ques_motherhood

ques_motherhood - de-essentializing sex/gender/kinship;...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
de-essentializing sex/gender/kinship; querying motherhood moving to final topic: from thinking about sexuality — as desire, behavior, identity, and various constellations of the 3 — to reproductive politics — not unrelated stories helpful transition is to recall the history we traced (Katz) of contrasting sexual ethics: procreative ethic of sex — sex is productive of babies, producing babies is good, therefore — in this way — sex is good pleasure ethic of sex sex is pleasurable, can be thought of and valued apart from procreation the pendulum swings of sexual ethics (agrarianism to capitalism; post WWII baby boom to Playboy™ & 60s sexual liberation) has been matter of emphasis , not absolute difference — not mutually exclusive; both available for rhetorical appeal — certainly today: pleasure ethic today bolstered by increasing visibility of homosexual lifestyles — straight people don’t want to miss out on pleasure part — but increasing “abstinence-only” sex ed new voice for procreative ethic (more in couple weeks) sex can be procreative; sex can be pleasurable — it’s often neither what we’re talking about are reigning ideologies of what sex “is” and should be , how people expect to experience it, and why we should value it — its significance as a component of “human nature” missing from this distinction (Katz) is how these competing ethics have been differentiated by – and used to differentiate -- not only along an axis of sexuality (while many heterosexuals were committed to procreative ethic, homosexuals carved out alternative identity based on a different attitude toward sex, pleasure ethic) but also of gender — among heterosexuals (once we get that category), procreative ethic has been applied more consistently to women than to men — women’s “natural” sexual desire said to be aimed at procreation more consistently than men’s these sexual ideologies have flip-flopped frequently enough in recent history — even your lifetimes — not difficult to realize that sexuality — how people experience themselves and others as sexual beings — is historically and culturally produced, shaped however , it may be more difficult to view motherhood in the same way — as ideologically produced, “socially constructed” — but it’s true sexuality, motherhood, marriage, The Family (capital letters) — these are all pieces of the same puzzle — elements that some have depicted as the “foundation of society” or, alternatively, as the “foundation of civilization” — a particular, exhaulted, type of society 1
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
But as Collier, Rosaldo and Yanagisako point out, “most of our talk about families is clouded by unexplored notions of what families ‘really’ are like.” “Confusing ideal with reality , we fail to appreciate the deep significance of what are, cross-culturally, various ideologies of intimate relationship, and at the same time we fail to reckon with the complex human bonds and experiences all too
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 11/08/2011 for the course ANTHRO 2.158 taught by Professor Ericajames during the Spring '03 term at MIT.

Page1 / 6

ques_motherhood - de-essentializing sex/gender/kinship;...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online