Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Marcel Mauss The Gift summary
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Marcel Mauss The Gift summary
Gayle Rubin is an American cultural anthropologist born in the year 1949.She is a renowned activist and theorist of sex and gender politics and is known for her works in the field of feminism, lesbian literature, pornography, prostitution, as well as anthropological studies. Presently, she is an Associate Professor at the University of Michigan teaching anthropology, women studies and comparative literature.
Early Life:
She was very active in the campus of the university, writing for women’s movement papers, majorly on feminist topics. She was also a part of feminist consciousness raising group during the late 60s and helped found an early Lesbian Feminist group called Radicalesbians. In the year 1975, her essay called the “Traffic In Women:
…show more content…
According to Rubin, “Gender is a socially imposed division of the sexes” and Female oppression is perpetuated within the patriarchal society through the exchange of women-which is the key to her argument, referencing Marcel Mauss’ “Essay On The Gift.” Considering women as gifts and exchanging her during marriage has been believed to strengthen the trust bonds between the exchangers and this exchange is also a very important social custom. She argued that gender was created by men in a system that functions on blood relationship i.e. kinship. Women are born biologically female and gender comes into play when such exchanges have to be made. When a man has to give away his daughter or sister for matrimonial purposes, it allows the formation and strengthening of the kinship ties and also leads to, “transfer of certain rights, lineage names, and sexual access”. When sex/gender system is analyzed in a capitalist society, women are excluded from that system, making men as the sellers and women as their commodities for exchange and it is the men who are the beneficiaries of such an exchange within this social organization. Rubin hopes for a society which is genderless with no sexual difference and hierarchies attached.
Rubin also stresses upon the “sexual division of labor” which
…show more content…
Here, Rubin clearly and distinctly pronounces that sex is used as a political agent for the implementation of repression and dominance in the western society of today. She has minutely analyzed the stance of modern culture on sexuality, exposing the hypocrisy and subjugation that victimizes anyone with a different sexual orientation or inclination. Her work majorly focuses on sadism, homosexuals, women, children, pedophiles etc. Her argument is strengthened by the theory of Foucault about the discourse in sex and its institutionalization. She questioned the value system that the various groups attach to sexuality defining some behaviors as good/natural or bad/unnatural. The concept of “Charmed Circle” of sexuality was introduced by her in this essay. This essay suggests that the sexuality that is given importance by the society is kept inside of it, while the others are opposed and kept outside of the society. There are a lot of ideological connotations attached to the ideas of sexuality, the most important being the negativity of sex. If marriage, love or reproduction is not involved, the sexual activities are considered bad or dangerous especially in the western context. A need is felt by the people to draw a line between good and bad sex as they see it standing between sexual order and chaos. It is often feared that if “bad sex” is allowed to move across the line, unimaginable activities will also follow. It is also
Sexuality has often been confused with pornography. It has been trivialised as something that is a denigration and denial of true feeling by sensationalising genuine expressivism.
In the article “An Anthropological Look at Human Sexuality” the authors, Patrick Gray and Linda Wolfe speak about how societies look at human sexuality. The core concept of anthology is the idea of culture, the systems of attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors people acquire as a member of society. The authors give an in depth analysis on how human sexuality is looked at in all different situations.
I decided to focus my paper on the first volume, the most mentioned and most known, which is a deep analysis of the last two centuries of history of sexuality, particularly oriented in finding out why and how sexuality is an object of discussion. Foucault is not interested in sexuality itself, but he is interested in how it has become an object of knowledge. Why, in the past few centuries, have we increasingly come to see our identity as bound with our sexuality?
Essay #1: Sexual Politics It has been said that “Society has always defined for us what it means to be a man and what it means to be a woman, what a man should be like and what a woman should be like, and these traditional definitions of gender roles have limited and even harmed individuals”. The theme of sexual politics comes to mind in this quote. One can define sexual politics as the relationship of the sexes, male and female, regarding power. Society’s definition of this can limit an individual in their gender role and restrain a person from being themselves.
In The Introduction to the History of Sexuality, Foucault explains how during the 19th century with the raise of new societies, the discourse or knowledge about sex was not confronted with repulsion but it “put into operation an entire machinery for producing true discourses concerning sex” (Foucault 69). In fact, this spreading of discourse on sexuality itself gives a clear account of how sexuality has been controlled and confined because it was determined in a certain kind of knowledge that carries power within it. Foucault reflects on the general working hypothesis or “repressive hypothesis,” and how this has exercised power to suppress people’s sexuality. It has power on deciding what is normal or abnormal and ethical or unethical about sexuality. Through discourses of life and sexuality, power is exercised because humans learned how to behave in relation to sexuality, which method keep individuals controlled and regulated. This explains why people experience that sense of behaving inappropriate when we talk about sex in a different way than the whole society. Foucault points up how sexuality is not just treated in terms of morality, but it is a matter of knowledge and “truth.” However, these discourses, including sexual discourses are not true or false, but they are just understood to be the truth or falsehood to control society. As a result, sexuality begins to be explored in a scientific way, developing the “truth” science of sex (Foucault 69). For Foucault, he asserts that sexuality has developed as a form of science that keeps us all afraid of such phenomena, which people think to be true, thus this science helps society to discipline and control individuals’ behaviors.
explores not only the way in which patriarchal society, through its concepts of gender , its objectification of women in gender roles, and its institutionalization of marriage, constrains and oppresses women, but also the way in which it, ultimately, erases women and feminine desires. Because women are only secondary and other, they become the invisible counterparts to their husbands, with no desires, no voice, no identity. (Wohlpart 3).
This essay will discuss the ways sexuality is gendered and their impacts towards both men and women by exploring the contemporary heterosexual scripts from a sociological perspective on three main aspects; i.e. sex drive, desire and power. It studies how men are deemed to have a higher sexual edge than women, who acts as the relationship gatekeepers. This essay analyses the theory that women predictably pursuits love and relationships while men are more sexually controlled by lusts and cravings. Sexual dominance and passiveness is another traditional script inspected in this essay, focusing on how men are always expected to be the prevailing initiator thus devouring more power in relationships while women stays being the weaker, submissive receivers.
Gayle Rubin’s “Thinking Sex: Notes for a Radical Theory of the Politics of Sexuality” focused on the history of sexuality and sexual persecution. Gayle Rubin recognizes the idea of sex as a natural force that exists prior to social life and which shapes institutions and society. First, Rubin, emphasizes the idea of negative sex, by showcasing views by other scholars. Rubin notes Foucault in his 1978 publication “The History of Sexuality”, as “sex as the natural libedo wearing to break free of social constraint” (Rubin, 149). This leads Rubin to her understanding of sex negativity. Sex, as Rubin depicts, is dangerous, destructive and a negative force and sex negativity is any negative sexual behaviour other than married or reproductive sex. Many Western religious believe that sex should only be for reproductive reasons and that pleasure and anything outside of martial sex should not be experienced. Third, Rubin goes on to construct the charmed circle, distinguishing good and bad sex. Resulting from sex negativity, Rubin develops an illustration of good and bas sex, better known as the charmed circle. Instances of bad sex include; casual,
In the book History of Sexuality: An introduction, Volume 1 by Michel Foucault, he discusses the “repressive hypothesis” which he had developed. Sexual repression was due to the rise of the bourgeois. He suggests that the repressive hypothesis is important for discourse on the revolution of sexuality. Foucault has recognized the repressive hypothesis as a form of discourse. The repressive hypothesis has power to repress the debate of sexuality. Foucault mentions that society has created control over how people talk about sex over time. In the 17th century with the rise of the bourgeoisie, there had been control on the discourse of sex. In the 18th century, sex was studied for the means of regulating the demographic of the population. Sex lives
Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies, Vol. 5, No. 3 (Autumn, 1980), pp. 17-20. JSTOR. 2
... decades ago. This book is one that will allow the reader to view many aspects of sexuality from a social standpoint, and apply it to certain social attitudes in our society today, these attitudes can range from the acceptance of lesbian and gays, and the common sight of sex before marriage and women equality. The new era of sexuality has taken a definite "transformation" as Giddens puts it, and as a society we are living in the world of change in which we must adapt, by accepting our society as a changing society, and not be naive and think all the rules of sexuality from our parents time our still in existence now.
The issues of sexual ethics in relation to morality and perversion have been addressed in depth by each of the gentleman at this table. Sexual activity as described by Solomon and Nagle is comprised of a moral standard and ‘naturalness’ aspect. So, in claiming an act is perverted we must first examine it through a moral framework and understand how this interacts with the ‘naturalness’ of a particular act. Solomon makes the distinction as follows “Perversion is an insidious concept…To describe an activity as perverse is not yet a full blown moral condemnation, for it need not entail that one ought not to indulge in such activities.” Along with the examination of the nature of an act, there must be clear justification as to why sexual acts deserve special separate ethical principles. The question arises: does an act simply due to its sexual nature deserve a separate form of moral inquisition than other acts that occur in nature? In this essay I shall argue that perversion and immorality are not mutually exclusive. By this I mean that a sexual act that is, by my definition, immoral must also be perverted. It is also my contention that if an act is perverted we must also define it as immoral. This second part of the argument is contrary to what many of you have claimed. At the outset of this paper I would also like to state my support of Thomas Nagel’s argument holding that the connection between sex and reproduction has no bearing on sexual perversion. (Nagel 105)
Deconstructing Michel Foucault's The Perverse Implantation In The Perverse Implantation, Michel Foucault argues that while the majority of discourse on sexuality prior to the 18th century focused solely on marriage, discourses on sex increasingly became more concerned with those who were outside the bond of marriage, namely, children, homosexuals, the mentally ill etc. Foucault then points out three major arenas where the exercising of the power to make distinctions in sexuality are actually encouraging and proliferating sexual perversion, rather than repressing it. Throughout his argument, he explores questions such as “What is the purpose of codifying a sexual norm?” and illuminates the reader on why we ought to abandon the repressive hypothesis.
II. Rosemary Radford Reuther, New Woman, New Earth: Sexist Ideologies and Human Liberation (New York: Seabury Press, 1975)
Women’s subordination within the labour market is seen by Marxist feminists as suiting the needs of capitalism as women are considered a ‘reserve army of labour’ as they are a more disposable part of the workforce. According to Beechey (1986) women are a cheap ‘reserve army of labour’ that are brought in during economic booms but then thrown out during slumps. Women are often not members of trade unions and are prepared to work for less money as their wage could be a second income. This benefits capitalism as a group of unemployed people looking for work creates competition and exploitation. Employers are given an advantage which allows them to reduce wages and increase the rate of exploitation. Benston (1972) supports this as women are used to benefitting the operation of the capitalist economy by carrying out unprepared work in the home. This proves that patriarchy dominates women which leads to women’s subordination. Hartmann (1981) believes that patriarchy and the economy both play a crucial role in explaining and understanding gender inequality. Historically, men have controlled women especially by control of labour power. This can come through legislation that operates economically to the benefit of men, for example Maternity and Paternity Rights. This proves that patriarchy and economics together explains gender inequality. However, Walby (1986) argues that women staying at home can actually harm capitalism because if women were to compete for jobs with men this would lower wages and increase profits. Women who earn also have superior spending power which would boost the economy and benefit