Say Hello to my Little Friend: An Investigating into the Correlation between Genital Slang and Sexism A thesis submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Cincinnati in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in the Department of Sociology of the College of Arts and Sciences by William M. LeSuer II B.A. Kent State University November 2011 Committee Chair: Erynn Masi de Casanova, Ph.D. Abstract A number of scholars in the social sciences have argued that slang terms for the genitals have a deleterious effect on those who use them or are exposed to them by promoting and maintaining heteronormative, androcentric views of sexuality and gender. Sociolinguists, especially second-wave feminists, persuasively argue that our language is sexist and reflects and reinforces our patriarchal society. However, no research has been conducted to test whether the users of these words hold these views. This study seeks to answer whether there is a significant correlation between genital slang and sexist attitudes. (Partial correlations are used instead of regressions because the causal order is unclear.) Additionally, it explores the importance of demographic characteristics in the knowledge, use, and perceived offensiveness to genital slang. When genital slang variables were regressed on demographic characteristics, gender was the primary source of significant differences. Significant correlations between the genital slang variables and sexism were found while controlling for demographic characteristics. However, the significant findings between the slang and sexism variables were puzzling at times. Some findings supported the theories and assertions of previous scholars that genital slang is patriarchal and heteronormative and correlates with sexist attitudes, while other findings eluded immediate explanation. ii © 2011 William M. LeSuer II. All rights reserved. iii Acknowledgements I would like to thank all those who have helped me through this learning process. To my advisers Erynn Masi de Casanova, Ph.D. and Steve Carlton-Ford, Ph.D., thank you for your tireless effort and boundless patience. This paper would not have been possible without your support. It was an honor to work with you. I have grown as a scholar and a person because of you. To my family, friends, and cohort, thank you for your support and feedback. Your interest, awkward laughs, and skepticism strengthen my resolve and helped me push forward. To all the professors at The University of Cincinnati, thank you for your support and entertaining my surprise office visits. To Linda Kocher, thank you for being a good friend and listening to me at all hours of the day. The functioning of the department rests on your shoulders. Finally, to my Katie Schutte, my wonderful fiancée, thank you for putting up with me through this and more. Your love has kept me going through thick and thin. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………………………………… ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS…………………………………………………………………… iv LIST OF TABLES ……………………………………………………………………………. vii INTRODUCTION ………………………………………………………………………………. 9 LITERATURE REVIEW ……………………………………………………………………… 10 HYPOTHESES ………………………………………………………………………………… 17 METHODS …………………………………………………………………………………….. 17 Benefits and Limitations of Using Surveys …………………………………………………. 23 FINDINGS ……………………………………………………………………………………... 24 Demographics ………………………………………………………………………………. 24 Slang ………………………………………………………………………………………... 26 Male Genital Terms ……………………………………………………………………... 26 Female Genital Terms ………………………………………………………………….... 29 Sexism ………………………………………………………………………………………. 33 Hypothesis 1 ………………………………………………………………………………… 38 Male Genital Slang Categories ………………………………………………………….. 42 Female Genital Slang Categories ……………………………………………………….. 43 Hypothesis 2 ………………………………………………………………………………… 47 Hypothesis 3 ………………………………………………………………………………… 52 Male Genital Slang Categories ………………………………………………………….. 57 Female Genital Slang Categories ……………………………………………………….. 59 Hypothesis 4 ………………………………………………………………………………… 62 Male Genital Slang Categories ………………………………………………………….. 67 Female Genital Slang Categories ……………………………………………………….. 68 DISCUSSION ………………………………………………………………………………….. 72 v Hypothesis 1 ………………………………………………………………………………… 73 Hypothesis 2 ………………………………………………………………………………… 76 Hypothesis 3 ………………………………………………………………………………… 77 Hypothesis 4 ………………………………………………………………………………… 78 CONCLUSION ………………………………………………………………………………… 81 FOOTNOTES ………………………………………………………………………………….. 84 BIBLIOGRAPHY ……………………………………………………………………………… 86 APPENDICES …………………………………………………………………………………. 89 vi LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Descriptive Statistics of Demographic Variables …………………………………….. 25 Table 2: Descriptive Statistics of Variables Measuring Male Genital Terms …………………. 27 Table 3: Descriptive Statistics of Variables Measuring Female Genital Terms ……………….. 31 Table 4: Descriptive Statistics of the Sexism Scale Subscales ………………………………… 35 Table 5: Number of Items and Cronbach's Alpha Coefficients for Extracted Sexism Scale Factors with Crossloaded Items Placed In Different Factors to Determine Changes in Alpha ………… 38 Table 6: R2, Adjusted R2, F-Test Values, Unstandardized Coefficients, and Significance Values when Male Genital Term Variables Are Regressed on Demographic Variables ……………… 40 Table 7: R2, Adjusted R2, F-Test Values, Unstandardized Coefficients, and Significance Values when Female Genital Term Variables Are Regressed on Demographic Variables …………… 41 Table 8: R2, Adjusted R2, F-Test Values, Unstandardized Coefficients, and Significance Values when Variables in the Authority Categories for Male Genital Slang Terms Are Regressed on Demographic Variables ………………………………………………………………………... 43 Table 9: R2, Adjusted R2, F-Test Values, Unstandardized Coefficients, and Significance Values when Variables in the Abject and Euphemism Categories for Female Genital Slang Terms Are Regressed on Demographic Variables …………………………………………………………. 44 Table 10: R2, Adjusted R2, F-Test Values, Unstandardized Coefficients, and Significance Values when Variables in the Nonsense and Euphemism+Nonsense Categories for Female Genital Slang Terms Are Regressed on Demographic Variables ……………………………………………... 45 Table 11: R2, Adjusted R2, F-Test Values, Χ², Nagelkerke R2, Unstandardized Coefficients, Log Odds, and Significance Values when Dummy Variable for the Listing of “Cunt”, Use of “Cunt”, and Perceived Offensiveness to “Cunt” Are Regressed on Demographic Variables ………….. 46 Table 12: R2, Adjusted R2, F-Test Values, Unstandardized Coefficients, and Significance Values when Ambivalent Sexism Inventory Subscales are Regressed on Demographic Variables …... 48 Table 13: Adjusted R2, F-Test Values, Unstandardized Coefficients, and Significance Values when Modern Sexism Scale Subscales are Regressed on Demographic Variables …………… 49 Table 14: R2, Adjusted R2, F-Test Values, Unstandardized Coefficients, and Significance Values when Sexual Beliefs Scale Subscales are Regressed on Demographic Variables ……………... 50 Table 15: Correlations and Significance Values Between Male Genital Term Variables and Sexism Scale Subscales ………………………………………………………………………... 53 vii Table 16: Correlations and Significance Values Between Female Genital Term Variables and Sexism Scale Subscales ………………………………………………………………………... 54 Table 17: Correlations and Significance Values Between Danger Category Variables for Male Genital Slang Terms and Sexism Scale Subscales …………………………………………….. 58 Table 18: Correlations and Significance Values Between Euphemism Category Variables for Female Genital Slang Terms and Sexism Scale Subscales …………………………………….. 60 Table 19: Correlations and Significance Values Between Listing of “Cunt”, Use of “Cunt”, and Perceived Offensiveness to “Cunt” and Sexism Scale Subscales ……………………………… 61 Table 20: Partial Correlations and Significance Values Between Male Genital Term Variables and Sexism Scale Subscales while Controlling for Demographic Variables ………………….. 63 Table 21: Partial Correlations and Significance Values Between Female Genital Term Variables and Sexism Scale Subscales while Controlling for Demographic Variables ………………….. 65 Table 22: Partial Correlations and Significance Values Between Danger Category Variables for Male Genital Slang Term Variables and Sexism Scale Subscales while Controlling for Demographic Variables ………………………………………………………………………... 67 Table 23: Partial Correlations and Significance Values Between Danger Category Variables for Female Genital Slang Term Variables and Sexism Scale Subscales while Controlling for Demographic Variables ………………………………………………………………………... 69 Table 24: Partial Correlations and Significance Values Between Nonsense Category Variables for Female Genital Slang Term Variables and Sexism Scale Subscales while Controlling for Demographic Variables ………………………………………………………………………... 70 Table 25: Partial Correlations and Significance Values Between Listing of “Cunt”, Use of “Cunt”, and Perceived Offensiveness to “Cunt” and Sexism Scale Subscales ………………… 71 viii Introduction Language connects the individual to the social structure. The importance of language in sociology and its theories cannot be understated. Language is used in all manner of schools of theories from Marxism to structuralism to functionalism to symbolic interactionism. Second- wave feminists seized upon the importance of language in shaping and maintaining societal beliefs and practices in America (e.g., Schulz 1975; Thorne and Henley 1975; Lakoff 1990). These feminists and sociolinguistic scholars persuasively argue that language