The Sex Blog. We bring you the sociology and psychology of sex in a daring, erotic, thought-provoking, sexy, forbidden and easy to understand way.

Orgysmic
Tags

© 2018 by Orgysmic. Artworks by Juliusz Lewandowski.

Der Sexblog. Soziologische und psychologische Analysen der Sexualitäten. Gewagt, erotisch, sexy, provozierend und leicht verständlich.

Understanding the Fetish of Big Black Cocks

March 10, 2018

Pornography depicting dominant, macho black fuckers and big black cocks is one of the biggest sellers of porn industry. How did that fetish come into existence?

 

[Dieser Artikel existiert auch auf Deutsch.]

 

 Afro-American porn star Flex-Deon Blake

 

 

Dominant black fuckers with big cocks are a cliché. But they bring the porn industry an incredible amount of money. "Ebony" – i.e. pornography with black protagonists – was in the top 3 of the most viewed porn categories in Pornhub's statistics of 2017 worldwide. In many countries ebony porn was also in the top 5 of the most watched porn categories, like for example France, the US and South Africa – all countries that are not only historically linked to the black African population, to colonialism and to the African slave trade, but that are also home to big black populations. Now ebony porn does of course not only include black cisgendered men but also people of other genders, however (especially dominant, aggressive) black fuckers and the emphasis on big black cocks are one of the main features of ebony porn. This is especially true for gay pornography where in the top 20 of the most searched for keywords one can find terms like "black" (position 5) and "big black dick" (position 11). The category "black" is even number one of most watched gay porn categories. Also when you look at the porn consumption habits of only women "big black cock" is on position 9 and "black" on position 14 of the most popular search terms. Among men "ebony" was on position 14. Ebony porn was also the second favourite category among men and the fifth favourite category among women.

 

Where does this porn fantasy come from? I would like to try to explain this with my theory of the sociology of sexual fetishes. But before I do that I would like to stress out that this is only one of many possible views on this phenomenon. In alignment with the philosophy of ORGYSMIC this is in no way meant to be an article uncovering "absolute truth". It is much more a specific viewpoint among many others and this point of view is flavoured by the life experiences of a white, gay, cis-gendered, male sociologist from middle class. For some people, this might sound weird to mention this but I believe it to be important to understand key biographical figures of a writer in order to properly categorize their writings. A non-white person or someone from a different social class might come to different, equally interesting points of view depending on the hegemonic structures of knowledge present in that social milieu.

 

More than that I also want to stress out that this article is not looking to make an ethical evaluation. My goal is not to say whether this fantasy, this fetish is good or bad. I rather want to neutrally explore where this fetish comes from and maybe also what an ethical evaluation of it might have as an effect.

 

 

Big black cocks – The fantasies of colonialism

 

Like many areas of Western thinking, colonialism and racism are built upon opposing categories: white vs. black, culture vs. nature, humans vs. animals, ratio vs. instincts, civilized vs. wild, and so on. Like I already demonstrated in my article about the sociology of fetishes, most regular fetishes are built upon such dualisms.

 

The history of African colonialism is intermingled with above-mentioned dualisms. The colonial masters had always justified the conquest of the African continent with the control and governing of wild, uncivilized nature. The African continent and its (black) inhabitants were seen as wild, driven by instincts, yes even as animal-like or bestial. Much to the opposing white, humane, rational, civilized culture of (white) Europe whose task was to bring European values to the world.

 

To make sure that no compassion would surge up with the African population due to the brutal colonialization strategies they (and especially the men) would constantly be described as "wild", "dangerous", "brutal", "aggressive", "uncivilized", etc.. People were especially warned on the "dangerous, brutal, overly sexual black men" which served not least also to justify their subjugation and control.

 

Black men were seen as "apes", as "brutal, aggressive, wild animals." However, the destiny of (white) humans and of human culture had been thought to control and partly subjugate nature and everything that was considered to belong to nature (so also body/sexuality and in the colonial age also the wild African continent). Accordingly, it's considered one of the biggest taboos for Western humans to fall back into an existence of a wild animal after the great efforts they've done to "free" themselves from their natural prison (1). Slowly the black African got linked to the sexual within these dualisms. On the "good" side of that dualistic chain, you had Europe, whiteness, culture, humans, mind, ratio, civilization and God. On the "bad" side, you had Africa, blackness, nature, animals, body/sexuality, instinct, wilderness, and the Devil. Those patterns of belief were inscribed via socialization into the subconsciousness of colonial-era humans and continue living up until today in the process of the social construction of reality by being subconsciously passed on from generation to generation.

 

To use Berger's and Luckmann's words (2): Humans create (externalize) the construct of the white, European, civilized, rational human as the opposite of the black, animal-like, sexual, instinct-driven, wild human. With this construction and externalization "sexual, wild, black man driven by his instincts" human beings have at the same time created the first step to give birth to the same fetish. Without this idea, this socially constructed feared fantasy that feared fantasy could also not have turned into a desired fantasy. To say it with Butler's words, it constructed the complex of simultaneously feared and desired fantasies (3). Afterwards, the objectification begins: The belief that black humans and especially black men were in opposition to white, European people overly sexual (with overly big cocks), wild and dangerous became a universal social "truth." Even if this has nothing to do with "real actual facts" it still became an invisible, unquestioned social matter of course, "the way things are," a law that will not be questioned anymore. And even more importantly which will put pressure on humans to adhere to this belief and to be afraid of those "wild, black, raping men". This finally results in the internalization of this belief that black men were so sexual and wild. This belief is encoded into every human being's subconsciousness during their socialization and was passed on from generation to generation. This fantasy is now maybe a bit weaker but still present in Western cultural memory and by that in the subconsciousness of every one of its members. The outer pressure to protect yourself against these "sexual monsters" turned into an inner pressure to actually do it. Human beings had now started to control themselves to act and think in accordance with this belief.

 

This internalization happened mainly through biopower (4). Europeans had learned to protect themselves from the apparent wild sexuality of black Africans, to constantly oppose it. More than that white people also constantly had to deny everything within themselves that they projected onto black people, including sexuality and especially what they saw as unrestrained, wild sexuality. This form of sexuality had been argued to be completely extrinsic to European civilization and projected onto black Africa. Consequently, an enormous pressure was formed to not only be afraid of the sexuality of black men but also to deny any own sexual fantasies.

 

The potential critical gaze of the people around you that Foucault described plays an important role in the internalization of the dualisms. Everybody polices themselves and controls their sexuality out of fear to be punished, ridiculed or rejected. Since the biopower is so pervasive and profound it strengthens the pressure to be considered as "normal" in the eyes of other people. And in this case, "normal" means to act in a way to conform to all these requirements of controlling the black and wild connoted sexuality.

 

The biopower will eventually inscribe this behaviour into the habitus of each person. These patterns of acting, thinking and behaving which are based on the worldview of the white/civilized-black/wild/sexual-dualism become a "second nature." They become the habitus of the Western socialized individual. I already explained how objectification in the social construction of reality turns the belief in a white-black-opposition into a socially constructed "truth." It is this truth, this certainty, and this self-evidence that becomes our doxa, i.e. our core beliefs and core values of the control of wild, African, sexual nature by European, white, civilized culture. This doxa that had been inscribed into our subconsciousness by an internalization through biopower will guide our sexuality controlling thinking, seeing, and acting.

 

 

The yearning for the forbidden

 

This inevitably leads to an enormous inner pressure. But the human being can't constantly control the tensions between what they are (including their sexuality) and what they should be. Therefore these tensions have the potential to release themselves during arousal and sexuality by falling exactly into what one is actually supposed to avoid: To give into the (apparent) hypersexuality dominant, black man with their (apparent) big cocks. To put into other words: It turns us on to allow what colonialism taught us to suppress. The forbidden, the danger, the taboo generates an incredible strong potential for arousal just because it is a taboo. Because black men are constructed as dangerous, hypersexual, wild, aggressive animals, it can offer an incredible arousal for some to allow the forbidden, to let oneself fall, and figuratively"to submit to the power of the big black cocks fucking and breeding everything and everyone". And the fetish for black fuckers is born.

 

The biopower internalizes the doxa of the danger of black men and their sexuality in our subconsciousness so that we constantly and profoundly control ourselves to not fall for their seduction. This pressure remains – as the Pornhub statistics show – even if it is a remaining of times long gone and even if it acts subconsciously most of the times. It lingers upon us like an oppressing shadow. What liberation, what salvation to just briefly release oneself from it. To finally let oneself fall. To vent unbridled which we control and suppress. To let oneself fall "into the strong, powerful hands of a black man with his gigantic cock whose sexuality consumes everything."

 

However, it remains unimportant whether the fantasy of the hypersexual black man with his big cock is an actual reality or whether it is a social construct. It just comes down to the sociological Thomas theorem (5) which states that every human action has real consequences no matter how unreal the situation was that lead to this action:


„If men define situations as real, they are real in their consequences."
 

Because hypersexual black men with big cocks are perceived as real the consequences of the feared fantasies are real. And by that also the desired fantasies, the kinks that result from them.

 

So sexually active, dominant, aggressive black men and especially the emphasizes on their sexual organs, on big black cocks are feared and desired fantasies at the same time. And the more one should not desire them, the bigger the yearning for them becomes. The more a culture creates fear of hypersexual black men, or the more it tells its population to not have a desire for them, the more the fantasy is strengthened.

 

This also leads to another question: Is this fetish part of racism? Or is it rather a mirror of a racist culture? Does this fetish reproduce racism or is it rather putting a mirror in front of a racist society? Tell us your opinion in the comments below!

 

---

 

(1) Cf. Sebastian, Marcel; Gutjahr, Julia (2013): Das Mensch-Tier-Verhältnis in der kritischen Theorie der Frankfurter Schule, S. 105, in: Buschka, Sonja; Pfau-Effinger, Birgit (Hrsg.): Gesellschaft und Tiere – Soziologische Analysen zu einem ambivalenten Verhältnis, Wiesbaden, S. 97-119.

 

(2) Cf. Berger, Peter L.; Luckmann, Thomas (2003): Die gesellschaftliche Konstruktion der Wirklichkeit – Eine Theorie der Wissenssoziologie, 19. Aufl., Frankfurt am Main.

 

(3) Cf. Butler, Judith (2014): Das Unbehagen der Geschlechter, 17. Aufl., Frankfurt am Main, S. 197.

 

(4) Cf. Foucault, Michel (2017): Der Wille zum Wissen – Sexualität und Wahrheit I, 21. Aufl., Frankfurt am Main.

 

(5) Vgl. Thomas, William Isaac (1928): The Methodology of Behavior Study, in: Knopf, Alfred: The Child in America – Behavior Problems and Programs, New York, S. 553–576.

Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Please reload

From Stigma to Empowerment: Sex Work

April 6, 2019

Converting Shame

February 6, 2019

1/9
Please reload

You Might Also Like: