• The Conference
  • Home
  • Programme
  • Venue & directions
  • Organizing Committee
  • Scientific Committee
  • Exhibitors & sponsors
  • Satellite events
  • Conference Party
• Past & future
  • Previous symposia
  • Finland 2014
  • Spain 2016
• About FU Berlin
  • University homepage
  • Humanities at FU

Programme: accepted abstracts

Abstract ID: 625

Part of Session 128: Sociofuckinglinguistics (Other abstracts in this session)

Amateur Straight Guys: Discourse context, taboo language, and power in “straight guy” pornography

Authors: Barrett, Rusty
Submitted by: Barrett, Rusty (University of Kentucky, United States of America)

This paper examines the role of interactional context in determining the meaning of taboo language, focusing on the subgenre of “straight guy” pornography marketed to gay men. There are a wide range of websites specializing in pornography in which men who identify as heterosexual perform sexual acts for a gay male audience. These websites include both sites involving any heterosexual man (Amateur Straight Guys, Seduced Straight Guys, Straight Men of New York, Broke Straight Guys, etc) and those involving specific types of men (such as men in the military, firemen and policemen, college students, etc).  The videos on such websites follow a fairly rigid “script” in which the performer establishes his heterosexual identity before engaging in sexual acts with other men. The videos begin with a fully-clothed man sitting across from a television or computer screen showing  heterosexual pornography while being interviewed by another (presumably gay) man. The interviewer is not shown on film, although he may come into view to engage in sex with the “straight” man once the interview is complete. During the interview, the straight man is encouraged to remove his clothes and to begin to masturbate. Although some videos end with masturbation, most result in sexual activity between the “straight” man and another man. As the videos are intended to exploit gay male fantasies about seducing heterosexual men, these interviews are critical in authenticating the identity of the performers.

The paper presents a discourse analysis of these interviews, focusing on the way in which the potential for gay sex redefines the interactional context. The interviews all begin with questions about sexual experiences and preferences, including questions like “What did you do to the last girl you fucked?”, “What’s your favorite position when you fuck a girl?” or “What do you like most about pussy?”. These questions simultaneously establish the heterosexuality of the performer and attempt to arouse him by triggering memories of prior (hetero)sexual encounters. In other discourse contexts, the exchange of sexual narratives is a typical form of homosocial bonding founded on a shared masculinity indexed through sexual dominance over women (see Kiesling 2002, 2005). However, in the interviews considered here, the heterosexual men often display a reulctance to discuss their previous sexual experiences. Responses to questions about sexuality often involve false starts, long pauses, or a failure to adeuqately respond to the actual question. In contrast to typical heterosexual male banter, the discussions of sexuality in these “Amateur Straight Guy” interviews position the performers as objects of gay male desire specifically because of their heterosexual identity. A taboo register that typically indexes straight male power over women is inverted to create a context in which the straight man is particularly vulnerable. The analysis demonstrates the central role of discourse context in determining the performative effect of taboo language (Irvine 2011).