03.05.03, 04:16.
i fucking rule.

Women and Work:
Women’s Sexuality and its Impact on the Private and Public Spheres.
By: Shannen Elle
Student no. 2********
March 5, 2003
Women’s Studies 257E
Sheila Cavanagh

Female sexuality has been a long-present and often controversial topic of study in our society. In fact, it is often rumoured that Sigmund Freud’s dying words were "The great question, which I have not been able to answer, is, ‘What does a woman want?’" Female sexuality in Western society has been understood (or assumed) to be everything from non-existent to a work of magic to something very similar to the sexuality of a man. It has often been a mysterious and questionable issue. Carol Queen states in her essay “Sex Radical Politics, Sex-Positive Feminist Thought, and Whore Stigma” that “…women are encouraged never to explore or experience our alternative sexual feelings in the first place. We are supposed to exist sexually within a (married, monogamous) relationship with a man, or else not at all. When we do step across boundaries of compulsory heterosexuality and “good girl” propriety, we are often treated viciously.” (Pg. 127) This quotation falls along the same lines of the age-old cliché that if a woman takes control over her own sexuality and her body, she is cruelly labeled as a “whore” by her fellow women.

Women have been sociologically conditioned through centuries of tradition and servitude to be available, amiable and subordinate to men. Our role has been defined as that of a servant. We are the wives, the mothers, the caregivers of society; “…it is presumed, rather than argued, that there is a natural association between women and mothering and caring.” (Helen Crowley, pg. 345) Crowley also comments that social conditioning to serve men may begin at a very young age; in regards to the Oedipus complex, Crowley writes, “In this way, her sense of autonomy is radically diminished, in that her desires become predicated on meeting the expectations of someone other than herself.” (Pg. 356) This bias of “woman as giver” transcends sociological and familial expectations and into the workplace. According to numbers provided by Statistics Canada in 2003, women significantly dominate the service-producing sector of the workforce. Women make up 82% of workers employed in Health Care and Social Assistance and 60% of the Accommodation and Food Services industry. Conversely, in the goods-producing sector, women represent less than 10% of Construction workers and a mere 16% of those employed by Forestry, Fishing, Mining or Oil and Gas. Women also make up 70% of self-described “Unpaid Family Workers”.

Another significant issue of women’s sexuality and work is the topic of prostitution and other sex work. According to Priscilla Alexander in “Feminism, Sex Workers and Human Rights”, “… most prostitutes are women (70-80 percent), [and] there are five to eight times as many clients as prostitutes on any given day, most of them male.” (Pg. 86) Prostitution, I believe, can thus be labeled as a “woman’s” occupation not only by demographic representation, but also because it clearly falls into the category mentioned above of “meeting the expectations of someone other than herself.” Priscilla Alexander and Carol Queen (“Sex-Radical Politics, Sex-Positive Thought and Whore Stigma”) both argue that prostitution has been demonized as an occupation and needs to be relabeled as a reputable, professional service. Many women have found their way into this occupation as a way of rebelling against the Western ideals of female sexuality; “whoring” is an occupation that stands against the patriarchal view that a woman’s sexuality should be calm, controlled, heterosexual and faithful. Queen states, “Activist whores teach, among other things, a view of our culture’s sexual profile that differs from traditional normative sexuality… It is time for all whores to embrace this difference, to become ambassadors for sex and gratification… We must include radical sexual politics in our agenda, becoming defenders of sex itself. Our well-being and our own defense depend on it.” (Pg. 134) Carol Queen argues that “whores need sex-positive thought”. To quote Queen directly, “Just one factor stands out to distinguish those who live well, with no loss of self-esteem, from those who may find sex work a difficult or even damaging career choice. Most of the former have sufficient sex information and are sex-positive. Most, too, are staunchly feminist, even though some of them refuse to embrace that term, associating it with women who do not understand their circumstances and who do not support their right to work and to control their own bodies. Most of the latter have internalized negative attitudes about sex, especially divergent sexual behavior, and certainly about sex work itself… In fact, when we whores see a client or when a peepshow worker or stripper interacts with a customer, the presence or absence of respect has much to do with how sex-positive the client or customer is- and something to do with our own sex-positivity.” (Pg. 129)

Prostitutes are commonly viewed in our society as depraved, drug-addicted, diseased and degraded by people from all walks of life; the conservative and the liberal, the rich and the poor, the educated and the working class. In fact, well known musician and staunch feminist herself Ani DiFranco comments in a recorded album, “I remember vividly the whole learning process of all the prostitutes working the little cobblestone street below my window. I thought, ‘No, Ani- those are not women. They look a lot like women…’” Alexander and Queen both present themselves as being strongly against these ideas, arguing that prostitution is harmless as a career choice, provided that it is done with a positive attitude and with caution. They strongly argue that it should be legalized, regulated and governed with ideas similar to those of any other dangerous occupation, such as mining or construction. “If we want to make life safer for women who work as prostitutes, we must make sex work amenable to the same kinds of regulations that have reduced the harm to workers in coal mines, textile and garment industry factories, construction sites, chemical and nuclear plants, and other sometimes hazardous work sites. And to do that, we must bring prostitution, sexual labour, above ground.” (Alexander, pg. 93)

Prostitution is often viewed as being a last-chance career choice, as noted by Alexander: “They deny the existence of “voluntary” prostitution, define all prostitutes as passive, helpless, degraded victims, and contend that any prostitute who claims otherwise is “brainwashed” or has a “false consciousness.” (Pg. 83) Alexander and Queen view sex work as a professional occupation not unlike any other. They are providing a service in exchange for a fee. Queen states that “we are not selling ourselves or our bodies… any more than does any worker under capitalism.” (Pg. 135)

As mentioned before, women face a particular injustice in relation to the private-sphere of the workforce. Helen Crowley writes predominantly about women in the private sphere in “Women and the Domestic Sphere” and how the combination of maintaining a public-sphere occupation combined with the expectation of holding together family life in the private-sphere can be overwhelming for women. While once only responsible for maintaining a household, women are now equally represented in the public-sphere yet have not been relieved of private-sphere duties and expectations by their spouses and/or families. “Women continue to be responsible for the primary care of children and the private care of vulnerable adults such as the sick, the elderly, and the mentally and physically disabled. Women also continue to undertake the domestic servicing of able-bodied men, as well as the majority of tasks associated with the domestic maintenance of families and family life… One of the dominant explanations for the positioning of women in the private sphere of the family and men in the public sphere of work and polity was, and remains, that women are naturally suited to mothering and caring.” (Crowley, pg. 344) To me, this seems like a redundant and obvious statement. Women are suited to mothering because they are the only creatures capable of mothering. Women are naturally suiting to being mothers just as men are suited to be fathers and vultures are suited to being scavengers. It is in our nature, and thus, we are well suited for the duties. The problem with women’s work in the private sphere is that it is commonly overlooked as work at all. It is seen as a necessary duty, as part of being a woman, as part of being a woman or wife or mother. The belief that it is in a woman’s nature to care is a dangerous one; Crowley comments that “Such an ideology not only makes a women’s labour in the private sphere appear to be natural, it also strips it of its status as labour, because women’s work in the family is separated from the public domain of waged work.” (Pg. 345) The private sphere of work has come to be represented by women, with the public sphere as a man’s territory. Similar to the masculinization and feminization of traits discussed in first semester, “The public and private have come to represent different values- rationalization, contract, and egalitarianism as counterposed to emotionality, bonding, and difference” (Pg. 346)

A woman’s place in the social structure of work, both private and public, has been drastically impacted by the Western view of female sexuality. Patricia Alexander, Carol Queen and Helen Crowley, the three feminist thinkers and writers exemplified within this essay, have all written in relation to this paradigm. A woman’s role has been mapped out by history, society and tradition. While this stereotype of a woman’s role continues to exist, the idea of “why” is beginning to shift from a biological cause (the instinctual need to care and mother) to a sociological one. People are beginning to realize that a woman’s work is not necessarily in the home, as well as the fact that private labour is indeed labour. Wages must not be paid in order to constitute work, and the activity that women tend to carry out within the household for their families and spouses certainly qualifies as “work”. The impact that female sexuality has on the workforce (both public and private) is undeniable. Sociological, historical and biological gender roles have seemingly mapped out the strengths of both sexes and individuals seem to be employed accordingly.