sex

At one point in U.S. history, sodomy was illegal in every state. In the penal codes (no pun intended), sodomy was sometimes defined as anal sex, sometimes as oral sex, and sometimes both. In some cases, the laws applied only to same sex partners, in other cases to any two partners (even husband and wife).

This map (found here) shows when each state repealed its law:

In 2003, the Supreme Court made all such laws unconstitutional. This image (found here) shows which states had sodomy laws that applied to same sex couples and those that had laws that applied to all couples:

Laura Agustin, author of Sex at the Margins: Migration, Labour Markets, and the Rescue Industry, asks us to be critical consumers of stories about sex trafficking, the moving of girls and women across national borders in order to force them into prostitution.  Without denying that sex trafficking occurs or suggesting that it is unproblematic, Agustin wants us to avoid completely erasing the possibility of women’s autonomy and self-determination.

About one news story on sex trafficking, she writes:

…[the] ‘undercover investigation’, one with live images, fails to prove its point about sex trafficking… reporters filmed men and women in a field, sometimes running, sometimes walking, sometimes talking together.

…I’m willing to believe that we’re looking at prostitution, maybe in an informal outdoor brothel. But what we’re shown cannot be called sex trafficking unless we hear from the women themselves whether they opted into this situation on any level at all. They aren’t in chains and no guns are pointed at them, although they might be coerced, frightened, loaded with debt or wishing they were anywhere else. But we don’t hear from them. I’m not blaming the reporters or police involved for not rushing up to ask them, but the fact is that their voices are absent.

…

There are lots of things we might find out about the fields near San Diego… [but] we don’t see evidence for the sex-trafficking story. Feeling titillated or disgusted ourselves does not prove anything about what we are looking at or about how the people actually involved felt.

Regarding a news clip, Agustin writes:

…a reporter dressed like a tourist strolls past women lined up on Singapore streets, commenting on their many nationalities and that ‘they seem to be doing it willingly’. But since he sees pimps everywhere he asks how we know whether they are victims of trafficking or not? His investigation consists of interviewing a single woman who… articulates clearly how her debt to travel turned out to be too big to pay off without selling sex. Then an embassy official says numbers of trafficked victims have gone up, without explaining what he means by ‘trafficked’ or how the embassy keeps track…

So here again, there could be bad stories, but we are shown no evidence of them. The women themselves, with the exception of one, are left in the background and treated like objects.

To recap, what Agustin is urging us to do is to refrain from excluding the possibility of women’s agency by definition. Why might a woman choose a dangerous, stigmatized, and likely unpleasant job? Well, many women enter prostitution “voluntarily” because of social structural conditions (e.g., they need to feed their children and prostitution is the most economically-rewarding work they can get). Assuming all women are forced by mean people, however, makes the social structural forces invisible. We don’t need mean pimps to force women into prostitution, our own social institutions do a pretty good job of it.

And, of course, we must also acknowledge the possibility that some women choose prostitution because they like the work. You might say, “Okay, fine, there may be some high-end prostitutions who like the work, but who could possibly like having sex with random guys for $20 in dirty bushes?” Well, if we decide that the fact that their job is shitty means that they are “coerced” in some way, we need to also ask about those people that “choose” other potentially shitty jobs like migrant farmwork, being a cashier, filing, working behind the counter at an airline (seriously, that must suck), factory work, and being a maid or janitor. There are lots of shitty jobs in the U.S. and world economy. Agustin simply wants us to give women involved in prostitution the same subject status as women and men doing other work.

Lisa Wade, PhD is an Associate Professor at Tulane University. She is the author of American Hookup, a book about college sexual culture; a textbook about gender; and a forthcoming introductory text: Terrible Magnificent Sociology. You can follow her on Twitter and Instagram.

Maggie B. says:

I was shocked and appalled when I saw these posters hanging above the children’s shoe section in a FootAction store in Jensen Beach, FL this weekend.

In her book, Bad Boys, Ann Ferguson argues that while white boys are seen as naturally and innocently naughty, black boys are seen as willfully bad.  This is possible because teachers attribute adult motivations to black, but not white, children.  Ferguson calls this adultification.   Essentially this means that many teachers and other school authorities see black boys as “criminals” instead of kids.  And black girls–also adultified, but differently–are seen as dangerously sexual.  Adults, of course, are held 100% responsible for their behavior.  There is no leeway here, no second chances, and no benefit of the doubt.

These pictures do more than just sexualize the young children pictured (who appear to be black and mixed-race), they also adultify them with their expressions, postures, fashion, and implied contexts.

Lisa Wade, PhD is an Associate Professor at Tulane University. She is the author of American Hookup, a book about college sexual culture; a textbook about gender; and a forthcoming introductory text: Terrible Magnificent Sociology. You can follow her on Twitter and Instagram.

Text: “The Hunt Is On.”

A fashion spread (note the “safari” colors”):

Other ads had the text: “Going in for the kill has never been so satisfying” and “Animal attraction is meant to be acted on.”

Text: “Her primal urges may be fulfilled, but he’s still hot on her trail.”

Text: “He spots his prey…”

Five-page ad for Dentyne:

Text:

INTRODUCTION:  Admit it, guys.  No matter where you are, you’re thinking about it.

It’s okay.  Ever since you were a cave dweller.  Hunting has come naturally.   But you won’t get anywhere with cave breath.

So aside from having a mouth that won’t scare her off, we’ve outlined some fundamental basics you’ll need to master when out on the hunt.

Let’s get started.  Happy hunting.

THE SPECIES:  First of all, you have to know what you’re hunting.  Here are some common species you may encounter on your expeditions.  Good luck.

THE CAREER GIRL:  The one in a power suit with a cell phone attached to her ear, tends to be icy and dismissive but can be melted.  Play your cards right and you will be a kept man.  Habitat: Gym, high-end shoe stores, assertiveness-training classes.

THE HOT GIRL: Hot and know it.  Will toy with you like a cat with a mouse (if she even notices you).  Tame this one and you can write your own guide.  Habitat: The market, the bus, living next door to your girlfriend.

Text:

THE EASY GIRL:  Appearances vary, but the same willing soul resides within.  A sure thing that can be a temporary boost to the ego.  Habitat:   Could be anywhere.  Good chance you’ll spot her at happy hour.

THE TEASE:  Easily mistaken for the easy girl, she’s anything but.  Habitat: Anywhere.

THE CHATTY GIRL:  You won’t recognize her until you say ‘Hi.’  Then it’s too late.  To escape, fake getting a phone call and say you’ll be ‘right back.’  Habitat: Almost anywhere except a library.

THE BOHEMIAN ROCKER GIRL: Odds are she’s no musician.  Just dresses like one.  Look interested when she talks about all the ‘projects’ she has going on while not being an administrative assistant.  Habitat: Used record stores, art museums, open mic night.

Text:

RULES WHEN OUT IN THE FIELD:

Look her in the eye, not the anatomy.

Practice chivaly.  Unless she’s a militant feminist, she’ll like it.

Compliment her outfit.  Lie if you have to.

Look interested when she talks about her cat.

If you get shot down, move on to one of her friends.

Pop in a piece of Dentyne before making any moves.

RED FLAGS:

In the first five minutes, she mentions an ex.

She says she has to go home and take her ‘medication.’

She’s made plans for the two of you next weekend.

She knows every bartender by name.

She has an adam’s apple.

Text:

THE ARSENAL:

Money (it never hurts).

Your own place.  Living above mom and dad’s garage doesn’t count.

Perseverance, it’s tough out there.

Plenty of Dentyne gum.

These all remind me of an unfortunate Target billboard.

Thanks to my students who have brought these in over the years!

Lisa Wade, PhD is an Associate Professor at Tulane University. She is the author of American Hookup, a book about college sexual culture; a textbook about gender; and a forthcoming introductory text: Terrible Magnificent Sociology. You can follow her on Twitter and Instagram.

In this ad, the copy, which reads “Who said you can’t have it both ways,” refers explicitly to both “play[ing] it safe” with condoms and having “a great time” with “great sex.”  Of course, implicitly, it also means not choosing between black and white women.  Women are, in the subtext, objects to “have” and black and white women are very different kinds of objects. 

Aaron B. sent in this 1947 video clip (found here), titled “Are You Popular?”:

Notice the caution to women: if you go “parking with all the boys,” you might think you’re popular, but you’ll ultimately find yourself ostracized and friendless. To be really popular, you need to be well-dressed, have the respect of girls at school, and carefully guard your reputation.

Thanks, Aaron!

Gwen Sharp is an associate professor of sociology at Nevada State College. You can follow her on Twitter at @gwensharpnv.

Select text: “These well-stacked Sno-Balls have more than sex appeal… they have sales appeal!”

The 1960s via Found in Mom’s Basement.

More sexualization of food here, here, here, here, here, here, and especially here.

Tessa G.S. sent in a link to the online game Miss Bimbo. Here are some images from the game:

Tessa says,

In this case, you build a “bimbo” by placing your character on diets, getting plastic surgery, shopping for clothes, attending a-list parties, dating handsome men— all with the aim of becoming the most popular bimbo in the game…[According to the website] MissBimbo is an educational tool, a social meeting place and a hot pot of bimboism. It is free to enjoy bimboland.

An educational tool? Really?

According to CNN, parents have expressed concern that pre-teen girls are playing a game that encourages them to have their characters get breast implants and facelifts, as well as go on diets.

The game also reinforces the idea that girls are always rivals, whether competing for popularity or men (or the perfect wedding, as the movie “Bride Wars” shows).

While we’re on the topic of video games (sort of), Burk M. told me about Sexy Beach 3. In the game, you get to pick a female character, what she’s wearing, which of several beach-related activities she’s involved in (playing tag, “playful floating,” limbo, etc.), the location (beach, reef, waterfall, and so on) and the time of day. And then you can take the role of a disembodied hand that rubs various parts of her body while her nipples get hard and she moans in delight and eventually appears to orgasm. Here’s an example (Not Safe for Work):

more...