Refuse Thy Name: Sexual Repression, Boundary Maintenance, and the Perpetuation of Privilege

Abstract

This article challenges certain current formulations which allege that women are innately less inclined to seek sexual variety than men, and that women are innately “nurturant” and “emotional.” A comparison of women's sexual behavior in communal and class societies leads to the conclusion that these apparent differences between the sexes are culturally imposed, rather than biological in origin. A cultural interpretation is offered to explain the greater repression of female sexuality in class societies, emphasizing the use of sexual repression in the maintenance of social boundaries between classes and gender‐castes. American capitalist society provides a clear illustration of such use–doctrines of “innate” female monogamy, nurturance, and emotionality tend to be most intensely promulgated when there is low demand for women in the wage labor force. By promoting the redomestication of female labor, such ideologies serve to perpetuate upper class and male privilege.