Purpose of the blog, Inital thoughts, and final thoughts

This blog was created to show my ability to think critically about topics that we talked about in SMF 310 regarding sexual ethics. This blog is a documentation of the way I conceptualized and thought about sexual ethics over the course of the term. I decided to show case my learning week by week because I felt that every week I learned something knew, and that essentially helped me shape my conceptualization of sexual ethics. On the left hand side of my blog each week is listed. Under each week I have included:

• my own reflections on the topics discussed
• concept maps
• my group research project
• précis assignments.
• Video clips on: consent, prostitution, and bug chasing

On a week by week basis, I determined where I stood with a variety of topics.

In the beginning

In the earlier weeks of the course, you will find that I had a very narrow focus of what sexual ethics is. I basically said that sexual ethics is an influence of family, friends, school, and religion. From these influences, the only thing I really thought of when I thought of sexual ethics was that people were to be in a monogamous relationship. I didn’t really consider other topics such as the ones we discussed later on in the course, i.e. pornography, prostitution, etc.

My goal over the course of the term was to be able to broaden my conceptualization of sexual ethics. Week by week you will see how I have achieved this goal. I asked questions, and tried to answer them, some of them easier than others. The readings were all very interesting and they really helped me look at certain topics in a new light i.e. homosexuality, which I will take with me for the rest of my life. In fact, with this course I will think differently and more critically about a lot of things in my life. This blog was a very good way to showcase how my conceptualization changed for some things and stayed the same for others.

In the end

The last few weeks of the course I was able to think of other things related to sexual ethics beside monogamous relationships. Near the end of the course I really saw that sexual ethics is determined a lot of the time by context. Determining whether something is moral/immoral depends on the context, i.e. the culture, the gender, the age, the era, etc. This also applies to consent. In the beginning of the course I basically thought that if there was consent involved by both partners in a sexual act, than it was considered moral. However, after class discussions and the movie Kids, I now know that consent can be a very blurred thing. For instance someone may consent, however they may have previously been forced or pressured into saying yes.

The main things that I now consider in my conceputalization of sexual ethics is:

• Context- what is the context of the situation?
• Consent- is it mutual or is one person pressured?
• Gender/sexuality- depends on the gender and sexuality of the individual
• Society- society will always play a huge role in deciding what is "normal"
• Is the issue moral/natural? immoral/unnatural? or moral/unnatural?
• Most issues are in the eye of the beholder
  

I could go on and on about all of the topics we talked about, because I believe I could come up with so many different contexts in which something is moral or immoral. However I look at this blog as a start to something I will now consider thinking about for the rest of my life. It really taught me to think critically and not just to take things for how they are. I will take this knowledge with me throughout the rest of my school career, work career, and any social interactions I have in the future. I really want to go into social work when I am done my undergrad. I feel that having a broader idea of sexuality and its ethics will help me with my future career path.

I really enjoyed creating this blog and I hope you enjoy it also!

Précis # 3: “The Historical Construction of Homosexuality in the United States” – Estelle Freedman (1995)

The social construction of sexuality has changed over time and across cultures. In the Essay “The Historical Construction of Homosexuality” Estelle Freedman demonstrates that the historical construction of homosexuality in the United States has understood, practiced, and regulated sexual or romantic relations between members of the same gender since the colonial era. The purpose of Freeman’s essay is to illustrate how sexuality in general is shaped and reshaped historically through the interaction of economic and social contexts and the behaviours of individuals and social groups. Freedman exemplifies this through instances of the cross-gender berdache, romantic friendships, urban anonymous sex, long-time companions, Boston marriages, bar culture, and gay identity and political consciousness.

In the era of the European settlement, before the arrival of the Europeans, labelling of same sex desire was evident. Many Native American cultures incorporated a form of cross-gender identity and, in some cases, a form of same-sex marriage. Europeans called this cross-gender identity berdache, in which a man who felt his true identity was that of a woman could take on a female role and marry a man. In other tribes a women could also do this and marry a woman. The Europeans found the berdache to be barbaric and practiced much more inflexible gender roles. Reproduction was important to the settlers who came to North America due to scarcity of labourers.

As a result of the social and political instability in the 19th century, sex became less associated with reproduction and more important as a form of personal intimacy. Within the middle class, romantic friendships encouraged both spiritual and physical intimacy that might become sexual. The industrializing economy offered white, wage-earning men opportunities to explore sexuality outside marriage while the city provided anonymity for their actions. Working class women also found that adopting the identity of the opposite sex could expand their opportunities by adopting men’s clothing and passing as men in order to marry other women and earn wages.

Romantic friendship between same-sex companionships was an acceptable part of social life within the middle class. Women’s socialization, at home or in boarding schools, encouraged them to form bonds with other women. These youthful friendships often turned into lifelong relationships. The separation of sexuality and reproduction made Americans more conscious of the erotic element of these friendships. College education, and the ability to be self-supporting without marrying, encouraged women’s partnerships at the turn of the century. Many educated women engaged in “Boston Marriages” which referred to two women living together.

In the twentieth century, same-gender relations, moved from an underground world into greater public consciousness. World War II created new erotic opportunities that provoked the expression of a gay identity and the rapid growth of a gay subculture. Lesbian subcultures were integrated after a bar subculture spread and stabilized throughout the postwar era. With the expanding possibilities for gay men and lesbians, came the postwar fears that homosexuals were a threat to national security. As a result gays and lesbians started the stonewall riots in 1969 which started a major social movement and the liberation impulse took root across the country.

From the colonial era to stonewall riots, construction of homosexuality has come a long way. Through Freedman’s examples of the cross-gender berdache, romantic friendships, urban, anonymous sex, long-time companions, Boston marriages, bar culture, and gay identity and political consciousness, we can see how sexuality was shaped and reshaped historically. With the interaction of economic and social contexts and the behaviours of individuals and social groups, we can see how social construction of sexuality has changed over time and across cultures.

References
Freedman, E. B. (1995). The historical construction of homosexuality in the U.S. Socialist
Review, 25(1), 31-46.

Précis 2: Talk Dirty to Me – A Women’s taste for pornography – Sallie Tisdale 1992

We live in a world in which almost every public image, and every interaction carries an element of sexual desire. Yet, it is nearly impossible for us to talk openly and honestly about sex. Talk Dirty to Me is an essay written by Sallie Tisdale (1992), which illustrates a women’s taste for pornography. Tisdale observes that when it comes to porn, even the most strong, powerful, and self-assured women have harboured fantasies and have grown more guilty for having them. Interweaving her own personal feelings of contradictory thoughts, experiences of non violent porn, and revelations that not all porn is for men, she presents a captivating portrait of sex and sexuality in America while encouraging us to explore and create our own intimate attitudes.

While creating her own intimate attitudes, Tisdale explains that at times she finds it harder to talk about pornography than her own sexual experiences. She may feel disgust or excitement, along with confusion while watching pornography. Tisdale argues that what she likes about pornography is as much a part of her sexuality as what she does, however it is deeply psychological. The Subconscious is where her pure imagination comes from. As a younger woman, Tisdale struggled with ignorance towards sex and felt shameful as a result. She was ashamed of what she desired and things that she said no one spoke about. Nevertheless she discovered that pornography was a way for her to propel toward the overt. She didn’t need information about sex, but wanted information and reassurance of bounds that were within normal. The implications of an overt consciousness by means of porn assisted Tisdale to expose her true sexual self while feeling comfortable.

Although porn can help a person expose their true selves as it does for Tisdale, there are boundaries. Tisdale argues that without consent the motions of sex become violent. Consent is what defines sex for her. To Tisdale, pornography is sex, however she acknowledges that there are feminists who believe that violence is the endpoint of all pornography. Tisdale mentions that feminists against pornography hold that our entire culture is pornographic, and in this pornographic society everything is frowned upon. As a result, feminists against pornography have actually made women into objects. This branch of feminism tries to tell us that watching porn is undesired by society. Tisdale however, describes that pornography tells her that none of her thoughts are bad and that anything goes. The implication of this attitude allows her to have peace with herself while being open about her sexual desires.

Sometimes it is hard to have peace with one’s self while being open about sexual desires in the world of pornography. For example a woman’s presence in an adult video store may be startling or genuinely unwelcome by men who are present. Tisdale provides evidence that society believes that men are the “standard-bearer” for what is obscene and forbidden. The act of viewing becomes a male act which subordinates the person viewed. Tisdale argues that although society has created this mindset, porn is for both men and women. Tisdale is glad that women are involved in the production of porn. She is happy that the boundaries in which women create can be expanded. She believes that there are no limits to what women can imagine or enjoy.

As Tisdale suggests, there are no limits to what women can imagine or enjoy, nor are there limits when talking openly and honestly about sex. Tisdale has demonstrated this through her essay Talk Dirty to Me. She encourages women to explore and create our own intimate attitudes while not getting hung up on our contradictory thoughts on sexuality, believing feminists views that all porn is violent or deeming porn as a pleasure for men only. With porn, just as Tisdale did, we can expose our true sexual selves.

Précis # 1 Sexual Antinomies in Late Modernity - Stevi Jackson and Sue Scott (2004)

Society is increasingly becoming more sexually liberal. Since the sexual revolution in the 1960s an era of broadened sexual attitudes and sexual regulation began. Research has shown us the wider acceptance of pre-marital heterosexual sexual relations, along with a greater tolerance of homosexuality. However, hand in hand with a more sexually diverse culture, is a high rate of tension and contradictions towards sexually liberal attitudes. Stevi Jackson and Sue Scott (2004) explored the tensions and uncertainties of different groups who are affected by this sexually liberal era. They examined children and childhood, heterosexual monogamy, heterosexuality and sexual difference, and the urge to sexual perfection.

Jackson and Scott found that the preservation of childhood innocence is increasingly anxiety provoking where erotic imagery is presented and easily accessed in the media. There are uncertainties of when to inform a child about sexual information, along with how to respond to children who begin to express themselves sexually. The contradiction lies between sex as a wonderful thing, and existing between limits for adults only. Defining the age of an adult furthers tension. In a society where there is greater acceptance of premarital sex, there is also more anxiety surrounding the issue of teen pregnancy. Anxiety surrounding preserving a child’s innocence is deeply concerning among parents who have difficulty seeing their child as potentially sexual.

Homosexuality is widely celebrated today but it also raises many tensions and contradictions regarding its understanding. Tolerance of homosexuality and other relationships that shy away from the norm make room for intolerances. Although homosexuality is being more widely accepted and considered “chic”, heterosexuality is still considered the norm. Some homosexuals still suffer from harassment whether in the workplace or on the street. Most homosexual relationships are only tolerated if they are monogamous and follow heterosexual family values and as long as they don’t “rock the boat too much”.

Equalitarianism has been on the rise among heterosexual relationships. The notion of the double standard has somewhat diminished. There is more emphasis in present day than in the past on women’s right to sexual pleasure and freedom of sexual expression. However with this new emphasis on female power, it is clear that the notion of the double standard has not entirely disappeared. With sexual liberalization comes the argument of being too sexual, or not being sexual enough. Emphasis on “new femininity” and equalitarianism may only reconfirm past attitudes rather than demolish them.

Just as the arguments presented above, sexual liberation brings pleasure among new constraints. With sexual liberation also comes the notion of perfection. To not have sex has been suggested as failing as a human. This can ostracize an individual away from a liberal community. A multitude of sexual revolutions have resulted in a broadening of the definition of what a sexual dysfunction is. The more we try to establish the idea of sexual perfectionism, the more variability that leaves for sexual dysfunction and ostracizing.

Sexual pleasure has become the benchmark of all things enjoyable. Sex is considered special and private, and puts self-confidence and self-esteem on the line if the relationship ends. As a result, sex can make a person vulnerable. On the flip side of anxiety and revulsion is a celebration of sexual pleasure. However as Jackson and Scott argue, sexual liberalization does not exist without constraints and tensions regarding children and childhood, heterosexual monogamy, heterosexuality and sexual difference, and the urge to sexual perfection.