5 Assignment 05

In Rubin’s, “Thinking Sex: Notes for a Radical Theory of the Politics of Sexuality,” she observes the notion of sex in Western culture. Rubin believes that sex is heavily viewed and practiced politically, rather than our natural property. Sex is only accepted in society in terms of marriage, love, or reproduction. And sex on any other terms is considered to be taboo, most especially if it involves homosexuals. Things like fetishes, sex toys, porn, and almost anything else in the context of sex, is presumed to be bad and unnatural. However the only unnatural part of this all really, is for western culture to even determine whether or not the act of sex is good or bad. It attaches sex with morality, when sex is just a natural expression, that we cannot always control, just like our hunger. Rubin mentions that our choice of diet is like our choice of sexuality. But, yet sexuality is viewed differently from other parts of our body. Western culture has idealized sexual behavior, and conforms people to their standards of “moral” sex.

Simply being a homosexual was considered to be a sexual offense. It places your entire character to be  good or bad just because of your sexual preference. And today, we can still see the same things going on. We are constantly under this pressure, when sex should be allowed, how, who, where, etc. Sex has become such a political system that it robs sex from its natural state. Our sex lives have socially become more of a burden. And this extends western culture’s power of judgement to say what is moral and immoral. How far is this supposed to go? There are limitations on how much relativism can go on in a culture. It is threatening our birthrights. Sexual oppression has been evident historically, and still is today.

In Rubin’s work, she discussed six distinct thoughts of sex that were perceived by western culture. One of the most significant assumptions was the concept of sexual essentialism. The idea behind this concept was that sex was believed to be unchanging, primarily biological in a sense that it was just a natural urge. It denounces the belief that sexual behavior can be influenced by outside forces, such as social influences, other than sex being used to procreate. This led to the rise of sexual negativity, which viewed sex as a harmful and sinful behavior if done outside of marriage or done for the pleasure of it. Another significant assumption that Rubin presented was the idea of a hierarchical system of sexual values. This system ranked sexual acts based on the normalcy of the act in society’s standards. At the highest of the system, being labeled as the most normal kind of sexual act, is the monogamous heterosexual couple. Other sexual behaviors, such as masturbation and monogamous gay/lesbian relationships were at the lower part of the system. At the bottom of this hierarchy, behaviors deemed as out of the norm and were looked down upon were transsexuals, prostitutes, fetishists, etc.

The various assumptions in this work represented how closeminded society is in regards to the topic of sex. Any type of sexual behavior, besides from being in a monogamous heterosexual relationship, is deemed as sinful and therefore creates a stigma for any behaviors other than the “normal” kind. This becomes more of an issue when the stigma is then turned into acts of hate and violence within society, which had been afflicted toward the gay community during the mid-1900s, in which they were attacked and arrested for their sexual behavior. The lack of understanding for the different sexual behaviors creates an imagined fear within society that people feel that they need to “correct” simply because they do not understand.

The radical theory of sex contains many different ideas and restrictions on the concept of sex.  These theories run deep within history and appear mostly in the United States and England.  The act of premarital/underage sex is something that is so forbidden that people are even advised not to touch themselves because of precautions for their health when they’re older.  Parents even tie their children up before they put them to bed in order to prevent them from touching themselves.  Any form of “sex per se” was a sensitive topic and many laws were made in order to perpetuate any form of sexual contact, whether it was physical or visual.  It even got to the point where some nude pictures were not allowed to be in textbooks because it violated their laws of nudity.  At that point it wasn’t sure what was appropriate or not.  The customs and norm of the sexuality culture in the past were deemed as normal and because of that, it shaped the laws, which is why why nobody really questioned it, however now sexuality is coming more and more out of their boundaries and not everyone is agreeing with the laws and customs in the past.

From reading this article we can clearly see the hierarchies embedded in our systems of sexuality.  Of course heterosexual couples were seen as the norm.  Police and media waged war on homosexuals throughout the 1950s. Many gay communities were raided.  This was all normal to people because gays weren’t accepted ever.  Even with all the commotion, the enforcements of the existing laws of prostitution has been restricted even more.  Some states have been passing new and tighter regulations on commercial sex.

A big issue today is the defunding of planned parenthood. This was probably enforced in order to prevent abortions, however planned parenthood doesn’t cover people for abortion.  It is to manage the birth control/contraceptives.  This type of regulation is similar to back in the days, however for different reasons. Back in the, people were trying to refrain young girls from having sex.  Now it is a sense of not supporting abortions.  Same situation, different reasons. 

These customs and norms are a perfect example that shows how people can be influenced by society and who they grow up with.  In my family, for example, it is not a question that people are supposed to wait until marriage to sex. It’s not a law in where my parents grew up, but generation after generation they were taught that and try to teach their kids the same.

Gayle Rubin’s essay, “Thinking Sex: Notes for a Radical Theory of the Politics of Sexuality” presents her argument that several persistent features of thought about sex inhibit the development of a radical theory of sex (Bullock). She observes many assumptions in the western culture to prove her point further and to show how they end up limiting political discourse on sexuality in the United States. During the late nineteenth century, the United States and England had a period where sexuality, in some ways, was renegotiated. Powerful social movements were against prostitution and masturbation, especially amongst the young, and encouraged chastity. On top of that, morality crusaders targeted public dancing, music halls, birth control information, abortion, nude paintings,  etc. Unfortunately, the consequences of these “moral paroxysms” still profoundly influence society, such as leaving deep imprints on people’s thoughts on sex, sex law, medical practice, child-bearing, etc (143-144). In result of all of this, masturbation is still seen as an unhealthy practice with myths that it could affect the health and maturation of a child, lead to insanity, or be a hindrance to growth. Although the horrific techniques to keep young ones from masturbation have been left behind, there are still social and legal structures which do not allow for minors to gain sexual knowledge or experience (144). Not only was prostitution and masturbation being targeted during this era [especially just before and after World War II], with laws being passed against such things, but soon the focus started to shift to “homosexual menace” or the code ‘sex offenders’ [but also including rapists and child molesters]. Once the public began to “worry”, an epidemic of sexual psychopath laws were passed through state legislatures, giving more police powers to psychological professions over homosexuals and other sexual deviants (145). Homosexuals and other erotic communities were persecuted and became objects of witch hunts and purges, with the help of executive orders, congressional investigations, and media exposures supported by the government. More than thousands had lost their jobs due to this, and till this day there are still restrictions on federal employment of homosexuals (145). Such anti-homosexual movements are the most documented examples of sexual suppression and erotic repression from the late nineteenth century which sadly still affects how society thinks today.

The assumptions based on sex and sexuality have only expanded since the publishing of Rubin’s work. From my experience the biggest issue we still face as a society is the idea that sexual liberation is for the benefit of heterosexual men. This theory is a constant battle and many men and women who consider themselves progressive struggle to overcome the stigma. Heterosexual men who identify as liberal continue to place judgements on women who express sexuality freely, whether deeming them “not worth the chase” or expecting the woman to prove her loyalty before beginning a monogamous relationship. Additionally, many of these same men who consider themselves open minded do not often mix with gay men, either as friends or support gay businesses, as if to say that love is love if you keep it to yourself.

I would suggest that this heterosexual male perspective is typical of Western culture and rarely unchallenged since wild women and gay men are often deemed as untrustworthy, not deserving of protection and characterized as aggressors when unsupervised. Many women and gay men are underpaid, often living in unsafe neighborhoods and with little access to health care. Community health centers are consistently at risk for harassment, lost leases or loss of government funding when states find the communities too unsavory for public money. Furthermore, sex laws that demonize violent sex crimes in the same manner as consensual sex acts suggest that the acts of consent are the same as any sex act imposed without consent. This perpetuates a hierarchy that sexual delinquents, rapists and child molesters, are the same as monogamous homosexual couples or promiscuous adults, like vegetables and fruits on a food pyramid. These ideas make discussions about human rights issues impossible because anyone who fits into a sexually deviant category, whether with or without consent, is not viewed as human in the consciousness of society.

Gayle Rubin’s, “Thinking Sex: Notes from a Radical Theory of the Politics of Sexuality” is an examination of sexuality in society, and the ways that it is heavily structured. Rubin attributes the current fear and lack of discussion of sexuality to notions that emerged in the U.S and England in the late nineteenth century. For example, things such as masturbation, obscene literature and art, and abortion were discouraged and crusaded against. These ideas lead to the rejection and persecution of certain sexual groups, such as homosexuals and the transgender community. These ideas that were promoted lead to the rigid structuring of sexuality, as well as the lack of acceptance and ability to engage in conversations regarding sexuality.

Rubin describes several assumptions about sex, many of which go unquestioned. One of the most significant assumptions that affects sexuality, is that sex is a negative thing. Sex is deemed dangerous, harmful and sinful, and something that should only happen in marriage to produce children so long as it is not “too” pleasurable. This attitude towards sex prevents any discussion from happening, because how can people speak about sex objectively if their attitude towards it is negative? The assumption that sex is negative, especially if it is not heterosexual furthers the oppression of the lgbtq community.

Rubin claims that sexual activity is organized in a hierarchal system, that places “reproductive heterosexuals”at the top of the pyramid. According to Rubin, certain sexual acts have more or less value, and are more or less accepted depending on their place in the hierarchy of sex. Rubin states that low-status sex acts are condemned, and those who engage are viewed as criminals or mentally ill, while heterosexuals at the top are rewarded with social mobility and institutional support. This hierarchy of sexual activity prevents discussion of sexuality that is not “normal”, and stigmatizes people who are not deemed regular by society. The preconceived notions of sex enforce the system that is sexuality, which makes it more difficult to engage in productive discussion of sex. If sexuality that isn’t hetero is disregarded and shunned before it is even in the public view, how can people shed their ignorance and speak about sex? As long as sex is seen as taboo, it will be hard to dismantle the system that is sexuality.

According to Rubin’s article, she states that sexuality was seems to be an unimportant topic in earlier centuries. It has its own internal politics, it’s political. Rubin began the argument of sex from England and the United States during late nineteenth century about chastity, eliminated prostitution, and discourage masturbation for the young. In that time, masturbation was consider an unhealthy practice for children. People thought the premature interest in sex would impair the health and maturation of the child. In order to protect the young, parent would tie their children at night to prevent them from touching themselves. But this idea was harmful to the young has been chiselled into people’s mind, this may affected the social and legal structures and make minors lacked the knowledge and experience about sex.

In 1950s, the topic about sexuality shifted to ‘homosexual menace’ and ‘sex offender’. The term ‘sex offender’ sometimes applied to rapists, sometimes to ‘child molester’ and eventually functioned as a code for homosexuals. During the time period from 1940s to 1981, the polices raided in gay bars and bath houses, arrested hundreds of people. This results the increasing of ‘Queerbashing’. The crackdown was not been limited to homosexuals. In 1977, the child pornography laws were claimed to protect the minors. All photographs of naked children in anthropology textbooks and movies was banned. This may not be a perfect way, but in people’s opinion, naked was always involve with sex. So it did have some help to protect the minors.

For many people, society must worked with the ‘moral’ way. But the ‘morality’ they believe may not be true, what they say as moral was the life style which majority people believe it’s true. Otherwise, it’s against the rule, it’s immoral.

The “thinking sex” by Gayle Rubin is talking about the conflict between the sexuality and politics. During the ninetieth century, the social movements and gender identity is misunderstanding and lack of knowledge. There are many stereotype ideals and attitude about sexuality. The limitation of sexuality development, give many people misunderstanding about reality. And the social justice system and government passed laws to manage how people should handle the sexuality. It’s controlling the rules of nature and destroys the universe thinking of human being.

In the 20^th century, the US and Britain government not allowed citizens watch any media resources about homosexual. The ideology of sexuality and gender is negative impact in their mind. The physical and psychology develop of an infant is begin at born; usually they have sex identity around 3yr until mature. During the infant to teenagers, the ways of parent teaching way determine whether a child has natural gender identity or not. In the other hand, the cultural and society make rules to push child to accept heterosexual, do not give their chance to choose their own lives. Different behavior can cause people in trouble; we live in a society people who not judge what you are doing or what you thinking. When the policy controls personal behavior, it causes mental illness, increase in criminal rate and loss of economy. The nature religious also give people an ideology of how sexuality it is. There is much value of sex than everything, so that people thinking sex becomes a value thing.

During the industrialization and urbanization period, the gender identity becomes more effective. The cultural ideas of gender should be, women become a natural producer and men become a strong worker. The assumptions include the culture, the new generations, the religious and technology. All of them limit political rules or policy in the United States. In conclusion, the Rubin points the view of how others view’s point about sexuality. The invisible hand is controlling the sexuality position in society.

As can be inferred from the title “Thinking sex,” in her essay, Gayle Rubin describes the politics of sexuality. Especially in Western culture and the United States, several thoughts and assumptions about sex have been acknowledged as naturally, without a doubt on its rationality. Some thoughts get deeply rooted into societies. Once they become so pervasive, it changes people’s attitudes towards such issue, and eventually dominates. Furthermore, it stays the same even after generation changes. People might have good understandings on what is unfair and wrong, but they just live with it.

Rubin delineates the issue of censoring obscenity in the United States. Late 19^th century was when it started to be pervasive, but this is an ongoing issue that the remains of old thoughts and laws still stays in people’s head. One of the shocking issues that were introduced by Rubin was regulation on homosexuals. The first federal anti-obscenity law in the United States was passed in 1873, and it prohibited activities that were related to sex. They arrested homosexuals and prostitutes. Then in 1950s, instead of focusing on prostitution, they forced power on homosexuals. Assumed as ‘sex offender,’ homosexuals became public fear and scrutiny. Many states did investigation that aimed to root out homosexuals employed in government. I was surprised that under the category of ‘sex offender,’ homosexuals were treated same as rapists, child molesters or pornographic materials. They were suffering from federal witch hunts, and extensive repression in every part of life. Up until 1977, gay arrests were happening throughout the whole state. Therefore, it could be easily found that the regulations were done formally by social, legal, and medical enforcements. We see that in current period, people who have been treated as sexual minorities speak up in public for their rights. It is more accepted by other people than earlier times. However, there still are lots of social conflicts in many different areas. Also, by some people homosexual activities are still acknowledged as inferior or immoral. Now is an important time to think about sex. Sexuality is linked to various parts of society, and discriminations or old exclusive thoughts should not be overlooked anymore.

In “Thinking Sex: Notes from a Radical Theory of the Politics of Sexuality,” Gayle Rubin states that sexuality is taboo in the United States, and in the Western societies in general. Society has been rigidly formed in a frame of thought or religious belief that defines what is accepted as sexual behavior, what is sinful and deviant. Rubin shows how  mechanisms of sexual control operate in our society through the use of law, repressive politics, mental health definitions and ultimately as a form of racism. In the U.S. sexuality is part of the hierarchical order of society and is difficult to discuss it openly.

Rubin shows the characteristics of sexual thought in the U.S. and reveals that sex is viewed as a negative behavior. In our society  sex is considered dangerous and destructive. This view is rooted in the Christian tradition, which condemns sex as sinful and bad. Sex is exempted as a negative force  only when a married couple, heterosexual of course, have sex because of procreation and love. Nevertheless, signs of enjoyment are forbidden, people must feel guilty for having sexual attractions, masturbate, cohabit, or explore their sexuality in any possible way. This perception of sexuality has confined the choices of people in regard their sexual lives. The social norms specify the way individuals should feel or repress emotions, pleasure and passion.  The laws have imposed boundaries in the ways people can use their bodies, and the laws have defined the only accepted way of having relationships with a person or group of people. These regulations are serious and coercive. LGBTQ have been deprived of their freedom, punished and segregated for just being.

There is another important aspect of the sexual though in the U.S. and Rubin describes it as a “hierarchical system of sexual value” (151). With that in mind, we should understand that people who have the most prestige in our society are married, reproductive-heterosexual couples. They are at the top of the social ladder because of their sexual behavior and conformity to the morals and values. They are perceived as socially acceptable, trusted, respectable and could be rewarded with advantages of social mobility. On the other hand, stigma is attached to all those who do not behave in the way religion, the state, the media and most public institutions establish as “normal.”

Moreover, Rubin states that the stigma is rooted in medical and psychiatric censure. Psychiatry condemns sexual behavior as a sign of mental health and judges individuals as emotional inferiors. Sexual preferences are not seen as a personal choice and as an expression of individual’s feelings.  These systems of sexual repression and judgement are meant to divide a line between what is good or what is wrong. If we take a closer look, all these ideas of sexual morality are similar with the ideas of racism, and operate alike segregating people in social classes and limiting their access to resources and social development. Sexuality is supposed to conform with a single standard, but that standard has been constructed by the ruling class. We live in a society where diversity is not valued at all. Variation in sexuality is rejected, as other races and ethnicities are undermined as less important.