skip to main content
10.1145/3569009.3572803acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesteiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Honorable Mention

Embodied Embroidery: Somaesthetic Interaction Design for Women's Masturbation

Authors Info & Claims
Published:26 February 2023Publication History

ABSTRACT

Though a taboo topic, women's masturbation is the most effective technique in producing orgasms among all sexual behaviors [37]. This project explores how somaesthetic interaction design can contribute to designing for women's sexual pleasure, challenging androcentric discourses on women's sexuality, and also the desexualization of women with dis/abilities. In the study, the first author, who identifies as a woman with an invisible disability, experiments with other women's masturbatory techniques using her own body as a design resource. She then articulated that intersubjective engagement using her own body as an artistic medium in the form of Embodied Embroidery, a practice inspired by women's artmaking, and which seeks to foreground the aesthetic dimensions of experiential knowledge to support theory-making in design. Guided by three key features of somaesthetic interaction—first-person perspective, intersubjectivity, and articulation—this pictorial contributes to pleasure activism in the domain of HCI and interaction design.

References

  1. Ilhan Aslan, Hadrian Burkhardt, Julian Kraus, and Elisabeth André. 2016. Hold my Heart and Breathe with Me: Tangible Somaesthetic Designs. In Proceedings of the 9th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (NordiCHI ,16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 92, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1145/2971485.2996727Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Bournemouth University. 2020. Disabled people's voices on sexual well-being. Video. (19 November 2020.). Retrieved February 23, 2022 from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qV80fFs5_xw&list=Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Jeffrey Bardzell and Shaowen Bardzell. 2011. Pleasure is your birthright: digitally enabled designer sex toys as a case of third-wave HCI. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ,11). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 257–266. https://doi.org/10.1145/1978942.1978979Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Anne-Sofie Belling and Daniel Buzzo. 2021. The Rhythm of the Robot: A Prolegomenon to Posthuman Somaesthetics. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction (TEI ,21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 62, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1145/3430524.3442470Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Christin P. Bowman. 2014. Women's masturbation: Experiences of sexual empowerment in a primarily sex-positive sample. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 38(3), 363-378. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684313514855Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Johanna Brewer, Joseph ‚Jofish‘ Kaye, Amanda Williams, and Susan Wyche. 2006. Sexual interactions: why we should talk about sex in HCI. In CHI ,06 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA ,06). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1695–1698. https://doi.org/10.1145/1125451.1125765Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Norma Broude and Mary D. Garrard (eds.). 1994. Power of Feminist Art: The American Movement of the 1970 s History and Impact. Harry N. Abrams, New York, NY, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. adrienne maree brown. 2019. Pleasure Activism: The Politics of Feeling Good. AK Press, Oakland, CA, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Cornelia Butler. 2007. Art and Feminism: An Ideology of Shifting Criteria. In WACK! Art and the Feminist Revolution, Cornelia Butler and Lisa Gabrielle Mark (eds.). MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA, 14-23.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Deborah Cameron and Don Kulick. 2003. Language and Sexuality. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Vanessa Carpenter, Sarah Homewood and Majken Overgaard 2018. From Sex Toys to Pleasure Objects. In proceeding of Politics of the Machines - Art and After (2018), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.14236/ewic/EVAC18.45Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Antonio Centeno and Raúl de la Morena. 2015. Yes, We Fuck!. Video. (23 March 2015.). Retrieved February 23, 2022 from https://vimeo.com/123177395Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Whitney Chadwic. 2020. Women, Art, and Society (6th ed.). Thames & Hudson, New York, NY, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Marianela Ciolfi Felice, Marie Louise Juul Søndergaard, and Madeline Balaam. 2021. Resisting the Medicalisation of Menopause: Reclaiming the Body through Design. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ,21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 408, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445153Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Joseph La Delfa, Mehmet Aydin Baytas, Rakesh Patibanda, Hazel Ngari, Rohit Ashok Khot, and Florian ‚Floyd‘ Mueller. 2020. Drone Chi: Somaesthetic Human-Drone Interaction. Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376786Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Audrey Desjardins, Oscar Tomico, Andrés Lucero, Marta E. Cecchinato, and Carman Neustaedter. 2021. Introduction to the Special Issue on First-Person Methods in HCI. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact. 28, 6, Article 37 (December 2021), 12 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3492342Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Mary Devereaux. 2005. Feminist Aesthetics. In The Oxford Handbook of Aesthetics, Jerrold Levinson (ed.). Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom, 648-664.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Rosalyn Driscoll. 2022. The Sensing Body in the Visual Arts: Making and Experiencing Sculpture. Bloomsbury Visual Arts, New York, NY, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Skyla Y. Dudek and James E. Young. 2022. Fluid Sex Robots: Looking to the 2LGBTQIA+ Community to Shape the Future of Sex Robots. In Proceedings of the 2022 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI ,22). IEEE Press, 746–749.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Anna Eaglin and Shaowen Bardzell. 2011. Sex toys and designing for sexual wellness. In CHI ,11 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA ,11). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1837–1842. https://doi.org/10.1145/1979742.1979879Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Breanne Fahs and Elena Frank. 2014. Notes from the back room: Gender, power, and (in)visibility in women's experiences of masturbation. The Journal of Sex Research, 51(3), 241-252. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2012.745474Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Michel Foucault. 1990. The History of Sexuality (Robert Hurley, trans.). Vintages Books, NY, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Michel Foucault. 1990. The Use of Pleasure (Robert Hurley, trans.). Vintages Books, NY, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Sigmund Freud. 2000. Three Essays On The Theory Of Sexuality (James Strachey, trans). Basic Books. New York, NY, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Joanna Frueh. 1994. The Body Through Women's Eyes. In Power of Feminist Art: The American Movement of the 1970s History and Impact, Norma Broude and Mary D. Garrard (eds.). Harry N. Abrams, New York USA, 190-207.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Eduard Fosch-Villaronga and Adam Poulsen. 2021. Sex Robots in Care: Setting the Stage for a Discussion on the Potential Use of Sexual Robot Technologies for Persons with Disabilities. In Companion of the 2021 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI ’21 Companion). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1145/3434074.3446907Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Andrea García-Santesmases Fernández. 2017 Sexual Dissidence and Crip Empowerment in Yes, We Fuck!. In: Brylla C., Hughes H. (eds) Documentary and Disability. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-59894-3_11Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Carol Groneman. 1994. Nymphomania: The Historical Construction of Female Sexuality. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 19(2), 337-367. https://doi.org/10.1086/494887Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Cressida J. Heyes. 2007. Self-Transformations: Foucault, Ethics, and Normalized Bodies. Oxford University Press, New York, NY, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Shere Hite. 2004. The Hite Report: A National Study of Female Sexuality. Seven Stories Press, New York, NY, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Kristina Höök. 2018. Designing with the Body: Somaesthetic Interaction Design (1st ed.). The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Kristina Höök, Anna St hl, Martin Jonsson, Johanna Mercurio, Anna Karlsson, and Eva-Carin Banka Johnson. 2015. COVER STORY Somaesthetic design. interactions 22, 4 (July - August 2015), 26–33. https://doi.org/10.1145/2770888Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Gopinaath Kannabiran, Alex A. Ahmed, Matthew Wood, Madeline Balaam, Theresa Jean Tanenbaum, Shaowen Bardzell, and Jeffrey Bardzell. 2018. Design for Sexual Wellbeing in HCI. In Extended Abstracts of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Paper W09, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1145/3170427.3170639 [54]Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Gopinaath Kannabiran, Jeffrey Bardzell, and Shaowen Bardzell. 2011. How HCI talks about sexuality: discursive strategies, blind spots, and opportunities for future research. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’11). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 695–704. https://doi.org/10.1145/1978942.1979043 [55]Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Gopinaath Kannabiran, Shaowen Bardzell, and Jeffrey Bardzell. 2012. Designing (for) desire: a critical study of technosexuality in HCI. In Proceedings of the 7th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Making Sense Through Design (NordiCHI ’12). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 655–664. https://doi.org/10.1145/2399016.2399116Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Patrick Keilty. 2012. Embodiment and desire in browsing online pornography. In Proceedings of the 2012 iConference (iConference ’12). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 41–47. https://doi.org/10.1145/2132176.2132182Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Alfred C. Kinsey, Wardell B. Pomeroy, Clyde E. Martin, and Paul H. Gebhard. 1953. Sexual Behavior in the Human Female. W.B. Saunders Company, Philadelphia, PA, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Carolyn Korsmeyer. 2004. Gender and Aesthetics: An Introduction. Routledge, New York, NY, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Lian Loke and Thecla Schiphorst. 2018. The somatic turn in human-computer interaction. interactions 25, 5 (September-October 2018), 54–5863. https://doi.org/10.1145/3236675Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Diego S. Maranan, Jane Grant, John Matthias, Mike Phillips, and Susan L. Denham. 2020. Haplós: Vibrotactile Somaesthetic Technology for Body Awareness. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction (TEI ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 539–543. https://doi.org/10.1145/3374920.3374984Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Sara I. McClelland and Michelle Fine, M. 2008. Rescuing a theory of adolescent sexual excess: young women and wanting. In Next wave cultures: Feminism, subcultures, activism, Anita Harris (eds.). Routledge, London, UK, 83–102.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Anna Mollow and Robert McRuer. 2012. Introduction. In Robert McRuer and Anna Mollow (eds.) Sex and Disability. Duke University Press: Durham, NC, USA, 1-36.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Livia J. Müller, Klaus Opwis, and Elisa D. Mekler. 2018. “In A Good Way Weird”: Exploring Positive Experiences with Technology-Mediated Pornography. In Extended Abstracts of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Paper LBW020, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1145/3170427.3188527Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. Linda Nochlin. 2021. Why Have There Been No Great Women Artists? 50th anniversary edition. Thames & Hudson, London, UK.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Jenelle Porter. 2019, Introduction. In Vitamin T: Threads and Textiles in Contemporary Art, Phaidon Editors (eds.). Phaidon Press, New York, NY, USA, 10-17.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  46. Helena Reckitt and Peggy Phelan. 2001. Art and Feminism. Phaidon Press, New York, NY, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. Nina J. Rothstein, Dalton H. Connolly, Ewart J. de Visser, and Elizabeth Phillips. 2021. Perceptions of Infidelity with Sex Robots. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 129–139. https://doi.org/10.1145/3434073.3444653Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. Tom Shakespeare. 2000. Disabled Sexuality: Toward Rights and Recognition. Sexuality and Disability 18, 159–166. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026409613684Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  49. Richard Shusterman. 1999. Somaesthetics: A Disciplinary Proposal. The Journal of Aesthetics ad Art Criticism, 57, 3 (Summer, 1999). 299-313. https://doi.org/10.2307/432196Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  50. Richard Shusterman. 2008. Body Consciousness: A Philosophy of Mindfulness and Somaesthetics. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USA.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  51. Richard Shusterman. 2012. Thinking Through the Body: Essays in Somaesthetics. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. Richard Shusterman. 2021. Ars Erotica Sex and Somaesthetics in the Classical Arts of Love. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. Tobin Siebers. 2012. A Sexual Culture for Disabled People. In Robert McRuer and Anna Mollow (eds.) Sex and Disability. Duke University Press: Durham, NC, 37-53.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. Mitchell S. Tepper. 2000. Sexuality and Disability: The Missing Discourse of Pleasure. Sexuality and Disability 18, 283–290.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  55. Emily Shields and Ves Wilkins (Producers) and Emma Young (Director). 2013. Sex on Wheels. Firecracker Films.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  56. Britta Schulte, Marie Louise Juul Søndergaard, Rens Brankaert, and Kellie Morrissey. 2021. Utopian futures for sexuality, aging, and design. interactions 28, 3 (May - June 2021), 6–8. https://doi.org/10.1145/3460204Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  57. Britta F. Schulte, Kellie Morrissey, Marie Louise Juul Søndergaard, and Rens Brankaert. 2020. Don't Blush: Sexuality, Aging & Design. In Companion Publication of the 2020 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference (DIS’ 20 Companion). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 405–408. https://doi.org/10.1145/3393914.3395915Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  58. Anna Ståhl, Madeline Balaam, Rob Comber, Pedro Sanches, and Kristina Höök. 2022. Making New Worlds – Transformative Becomings with Soma Design. In Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 176, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1145/3491102.3502018Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  59. Anna Ståhl, Martin Jonsson, Johanna Mercurio, Anna Karlsson, Kristina Höök, and Eva-Carin Banka Johnson. 2016. The Soma Mat and Breathing Light. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 305–308. https://doi.org/10.1145/2851581.2889464Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  60. Norman Makoto Su, Amanda Lazar, Jeffrey Bardzell, and Shaowen Bardzell. 2019. Of Dolls and Men: Anticipating Sexual Intimacy with Robots. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact. 26, 3, Article 13 (June 2019), 35 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3301422Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  61. Giovanni Maria Troiano, Matthew Wood, and Casper Harteveld. 2020. “And This, Kids, Is How I Met Your Mother”: Consumerist, Mundane, and Uncanny Futures with Sex Robots. Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376598Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  62. Millie Walton. 2021. The Body as Material: An Interview with Annegret Soltau. Retrieved March 9, 2022 from https://www.trebuchet-magazine.com/annegret-soltau/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  63. Linda Wolfe. 2014. The cosmo report: Female sexual behavior. Open Road Distribution, New York, NY, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  64. Matthew Wood, Gavin Wood, and Madeline Balaam. 2017. “They're Just Tixel Pits, Man”: Disputing the ‘Reality’ of Virtual Reality Pornography 22 through the Story Completion Method. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 5439–5451. https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025762Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  65. Matthew Wood, Gavin Wood, and Madeline Balaam. 2017. Sex Talk: Designing for Sexual Health with Adolescents. In Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Interaction Design and Children (IDC ’17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 137–147. https://doi.org/10.1145/3078072.3079747Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  66. Douglas Zytko, Nicholas Furlo, Bailey Carlin, and Matthew Archer. 2021. Computer-Mediated Consent to Sex: The Context of Tinder. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 5, CSCW1, Article 189 (April 2021), 26 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3449288Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Embodied Embroidery: Somaesthetic Interaction Design for Women's Masturbation
    Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      TEI '23: Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction
      February 2023
      709 pages
      ISBN:9781450399777
      DOI:10.1145/3569009

      Copyright © 2023 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 26 February 2023

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed limited

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate393of1,367submissions,29%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader