The social construction of erotophobia.

The Politics of Lust. By John Ince. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 2005, 335 pages. Paper, $16.00.

In a casual and easy-to-understand tone, The Politics of Lust provides a thought-provoking account of erotophobia at the macro- and meso-sociocultural level as well as the microsocial psychological one. This book is suitable for a wide range of educational and lay audiences who are interested in gaining valuable insight into the inner workings of the politics of sexuality.

In this fascinating book, John Ince examines the sociocultural ambivalences and contradictions surrounding human sexuality and our micro-erotophobic conditioning toward the free expression and experiencing of our sexual inclinations. Ince delves into an adventurous exploration of erotophobic conditioning, its impact on our lives and culture, and the complex political system that brings it to fruition.

The overall organization of Ince's book revolves around the causes of erotophobia, especially their link to a group of behaviors he labels as antisexualism. The author defines antisexualism as the social construction of an intolerant, phobic, and anxiety-laden sexual environment, which consists of stereotypical attitudes, prejudicial beliefs, and discriminatory behaviors aimed at discouraging individuals from aspiring toward a more liberal, naturalistic, and expressive erotic and sexual ethos. As he states, "Antisexualism has much in common with intolerant behavior aimed at racial or religious minorities. In the same way that racism promotes racial prejudice, antisexualism breeds erotophobia" (p. 11).

The first 13 chapters of the book provide a detailed examination of the variants of antisexualism (the first cause of erotophobia), such as live nudity, nude images, premarital sex, contraception, masturbation, oral and anal sex, childhood sexuality, sex education, sexual fantasy, extramarital sex, sexual discourse, pomography, prostitution, and homosexuality. Chapter 14 deals with the second cause of erotophobia, having to do primarily with harmful sexual acts, which the author labels as nasty sex, such as rape, violent pornography, unhappy and unwanted sexual initiation, and sexual behavior leading to the contraction of a sexually transmitted infection or to an unwanted pregnancy.

Chapter 15 explores the third cause of erotophobia, that having to do with its link to personality traits. As Ince explains, certain individuals are genetically predisposed to developing sexual rigidity, which, when coupled with a supporting lifestyle, leads them to develop chronic physical tension, personal insecurity, and an overall inability to initiate and enjoy playful, spontaneous sexual acts for their own sake. The author explains that rigid personality traits lead to sexual phobia, whereby the rigid individual comes to perceive the experiencing of sexual desire as an uncomfortable or an emotionally threatening feeling that needs to be avoided or controlled.

As the author rightly points out, most parents tend to experience considerable anxiety, ambivalence, and discomfort when it comes to providing basic sex education to their children. Similarly, although socioculturally-generated sex education programs focus on the avoidance of sexually transmitted infections and pregnancy, they completely avoid topics regarding sexual desire and pleasure within the bounds of intrapersonal and interpersonal intimacy and well-being.

According to Ince, socioculturally-generated erotophobia also results in the "pornification" of pleasure-oriented sexual imagery and desire, thereby relegating both as unnatural and deviant. This "pornification," or "dirty" way of viewing our natural human sexual capacities and potentialities, gives rise to the establishment of a profit-seeking and inhumane sex industry, which oftentimes perpetuates an environment of victimization for both its workers and its consumers. The author explains how widespread aversion to autoeroticism/masturbation robs individuals of a healthy and risk-free sexual outlet. In addition, he points that internalized sexual ambivalence, anxiety, and fear tend to have a negative effect on the sex lives of many individuals by preventing them from attaining their full sexual potential. As he comments,

   Most of us have a very narrow erotic repertoire, a short sequence
   of erotic acts that varies minimally from day to day, partner to
   partner. We fear any form of sexual experimentalism or originality.
   While we seek out the new in movies, books, food, travel, fashion,
   computers, and so on, our sexual expression remains bland
   and repetitive. (p. 9)

The author rightly contends that sexual fear is far more prevalent than most people think, and it is difficult to detect due to being well-camouflaged in our everyday lives. For example, even though most individuals are erotophobic, it remains a rarity to come across an individual who admits to being negatively affected by such a condition. Therefore, since most of us refrain from even acknowledging erotophobia, how are any of us ever going to admit to our sexual shortcomings and embrace the path to sexual liberation? As Ince explains, the processual determinants of erotophobia are highly unconscious, and many irrational sexual ideas, beliefs, and values remain deeply entrenched in our surrounding historico-sociocultural environment that they are difficult, if not impossible, to expose as invalid and untrue. Various institutions, such as education, religion, economy, media, and jurisprudence, are invisibly engaging in everyday "brainwashing" and propaganda, imprinting irrational sexual fears and anxieties in billions of minds while remaining relatively unaware of it.

Concerning the driving forces of erotophobic mechanisms, Ince makes an interesting point that they are largely due to the existence of powerful political forces enacted by stakeholders with vested moral, power, and economic interests. The patriarchal affordance of male privilege in all areas of public and private life have led to the rise of stakeholders who "seek to influence what we do when we are alone with our sexual partners, as well as to influence which partners we choose" (Gagnon & Parker, 1995, p. 15). Such stakeholders tend to (a) embed sexuality in the various intra- and inter-structural dynamic interplays that take place within large-scale patriarchal institutional systems, (b) define and redefine sexuality in the context of everyday sociocultural relations, and (c) sift the whole spectrum of sexual experiences, beliefs, and practices, legitimizing only those that perpetuate male advantage while downplaying or denigrating others that promote egalitarianism and take away the power component of human sexual relations. Therefore, sexual relations are not a priori being created out of the immutability of human sexual biology but, instead, are recursively "wired" within societal institutions in a systemic manner (Philaretou, 2004). As Baber and Murray (2001) suggest,

   Rather that seeing sexuality as a purely natural phenomenon
   characterized by fixed, inherent drives that are essentially
   different for men and women, sexuality is seen to be constructed
   in relation to, and in interaction with, historically and
   culturally variable social practices [that is, institutional
   structures] like religion, education, and medicine (J. Harding,
   1998). Conceptualizations of sexuality are believed to reflect
   social relations regarding gender, ethnicity, and class and to
   be culturally managed through the ways we talk, think, and
   practice. (p. 24)

According to Ince, overcoming erotophobia is an important step to promoting true democracy and social equality, and this can be brought about by eliminating or reducing sexual fear. He insists on creating an awareness concerning the rights of sexual minorities (such as nudists and sexual entertainers) and fervently supports the sexual freedom of consenting adults, believing that sexual education "ultimately serve[s] a much bigger agenda, making our society more rational and humane and the relationships between all people more healthy" (p. 14).

Schnarch (1991) introduces the idea of the sexual crucible as a way to reduce sexual anxiety, fear, and erotophobia, promoting instead relational intimacy and individual fulfillment. The individual partners' sexual behaviors--including the style and content included and excluded in their repertoire--become a window into their inner psycho-emotional workings and state of being of their relationship. Various personal and relational issues that partners are unable or unwilling to acknowledge and bring to the forefront for resolution are inevitably manifested as deficiencies and weaknesses in sexual style.

Since many individuals seem to lack in the area of interpersonal intimacy and in the area of articulation of their feeling states, the concept of the sexual crucible would be particularly helpful as a way to facilitate greater interconnectedness and emotional, psychological, and sexual satisfaction. Bringing a man and a woman to react together sexually in one sexual crucible lays the foundations for the initiation of intense intimacy during sex, thereby rendering it a physically fulfilling as well as a spiritually liberating experience. The sexual crucible becomes a crucible for bringing together the partners' intimacy constituents in a single chemical reaction, thereby moving them away from the inhibiting sociocultural elements of erotophobia (Philaretou, 2004).

REFERENCES

Baber, K. M., & Murray, C. I. (2001). A postmodern feminist approach to teaching human sexuality. Family Relations, 50, 23-33.

Gagnon, J. H., & Parker, R. G. (1995). Conceiving sexuality. In R. G. Parker & J. H. Gagnon (Eds.), Conceiving sexuality: Approaches to sex research in a postmodern world (pp. 3-16). New York: Rutledge.

Harding, J. (1998). Sex acts: Practices of femininity and masculinity. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Philaretou, A. G. (2004). The perils of masculinity: An analysis of male sexual anxiety, sexual addiction, and relational abuse. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.

Schnarch, D. M. (1991). Constructing the sexual crucible. New York: Norton.

Reviewed by Andreas G. Philaretou, Ph.D., Associate Professor, Department of Psychology, Cyprus College, 6 Diogenes Str. Engomi, P.O. Box 22006, 1516 Nicosia, Cyprus; e-mail: [e-mail].