An article I recently read, although over thirty years old, did provide some insight into exhibitionism and voyeurism and how these topics relate to sexuality.
According to Merriam-Webster's online dictionary:
Exhibitionism: "a perversion in which sexual gratification is obtained from the indecent exposure of one's genitals (as to a stranger)" or "an act of such exposure" (1).
Voyeurism: "one obtaining sexual gratification from observing unsuspecting individuals who are partly undressed, naked, or engaged in sexual acts" or "a prying observer who is usually seeking the sordid or the scandalous" (2).
Leonard Blank discusses nudists and the differences between "naked" and "nude" (naked being a term that implies vulnerability and shame, where nude can refer to more sophisticated states of being unclothed, such as in art). But when discussing the nudist, Leonard states, "...it is the outsider rather than the nudist whose sexual control seems threatened" (3). This can apply directly to sex in a dorm room in front of a roommate. It is hardly ever the couple engaging in the act that feels ashamed; they are the nudists who feel comfortable with not only their lack of clothes, but the display of their sexual acts. It is the roommate who feels violated, who is made uncomfortable by witnessing the nudists. It could also be said that the couple could be exhibitionists, although subjecting a "stranger" or even a roommate to such a display (without their consent)is an entirely different ethical question in itself.
Oddly enough, the article went on to discuss the fine line between what is acceptable in cinema and art, and what is not. Blank automatically diverts to the discussion of pubic hair, and how it suddenly transforms art into pornography. I immediately remembered something I had seen on Vh1 years ago...and after a ton of circling research, I came to find that it was the Black Crows album Amorica that had been featured. The album cover was nothing more then the bottom half of a woman wearing a bikini, but there was pubic hair sticking out from under it. (The image and a little information can be found here but I'm not posting it for the same reason that it stirred up controversy). None of this connects directly to the topic of my blog, except to say that it doesn't take much for something to become controversial (because once the band took out the pubic hair, the album was suddenly acceptable); mostly I just thought it was interesting.
To continue, Blank backed up some of the other articles already looked at in this blog by explaining that excitement can be associated with the forbidden, and the forbidden is what sometimes provokes compulsive looking, or voyeurism. The voyeur is able to stay passive in the situation while experiencing the forbidden which is closely linked with desire. This is quite the opposite of the exhibitionist situation, but it still explains why curiosity can be piqued by these kinds of situations.
Blank's article also covers some of the gendered stereotypes surrounding sex, which I will look at in the next entry.
(1)exhibitionism. (2008). In Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary.
Retrieved November 29, 2008, from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/exhibitionism
(2)voyeur. (2008). In Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary.
Retrieved November 29, 2008, from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/voyeur
(3)Blank, Leonard. "Nakedness and Nudity: A Darwinian Explanation for Looking and Showing Behavior." Leonardo 6 (1973): 23-27. JSTOR.
Saturday, November 29, 2008
Friday, November 28, 2008
Fantasy, Desire, and Sexual Scripts
Desire and Sexual Scripts play large roles when talking about any sexual behavior.
Sexual Scripts were first introduced by Gagnon and Simon in 1973, but Michael Wiederman explains,
"Social scripting theory points to the fact that much of sexual behavior seems to follow a script. Similar to scripts that stage actors use to guide their behavior, social scripts instruct members of a society as to appropriate behavior and the meanings to attach to certain behaviors." (1)
It could be argued that, in everyday life, having sex in public or in front of others is not a part of the normal sexual script. However, in my personal opinion, I believe that on college campuses, public sexual relations have found a home in sexual scripts. To take the analogy of the stage further, if actors on one stage deem it acceptable to stab someone during their performance, and there are no objections raised by the audience, what is to stop other other actors from doing the same after realizing they will not be met with much resistance? The same can be said for these scripts applied to sex. If an action is deemed "okay" once, others will soon catch on, and the act will be repeated.
Another contributor, as mentioned earlier, is desire.
As Curtis pointed out in her article that was cited in my last entry, desire seems to be intensified when it seems dangerous or unconventional. Michael Kimmel explores this further, stating that fantasy is what stimulates desire, and erotic excitement is greater when, "fantasy outcome is uncertain - when it includes an element of risk, danger, mystery, or transgression." (2)
Nothing seems more uncertain than not knowing whether or not you will be caught having sex in a public bathroom. People appear to be driven by these experiences that make it seem "dangerous" to engage in acts in front of others, and in public spaces. Especially if what I assumed about sexual scripts on college campuses is not true, a public fantasy would seem even more risky, heightening desire.
(1)Michael Wiederman, "The Gendered Nature of Sexual Scripts." The Family Journal, Vol. 13, No. 4, 496-502. Sage Publications, 2005
(2)Kimmel, Michael, ed. The Sexual Self : The Construction of Sexual Scripts. New York: Vanderbilt UP, 2007. 63-65.
Sexual Scripts were first introduced by Gagnon and Simon in 1973, but Michael Wiederman explains,
"Social scripting theory points to the fact that much of sexual behavior seems to follow a script. Similar to scripts that stage actors use to guide their behavior, social scripts instruct members of a society as to appropriate behavior and the meanings to attach to certain behaviors." (1)
It could be argued that, in everyday life, having sex in public or in front of others is not a part of the normal sexual script. However, in my personal opinion, I believe that on college campuses, public sexual relations have found a home in sexual scripts. To take the analogy of the stage further, if actors on one stage deem it acceptable to stab someone during their performance, and there are no objections raised by the audience, what is to stop other other actors from doing the same after realizing they will not be met with much resistance? The same can be said for these scripts applied to sex. If an action is deemed "okay" once, others will soon catch on, and the act will be repeated.
Another contributor, as mentioned earlier, is desire.
As Curtis pointed out in her article that was cited in my last entry, desire seems to be intensified when it seems dangerous or unconventional. Michael Kimmel explores this further, stating that fantasy is what stimulates desire, and erotic excitement is greater when, "fantasy outcome is uncertain - when it includes an element of risk, danger, mystery, or transgression." (2)
Nothing seems more uncertain than not knowing whether or not you will be caught having sex in a public bathroom. People appear to be driven by these experiences that make it seem "dangerous" to engage in acts in front of others, and in public spaces. Especially if what I assumed about sexual scripts on college campuses is not true, a public fantasy would seem even more risky, heightening desire.
(1)Michael Wiederman, "The Gendered Nature of Sexual Scripts." The Family Journal, Vol. 13, No. 4, 496-502. Sage Publications, 2005
(2)Kimmel, Michael, ed. The Sexual Self : The Construction of Sexual Scripts. New York: Vanderbilt UP, 2007. 63-65.
Sunday, November 23, 2008
Sexual Relativism
One of the things that I thought would be extremely interesting would be to try and research some statistics on this topic, as one person has already suggested. However, I was not able to come away with much. Although I found plenty of reputable sources that gave quantitative facts about sexually transmitted diseases, teen pregnancy, and whatnot, I did not come across any such figures to help explain the phenomenon behind having sex in public, and more specifically in a college setting.
However, reading an ethnographic article by Debra Curtis (which is cited at the bottom of this entry) has helped to put this lack of information into context. Although it may be relatively easy to collect data based on medical records or birth certificates, when it comes to individuals giving out personal information, the collection of such information becomes more difficult. Curtis explains, "Not having access to this interior space may be an inevitable obstacle in sexuality research no matter how loosely structured and open-ended our interviews are crafted to be” (p 112).
The article's real focus is on sexual desire and capitalism, but because it looks at sex toy parties to do so, it also says a lot about how these sex toy parties shape sexual identities. The sex toy parties are not unlike Tupperware parties, or Mary Kay make-up parties; a bunch of women gather together to look at products and possibly buy some of them. However, much in the way that Tupperware parties were forums for discontented women to bond together in the '50's and '60's, today sex toy parties are places where women can exchange sexual ideas and shape their sexual identities.
Curtis sits in on a number of these parties, and she notes that sometimes mothers and daughters attend them together, which shows that there is a certain degree of openness involved in these parties that we don't normally see in everyday life. In order to sell these products, the marketer needs to make her clients feel at ease, and feel comfortable with their surroundings as well as the products; "the marketer sanctions a liberal attitude about sex-an attitude that also suggests the possibility for new ways of experiencing pleasure" (p 102). The marketer must break down the rigidity that we normally associate with sexual conduct in order to sell products. But the idea of sexual openness does not diminish as soon as the seller walks out the door; these women are left with these ideas which then impact their everyday lives.
Those who feel it’s acceptable to engage in sexual acts in the presence of others could be influenced by phenomenon such as sex toy parties. Whether they are brought up feeling that they can be open about sex, or a third party makes them feel as such, a possible explanation to sex in front of others could simply be sexual openness and ease. For example, at a sex toy party, it is normal for guests to share their experiences, to recommend toys for each other, and to ask questions. To me, it sounds like this is a step toward feeling comfortable enough not only to talk about sex with others, but also to perform acts in front of others as well.
Curtis explores a quotation from Gayle Rubin about sexual relativism. She notes that not unlike previous misconceptions about "savages," we sometimes stereotype sexual differences as being disgusting or immoral. It is important to have an understanding surrounding these different sexual practices, and to acknowledge that they might be different, but not necessarily bad. Sex toy parties do very well at capitalizing on this aspect by making sexuality and desire seem normal and natural, thus justifying their toys as wholesome when thrown into that mix.
I think in addition to sexual openness and comfort, desire also plays a large role when discussing public sexual acts. Curtis realizes, "As 'wholesome' as Jennifer portrayed the cock ring and vibrator to be, for instance, consuming such products is still about realizing 'forbidden' and unmentionable desires" (p 102). I think desire will be an interesting direction to take for the next entry on this topic.
Curtis, Debra. "Commodities and Sexual Subjectivities: A Look at Capitalism and Its Desires." Cultural Anthropology 19 (2004): 95-121. Anthrosource.
However, reading an ethnographic article by Debra Curtis (which is cited at the bottom of this entry) has helped to put this lack of information into context. Although it may be relatively easy to collect data based on medical records or birth certificates, when it comes to individuals giving out personal information, the collection of such information becomes more difficult. Curtis explains, "Not having access to this interior space may be an inevitable obstacle in sexuality research no matter how loosely structured and open-ended our interviews are crafted to be” (p 112).
The article's real focus is on sexual desire and capitalism, but because it looks at sex toy parties to do so, it also says a lot about how these sex toy parties shape sexual identities. The sex toy parties are not unlike Tupperware parties, or Mary Kay make-up parties; a bunch of women gather together to look at products and possibly buy some of them. However, much in the way that Tupperware parties were forums for discontented women to bond together in the '50's and '60's, today sex toy parties are places where women can exchange sexual ideas and shape their sexual identities.
Curtis sits in on a number of these parties, and she notes that sometimes mothers and daughters attend them together, which shows that there is a certain degree of openness involved in these parties that we don't normally see in everyday life. In order to sell these products, the marketer needs to make her clients feel at ease, and feel comfortable with their surroundings as well as the products; "the marketer sanctions a liberal attitude about sex-an attitude that also suggests the possibility for new ways of experiencing pleasure" (p 102). The marketer must break down the rigidity that we normally associate with sexual conduct in order to sell products. But the idea of sexual openness does not diminish as soon as the seller walks out the door; these women are left with these ideas which then impact their everyday lives.
Those who feel it’s acceptable to engage in sexual acts in the presence of others could be influenced by phenomenon such as sex toy parties. Whether they are brought up feeling that they can be open about sex, or a third party makes them feel as such, a possible explanation to sex in front of others could simply be sexual openness and ease. For example, at a sex toy party, it is normal for guests to share their experiences, to recommend toys for each other, and to ask questions. To me, it sounds like this is a step toward feeling comfortable enough not only to talk about sex with others, but also to perform acts in front of others as well.
Curtis explores a quotation from Gayle Rubin about sexual relativism. She notes that not unlike previous misconceptions about "savages," we sometimes stereotype sexual differences as being disgusting or immoral. It is important to have an understanding surrounding these different sexual practices, and to acknowledge that they might be different, but not necessarily bad. Sex toy parties do very well at capitalizing on this aspect by making sexuality and desire seem normal and natural, thus justifying their toys as wholesome when thrown into that mix.
I think in addition to sexual openness and comfort, desire also plays a large role when discussing public sexual acts. Curtis realizes, "As 'wholesome' as Jennifer portrayed the cock ring and vibrator to be, for instance, consuming such products is still about realizing 'forbidden' and unmentionable desires" (p 102). I think desire will be an interesting direction to take for the next entry on this topic.
Curtis, Debra. "Commodities and Sexual Subjectivities: A Look at Capitalism and Its Desires." Cultural Anthropology 19 (2004): 95-121. Anthrosource.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)