Most research on sexually explicit material (SEM) uses a harm-based discourse, a central tenet of which is that pornographic media deleteriously affect male viewers' attitudes and behaviours toward women. Consequently, minimal attention has been directed toward examining associations between men's exposure to SEM and their self-perceptions in terms of physical appearance and sexual functioning. To investigate this topic, 188 men attending a comprehensive college in Alberta, Canada, were given a questionnaire measuring exposure to various pornographic media and three forms of esteem (sexual, genital, and body). As predicted, significant negative correlations were obtained between exposure to pornographic imagery on the Internet and levels of genital and sexual esteem. Limitations of the current study and directions for future research are provided.
AttwoodF. (2005). What do people do with porn? Qualitative research into the consumption, use, and experience of pornography and other sexually explicit media. Sexuality & Culture, 9, 65–86.
2.
BogaertA.F. (1996). Volunteer bias in human sexuality research: Evidence for both sexuality and personality differences in males. Archives of Sexual Behaviour, 25, 125–140.
3.
BogaertA.F. (2001). Personality, individual differences, and preferences for sexual media. Archives of Sexual Behaviour, 30, 29–53.
4.
ByersL.J.MenziesK.S., & O'GradyW.L. (2004). The impact of computer variables on the viewing and sending of sexually explicit material on the Internet: Testing Cooper's “triple-A engine.”Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 13, 157–169.
5.
EscoffierJ. (2003). Gay-for-pay: Straight men and the making of gay pornography. Qualitative Sociology, 26, 531–555.
6.
FisherW.A., & BarakA. (2001). Internet pornography: A social psychological perspective on Internet sexuality. Journal of Sex Research, 38, 312–323.
7.
GillR.HenwoodK., & McLeanC. (2003). A genealogical approach to idealised male body imagery. Paragraph, 26, 187–200.
8.
GoodsonP.McCormickD., & EvansA. (2001). Searching for sexually explicit materials on the Internet: An exploratory study of college students' behaviour and attitudes. Archives of Sexual Behaviour, 30, 101–118.
9.
HatoumI.J., & BelleD. (2004). Mags and abs: Media consumption and bodily concerns in men. Sex Roles, 51, 397–407.
10.
IrvingL.M. (1990). Mirror images: Effects of the standard of beauty on the self-and body-esteem of women exhibiting varying levels of bulimic symptoms. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 9, 230–242.
11.
KirkR.E. (1996). Practical significance: A concept whose time has come. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56, 746–759.
12.
LeitR.A.GrayJ.J., & PopeH.G.Jr. (2002). The media's representation of the ideal male body: A cause for muscle dysmorphia?International Journal of Eating Disorders, 31, 334–338.
13.
LockwoodP., & KundaZ. (1999). Increasing the salience of one's best selves can undermine inspiration by outstanding role models. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 214–228.
14.
LorenzenL.A.GrieveF.G., & ThomasA. (2004). Exposure to muscular male models decreases men's body satisfaction. Sex Roles, 51, 743–748.
15.
MayersK.S.HellerD.K., & HellerJ.A. (2003). Damaged sexual self-esteem: A kind of disability. Sexuality and Disability, 21, 269–282.
16.
MestonC.M.HeimanJ.R.TrapnellP.D., & PaulhusD.L. (1998). Socially desirable responding and sexuality self-reports. Journal of Sex Research, 35, 148–157.
17.
MorrisonT.G.HarrimanR.MorrisonM.A.BeardenA., & EllisS. (2004a). Correlates of exposure to sexually explicit material among Canadian post-secondary students. Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 13, 143–156.
18.
MorrisonT.G.KalinR., & MorrisonM.A. (2004b). Body-image evaluation and body-image investment among adolescents: A test of sociocultural and social comparison theories. Adolescence, 39, 571–592.
19.
MorrisonT.G.MorrisonM.A., & HopkinsC. (2003). Striving for bodily perfection? An exploration of the drive for muscularity in Canadian men. Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 4, 111–120.
20.
RosenthalR. (1994). Science and ethics in conducting, analysing, and reporting psychological research. Psychological Science, 5, 127–134.
21.
ScugliaB. (2004). Sex pigs: Why porn is like sausage or the truth is that—behind the scenes—porn is not very sexy. Journal of Homosexuality, 47(3/4), 185–188.
22.
SegalL. (1998). Only the literal: The contradictions of anti-pornography feminism. Sexualities, 1, 43–62.
23.
SnellW.E., & PapiniD.R. (1989). The Sexuality Scale: An instrument to measure sexual-esteem, sexual-depression, and sexual-preoccupation. Journal of Sex Research, 26, 256–263.
24.
ThompsonJ.K.CoovertM.D., & StormerS.M. (1999). Body image, social comparison, and eating disturbance: A covariance structure modelling investigation. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 26, 43–51.
25.
TrostleL.C. (1993). Pornography as a source of sex information for university students: Some consistent findings. Psychological Reports, 72, 407–412.
26.
WiedermanM.W. (1999). Volunteer bias in sexuality research using college student participants. Journal of Sex Research, 36, 59–66.
27.
WinterH.C. (1989). An examination of the relationships between penis size and body image, genital image, and perception of sexual competency in the male. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, New York University.
