex-bombs were deciding how to achieve their goal of

raising money. Thirty years later, orgasm after orgasm, Debbie emerges hornier than

before, ready to greet North American society. No one is exchanging money for Debbie

this time, because in the 21st century everyone can be Debbie. Digital innovation offers

comfort, security, variety, and opportunities to people who want to be their own porn

industry. The Internet has altered the stream of porn exchange from seller-to-buyer, to

free file sharing, to personal sex cameras. Digital technology affecting the direction of

pornography’s impact on society will be initially examined. Secondly, Pornography

transitioning from an independent spectacle of the underground to a more acceptable

mainstream element will be examined for its consequence at the present. Finally, the

combination of technology with greater cultural acceptance of pornography leads to

today’s sexualized culture. Speculations on a future sexualized culture will also be

examined. The Debbie Does Dallas films represent how increased digital technology

coupled with the mainstreaming of pornography has created a sexualized culture with an

uncertain future.

It takes people to make porn. Laurence O’Toole comments on contemporary

technologies uniting users, he states:

“In an era of convergence, where computers, televisions, phones, cables, video and
compact disk technology are starting to merge in multimedia harmony, more people than
ever before are gaining access through new technology to sexual materials and
communities of like-minded types” (O’Toole, 1998. p. 274).

2
← Internet users converging in social network communities are the same from

SuicideGirls.com to Facebook.com. Feona Attwood believes that these types of digital

communication have a bearing on people’s identities, she explains, “Digital technologies

are changing the kinds of ‘identity work’ performed in western cultures and self-

presentation is increasingly mediated”(Attwood, 2007. p. 452). Increased self-

presentation coupled with O’Toole’s comments on “multimedia harmony” presents 21st

century communications technology as like a vaudeville show. Suicide Girls online and

pre-teens bearing themselves over Facebook are similar in that they self-present to others

who are anonymous over the Internet.

← O’Toole remarks on diversity of interest in digital porn, he states, “the

hip new internet phenomenon has made porn more culturally acceptable to many more

people” (O’Toole, 1998. p. 274). “Many more people” applies to Debbie Loves Dallas

because Vivid Alt. is a branch of Vivid productions that reaches out to encompass

counter-mainstream music cultures, such as ‘punk’, ‘goth’, ‘electro’, and ‘indy’. These

cultures thrive in online community forums that trade music and concert details instead of

porn videos. Debbie Loves Dallas as a counter-culture porn acknowledges groups of

individuals who don’t find “classic-Debbie” sexually attractive. Vivid alt. pinpoints

trends, recruits “lost-souls”, or regular-souls that are converted to “lost souls”, and

finally, are filmed having sex to arouse “lost-souls”. Attwood acknowledges

pornography’s attempt to blanket our entire culture with pornographic categorization, she

states:

← “[Internet technologies] are part of a ‘reconfiguration of erotic life’ in

3
← which sex and commerce are combined. The rapid growth of new forms of online
pornography and the taste cultures that grow up around them are blurring the boundaries
between porn and other aesthetics, between commercial and non-commercial forms of
sex, between consumption and community, and between sex as representation and self-
presentation, recreation and relation”(Attwood, 2007. P. 453).

Attwood acknowledging the “blurring [of] boundaries” connects to O’Toole’s view

regarding changes of opinion, he similarity suggests, “people found that easy-access

telecommunications changed their view on many things: politics, the world, the

establishment media, and also maybe porn.” (O’Toole, 1998. P. 275). Technology

altering opinions about porn helped lead to its widespread acceptance. Debbie hiding in

the locker room is now a thing of the past. O’Toole offers a similar standpoint regarding

pornography’s acceptance, he states, “The internet was coming straight to you and

enabled porn to be reconsidered and found to be not such a terrible thing after

all”(O’Toole, 1998. p. 275). Social networks and less expensive, more powerful

technology put producing in the hands of the consumer. Attwood suggests:

4
 ← Pornographers may operate independently of the established industry in new and
alternative ways, while small groups of independent and ‘savvy media practitioners’ are
producing and distributing alternative porn in online arenas for peer-to-peer sharing, sex
activists and art networks. (Attwood, 2007 p. 442).

DIY porn is vertically integrated because domestic pornographers can control the

industry aspects of production, distribution, and exhibition. Craigslist.com is seeking an

actress for a low-budget porn film in Calgary this month.1 The job-ad on Craigslist.com

shows that DIY porn can be filmed even semi-professionally anywhere in the 21st

century. Digital communications technologies are enabling anyone to be Debbie.

← In Debbie Does Dallas, one of the cheerleaders has sex with her principal,

afterwards, he comments, “this is a good company you girls have formed!”(Debbie Does

Dallas). This line of dialogue represents the shifting attitude of the mainstream towards

accepting pornography. The principal’s comment makes it seem that even the most strict

authority figure experiences sexual fantasies for teenage girls. The scene in question

reasserts the principal figure’s power of authority, not only as an educational overseer,

but a sexual partner, thus affirming his sexual prowess. Acceptance of pornography is

suggested through a coupling of the taboo of principal-student intercourse, as well as his

comment. This is so because the dialogue is spoken by an authority figure that is made to

seem all knowing.

Pornography’s acceptance is aided by a mainstream fascination with sex. Karen

← Boyle contributes to the mainstream fascination argument, she states:

← “The pornographisation of the mainstream can be seen both in the widespread

visibility of sexually explicit representations outside what we normally recognize as
pornography, and in the fascination with commercial sex and those who sell it in
mainstream shows”(Boyle, 2008. p. 37).

1
http://calgary.en.craigslist.ca/tfr/1124567522.html

5
“Sell[ing] sex in the mainstream” increases interest in pornography because mainstream-

built intensity often denies the audience any pornographic visual. Bring It On, a

cheerleading movie, contains no pornographic content, whereas Debbie Does Dallas,

another cheerleading movie, does contain pornography. The two industries therefore

angle society’s interest in sex to run parallel, evoking an overall acceptance of it. Boyle

elaborates on the connection between porn and mainstream and the results, she explains

are, “part of the reason for this shift in academic responses to pornography [is because]

the increasing sexualisation—some would say pornographisation—of mainstream culture

that makes it increasingly difficult to define the boundaries of pornography”(Boyle, 2008.

P. 38). Debbie Does Dallas aesthetically embodies this difficulty of distinction. The use

of emotional music, elliptical editing that keeps attention focused at cinematic pacing,

and a filmic duration of eighty minutes all serve to blur the distinction between cinema

and pornography. There is now a place in mainstream society for Debbie.

Boyle realizes that the subject of pornography is widespread in mainstream

entertainment culture, stating:

“The acceptability of pornography and commercial sex is heralded by everyday media

references. Alongside the proliferation of television documentaries about sex and the sex
industry, hard-core pornography is an increasingly legitimate subject in mainstream film.
Mainstream sitcoms and dramas are peppered with sniggering jokes about strippers and
pornography and porn stars’ celebrity is becoming increasingly crossover”
(Boyle, 2008. P. 38).

Mainstream productions such as The House Bunny, “The Smoking Jacket” episode of

Curb Your Enthusiasm, “Amazon Women in the Mood” episode of Futurama, and

countless others operate with pornography as a dominant theme in the production.

Mainstream representations of pornography validate its existence for the purposes of

6
extracting content from the sex-industry, which the mainstream conversely turns into

material for its own endeavors. The dismantling of the Hayes office, or, the censorship

board, was in part due to increased desire to feature more suggestive content. From a

business standpoint, it was necessary for Hollywood to restructure censorship because the

decline of postwar movie attendance left Hollywood desperately seeking material to

attract teenage viewers. Attracting teenage viewers aids pornography’s existence through

acknowledgement by the mainstream.

Richard Dyer comments on the historical sexual dilemma faced by men, he states,

“since the 1950’s, social and economic shifts have occurred that have weakened the

structure of men’s dominance of the public world…[Since then] sexuality has become

increasingly problematic for men”(Dyer, 1985. P. 48-50). Teenage and adult males

navigating their sexualities indefinitely come across pornography. Dyer comments on the

acceptance of pornography, “it is as if, by staring hard enough, the [viewer] can somehow

come to possess and master his subversive sexual difference”(Dyer, 1985. P. 56).

Pornography challenges North American males to have heightened sexual prowess.

Debbie Does Dallas…Again illustrates the desire for a ceaseless sexual lifestyle when

Debbie is having sex in heaven. Debbie asking, “Please tell me there’s fucking after

death”(Debbie Does Dallas…Again) informs the viewer that even after someone dies,

they still should have sex. The sex scene in “heaven” confirms this when an “angel” is

having sex with Debbie, inviting men to believe that cheerleaders are waiting in heaven

to have sex. Whether or not this is Vivid’s mediation on the afterlife, it represents a

newfound fixation on sex.

Harris Gaffin describes the job requirements of a Vivid employee, he states,

7
“Keith Bailey watches porno films eight hours a day, five days a week, rating and

categorizing in minute detail every aspect of every item in every scene”(Gaffin, 1997).

8
← Keith’s position represents our sexualized culture because the American market is

paying for someone to preview and categorize endless amounts of recorded sex. Luke

Ford interviews the workers of porno-valley. Ford interviews Phil Tobais, a porn star

who wonders why women won’t date him, he complains, “I want to be respected and I

want people to be proud of me. One of the biggest disadvantages of working in erotic

films is that you constantly have to explain yourself. It’s caused me problems with

women”(Ford, 1999. P. 103). Phil Tobais and Keith Bailey represent sexualized culture

from the perspectives of porn star and producer. Keith Bailey represents Attwood’s belief

about new pornography, she states that, “[Bailey coordinates] a ‘reconfiguration of erotic

life’ in which sex and commerce are combined”(Attwood, 2007. P. 453). This is so

because Bailey categorizes porn for compilation DVD’s, which appeal to any range of

customer. Phil Tobias counter-represents Boyle’s statement about porn actors, she

explains:

← “These men…are not held accountable for the decisions they make and their
decisions are unquestioned, naturalized: their demand for a particular sexual “service” is
not at issue, but the women’s willingness to supply it is”(Boyle, 2008. P. 41).

Boyle’s observations are correctly reflected within porn, however, on the outside, Tobias

is denied by women who will not date him because he is hyper-sexualized. Phil’s

frustration taken as a counter-point to Boyle’s statement shows that Phil, as the porn star

he is, cannot realize why women won’t date him. Phil believes that his profession grants

immunity because having sex with women is not his passion, but his job. Phil Tobias and

Keith Bailey show how porn industry workers are desensitized to our sexualized culture.

9
← Sexualized culture is advanced with the acceptance of pornography in

place of marriage. Alan Soble identifies the demographic opposed to the marital

institution, he explains:

← “Men who are living alone, who are postponing or avoiding marriage, or who
realize, from divorce statistics, that relationships are not the stabilizing and secure retreats
from the world they once might have been, masturbation with pornography is a useful
and pleasurable activity that complements the new, evolving masculine role”.
← (Soble, 1986. P. 84).

This “evolving masculine role” develops through an increased sense of individualism in

North American ideology. Anyone being capable of making a living on his or her own is

completely acceptable, if not desirable. With the divorce rate at 50% in 2002 by the

American Census Bureau, North American’s are seen as not being satisfied in their

marriages. Pornography offers male stimulation in the way the consumer desires, as

Soble explains, “pornographic fantasy gives men the opportunity, which they otherwise

rarely have, to order the world and conduct its events according to their individual tastes.

In the fantasy world permitted by pornography men can be safely selfish and

totalitarian”(Soble, 1986. P. 81). Free file sharing provides ample sources for the seeking

of any particular pornographic material. Extremely filtered pornography is chargeable,

but still available. However, the cost of pornography is less than the cost of a marriage.

Gaffin questioning Nancy represents the level of specificity our sexualized culture

demands of modern pornography. Gaffin asks, “what if Vivid wanted to produce a video

solely of ‘shaved women with tattoos in a locker room wearing nurse’s outfits, playing

with shaving cream, doing double pussy penetration in a reverse straddle’? ‘No problem,’

Nancy says”(Gaffin, 1997). Replacement of marriage for pornography becoming a reality

is a significant example of sexualized culture.

10
← In Debbie Does Dallas…Again, Debbie is told by a spiritual guide that,

“you are yourself, and you’re completely unique”(Debbie Does Dallas…Again). This

guidance is startling because in the 21st century, where individualistic ideology is taking

over, “being unique” is enough to justify self-presentation. Attwood elaborates on the

growing culture of digital self-presentation, she explains, “online technology has

expanded the possibilities of participation enormously, where many new applications

depend on networks, as in popular sites such as MySpace, YouTube and Second

Life”(Attwood, 2007. P. 442). Youjizz.com features live web cam networks that are

categorized like video porn. Choice of any partner is available through category filters or

by picture. Digital sex cams support a sexualized culture through technology and

mainstream acceptance of porn because anyone can broadcast themselves naked in a

combined network with others.

11
← The future of pornography is speculative, but technologies are

interweaving with society at a pace where ‘teledildonics’ is a possible reality. Debbie

Nathan describes ‘teledildonics’ as, “technology that allows two people to masturbate

together, with the sensation of touch transmitted over a data link even if they are

thousands of miles from each other”(Nathan, 2007. p. 119). Explaining the possible

future of digital pornography is the farthest step we can practically speculate, where the

link between producer and consumer is shattered with digital pleasure. ‘Teledildonics’

represents the ultimate combination of technology, coupled with societal acceptance of

pornography to complete the sexualized society. O’Toole suggests that ‘teledildonics’

protects prostitutes by “offering increased autonomy and physical security for the sex

worker, and without some of the traditional drawbacks of labor, like the police and the

wrong kinds of middlemen”(O’Toole, 1998. p. 281). Nathan examines negative

consequences of digital sex, stating, “researchers worry that virtual experiences might

hurt people by isolating them. A simulated relationship “decreases what is essential in

human life, which is sociability – one’s capacity to relate to other people” (Nathan, 2007.

p. 122). ‘Teledildonic’ integration having not yet come to pass, the future of pornography

in our sexualized society is open to alteration.

12
In conclusion, digital technology and the acceptance of pornography in technology and

the mainstream are shown to have led to an increased sexualization of 21st century North

American culture. The sexualized 21st century culture developed through free file-

sharing, high-resolution cameras, porn producers developing a genre for everyone,

Hollywood connections, threatened male sexual prowess, high divorce rates, occupational

desensitization, and participatory networks. The potential future of a hyper-sexualized

culture has been suggested, but not confirmed. Nathan resolves our uncertain future by

suggesting that, “as humans we always want to know more about ourselves than we can

know… If we want to depornify, we will have to accept – or better, celebrate – that

interest in sex and sexual imagery is simply part of the human condition”(Nathan, 2007.

P. 123-7). In the future, will Debbie herself be available for ‘teledildonic’ sex? Or, will

everyone just be Debbie?

13
Works Cited:

Debbie Does Dallas. 1979. Writer: Maria Minestra. Director: Jim Clark. Producer: VCX:
USA.

Debbie Does Dallas…Again. 2007. Director: Paul Thomas. Producer: Vivid: USA.

Debbie Loves Dallas. 2007. Director: Eon McKai. Producer: Vivid Alt., Vivid: USA.

Attwood, Feona. “No Money Shot? Commerce, Pornography and New Sex Taste
Cultures”. Sexualities 10(4). SAGE Publications: London: 2007. P. 442-53.

Boyle, Karen. “Courting Consumers and Legitimating Exploitation.” Feminist Media

Studies 8(1). Routledge: NY: 2008. P. 37-41.

Dyer, Richard. “Male Sexualities in the Media”. The Sexuality of Men. Ed: Andy Metcalf
and Martin Humphries. Pluto Press Ltd.: London: 1985. P. 48-56.

Ford, Luke. “The Golden Age of Porn”. A History of X. Prometheus Books: Amherst,
NY: 1999. P. 103.

Gaffin, Harris. Excerpts from Hollywood Blue. Batsford, 1997. Pages Not Provided.

Nathan, Debbie. “The Future of Porn”. Groundworks Guides: Pornography. House of

Anansi Press: Toronto: 2007. P. 119-127.

O’ Toole, Laurence. “Future Sex”. Pornocopia: porn, sex, technology and desire.
Serpent’s Tail: London: 1998. P. 274-81.

Soble, Alan. “Male and Female Sexuality in Capitalism”. Pornography: Marxism,

Feminism, and the Future of Sexuality. Yale University Press: London: 1986.
P. 81-4.

14