Intimate Matters PDF
Intimate Matters PDF
Intimate Matters PDF
Freedman
Review by: Steven Seidman
Journal of Social History, Vol. 24, No. 2 (Winter, 1990), pp. 391-394
Published by: Oxford University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3787510 .
Accessed: 28/09/2014 09:29
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Oxford University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of
Social History.
http://www.jstor.org
Indeed, they aim to narrate a story in which the categories of repression and
freedom do not figure prominently. Their narrative is structured by a periodiza?
tion of American history in which three sexual systems achieved successive
dominance between the colonial and the contemporary period. Despite the
historicism of their approach, a certain ideal of progress is evident in that the
establishment of a liberal sexual culture valuing sexual choice and diversity
functions as a dramatic center to the narrative.
The authors identify three periods, each characterized by a dominant sex
system. The first period, roughly from 1600 to 1780, featured a family and
marriage centered, reproductive sexual regime. Shaped by agricultural hardships
and the need for labor as well as by English familial and religious traditions, the
colonists legitimated sex only in marriage and primarily for its procreative role.
Yet, the colonists, even the Protestants, were not sexual ascetics. They typically
accepted marital sexual pleasures and affectionate expression in moderation.
They did not, however, tolerate nonmarital sex, as was evidenced by the harsh
penalties for fornication, sodomy, and adultery. The church, state and local
community enforced this marital, reproductive sexual code through legal sanc?
tions, public rituals of humiliation and threats of social ostracism. The colonial
sex system was not uniform. Many Native American Indians practiced premarital
intercourse, polygamy or institutionalized homosexuality. In the Cheasepeake
colonies where there was a large number of single migrants and many more men
than women, there was more tolerance towards nonmarital, nonprocreative sex.
With the growth of slavery in the South a somewhat unique sex system emerged
among the slaves and between the races.
By the late eighteenth century this sex system was becoming marginalized. The
- state, church, and local
existing forces of social control community - were losing
their hold over the individual under the impact of commercialization and
industrialization. A new era of expanded individualism was coming into exis?
tence. It was accompanied by a different sex system.
Between 1780 and the 1880s a marital centered, romantic sexual order assumed
dominance. Sex was legitimated less as a reproductive act than as a medium of
romantic love and intimacy. Erotic expression and pleasure was an expected part
of marital sex. Marriage itself was imbued with heightened expectations of
intimacy even though men and women often occupied different spheres. This
created some emotional and social strains in intimate affairs. Many middle class
women supported the romanticization of marriage since it promoted their
enhanced autonomy in marital relations. It most certainly was used to limit
conception as is evidenced by the dramatic drop in fertility rates during this
period. Expanded individual choice in intimate affairs extended beyond marriage
as well. Tolerance for nonmarital forms of sexuality expanded. Thus, there
emerged movements advocating sexual lifestyle experimentations; same sex
intimacy was socially acceptable, even idealized for its elevated spiritual charac?
ter; a vast sexual undergroup composed of brothels, pornography, and dance halls
cropped up in urban centers. In short, the beginnings of a "liberal" sexual order
can be observed in the nineteenth century.
In the late nineteenth century this nascent liberal sexual culture came under
attack. A myriad of moral reform and purity groups assailed the expanded sexual
intended to address current moral and political events, Intimate Matters could
have profited had its ideological significance been made explicit. For authors who
are acutely aware of the power of discourse to shape sexuality, they must surely
have known that their own work counts as a discursive intervention. To be sure,
this work will contribute to further politicizing sex by framing it as a social
construction. Yet, in the face of current backlash politics directed especially
against women and sexual minorities, a historical narrative that articulated a
stronger defense of a progressive sexual order would have been pertinent.
From a scholarly standpoint, I have some doubts about the periodization that
informs the narrative. The description ofthe colonial sex system as dominated by
a procreative sexual norm seems somewhat inconsistent with the authors'
acknowledgment that even Northern Protestants valued sex as a medium of
pleasure and intimate or affectionate expression. Similarly, while their charac?
terization of middle class Victorians as approaching sex as a domain of love is, in
general, correct, it lacks important nuance. My own research suggests that while
the Victorians accepted sex in marriage, they defined a spiritual notion of love as
its essence. Sexual expression was not a vehicle of love but often threatened it as
it elicited sensual desires which threatened to engulf marriage in a sea of lust.1
Again, while the construction of sex as a sphere of self-fulfillment figured
prominently in the "modern" period, sex functioned primarily as a medium of
love. Indeed, what is crucial in the twentieth century is the central role that sex
plays in demonstrating, maintaining and improving love and romantic solidarity.
In other words, it would seem more pertinent to describe the changes in the
meaning of romantic love or intimacy over three centuries than to speak of shifts
from procreative to romantic to commercial sexual meanings.2
In short, I am underscoring shortcomings that are perhaps inevitable in a book
of this genre. As a general overview it is useful and, at times, masterful, but on any
number of important issues (e.g. Victorian sexuality, the colonial Protestant view
of love, working class intimate patterns) it proves to be quite cursory. This hardly
detracts from what is, unquestionably, the best available overview of American
sexual history.
ENDNOTE