Two unique perspectives on the sexual revolution.

At the Dawn of the Sexual Revolution: Reflections on a Dialogue. By Ira L. Reiss and Albert Ellis. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press, 2002, 212 pages. Paper, $29.95.

Sex in the Heartland. By Beth Bailey. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999, 265 pages. Hardcover, $29.95; Paper, $17.95.

I was asked to review these books as a pair, as each addresses the sexual revolution of the 1960s and 1970s in the United States. However, each book provides a very different perspective on this cultural phenomenon.

At the Dawn of the Sexual Revolution

What a joy! This inside view of the correspondence between two major contributors to sexual freedom and the Society for the Scientific Study of Sexuality (SSSS) is a quick and enjoyable read. There are 43 letters written by Ellis to Reiss, including some to family, and 20 letters written by Reiss, all between 1956 and 1967. This correspondence over the 11 years during the seedbed of the sexual revolution gives the reader a sense of how two of the most eminent sexologists influenced each other's thinking and how they challenged each other's views. Much of the richness of the letters comes from Ellis, the psychologist pressing for individual sexual freedom, in contrast to Reiss, the sociologist applying his cultural perspective. Both pushed their view of sexuality, Reiss placing more emphasis on the contrast between coitus without affection versus coitus with affection and Ellis pushing for an open sexuality in which the individual would be free to establish his or her own meaning for coitus.

Each in his way raised concerns about how the double standard impacted sexual life. Ellis seemed to emphasize how the double standard throttled the sexual freedom of both males and females. Reiss's letters suggested more concern for how the double standard impacted society. Ellis kept coming back to how our culture's attitude toward sexuality produces guilt and shame that limits happiness and life satisfaction. Probably no one has been a greater spokesperson for individual sexual freedom since 1950 than Albert Ellis.

The reciprocal influence of culture and sexuality was one of the major concerns of Reiss. In his letters he continually challenged Ellis about the impact of not giving enough attention to this interrelationship of culture and sex. As quickly as Reiss would challenge Ellis about culture and sexuality, Ellis would give the rationale for greater individual sexual freedom. Often this dialogue was partially centered on the role of biology versus cultural influences on sexuality. Ellis seemed to give greater importance to biology whereas Reiss seemed to emphasize culture as the key influence on sexual behavior. A glimpse of this correspondence from Reiss' perspective follows:

   I think also we differ on the area of the place of biological
   drives in man's existence. You seem to feel that man should
   not inhibit these drives and feel almost that it is
   impossible to control them anyhow. I think that man's social
   nature is of crucial import and that what we call sexual drives
   exist only in theory--in practice man has a drive that is so
   mixed with his cultural training and experiences that it is just
   as social as is the "drive" that may impel him to control it.
   (p. 9)

Reiss' perspective is continually focused through his sociological research orientation and is juxtaposed to Ellis' clinical and therapeutic perspective.

Ellis often pushed for individual sexual freedom and seemed to place emphasis on the natural goodness of humans. He seemed to see the role of society and the legal system as a source of guilt and shame that crippled the individual and limited the general health of society. The following quote reflects much of Ellis' push for individual sexual freedom: "But I believe that any sane society, if one ever existed (which, to my knowledge, has never been the case), would put MINIMAL and NECESSARY restraints, rather than MAXIMAL and UNNECESSARY ones, on the sex drives--just as I believe that any sane society should put MINIMAL and NECESSARY restraints on man's urge to talk, write, and vote freely" (p. 13). Ellis spoke often and loudly for individual freedom. His invention of REBT (Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy) came from his philosophical belief in individual freedom and the innate goodness of humanity. Reiss spoke for individual freedom but seemed to give more attention to the confluence of nature and culture.

Both men were very instrumental in shaping the sexual revolution and its concomitant gender revolution. To me it appears that Reiss was more of an idealist-pragmatist and Ellis a realist-pragmatist. Both admitted that they were more alike than different philosophically, yet each approached sexual freedom from his unique experiences. Ellis drew heavily from his experience of seeing about 60 clients a week, many referred for sexual issues, whereas Reiss was researching the changes in premarital sexual mores from a sociological perspective.

At times both Reiss and Ellis shared glimpses of their personal and professional lives. For example, there are numerous references to the challenges Ellis encountered in establishing the Society for the Scientific Study of Sex (SSSS), and both men shared issues and challenges in developing their professional identities and getting their works published at a time when there was acceptance of materials that pushed the envelope of sexual freedom and sexual sciences. At a personal level, the letters seem to reveal Reiss's growing respect and fondness for Ellis. It appears that each influenced the other's thinking about life, sexuality, and philosophy.

One shortcoming of the book is that some of the letters Reiss wrote are no longer available. The book includes the letters Ellis wrote to Reiss and some of Reiss's responses. The book is based on Reiss's collection of letters over the 11 years; some of Reiss' letters over the time were not saved.

Many current academics may not be aware of the pathfinders' struggles to establish the freedoms available today for sexuality research, sexuality teaching, and gender studies. This personal view of two of our most eminent personalities in the sexual revolution may help us appreciate more the struggle of the pioneers in the sexual and gender revolution.

Sex in the Heartland

The introduction to Beth Bailey's book seems to raise the question of whether the sexual revolution, as it developed at the University of Kansas, was actually a sexual revolution or more a revolution against tyranny, oppression, inequality, control, and exclusion. Bailey portrays the revolution as being about much more than simply sex. It was a revolution about personal freedom, responsibility, and cultural injustices.

The setting for the unfolding of this historical research and scholarly analysis of a social phenomenon is the University of Kansas (in Lawrence, KS) from the 1950s through the 1970s. I am a native of Kansas, and was working in education in southwest Kansas at the time of the sexual revolution, yet was unaware of the strong counter-culture movements going on at the other end of the state. Today it seems that few Kansans, or others, are aware of the contributions made by the students and the counterculture proponents of that time to today's increased freedoms and greater equality.

Bailey identifies World War II as creating fissures in the American psyche and thus providing the seedbed for questioning many aspects of American culture. Not only sexual mores but also many other aspects of culture at the time were questioned. Television was projecting scenes, challenges, mores, and different ways of living into American homes and questioning the status quo, thus broadening what youth were exposed to. Youth used this information to challenge the establishment and especially the in loco parentis and parietals that universities had long used to control college students. The sexual revolution gave youth a voice that they had not had before.

Redefinitions of sexual conduct, the role and mission of the university, and curricula changes were all occurring as universities' enrollments expanded to accommodate a more diverse student population. The new diversity arose as college became a dream of more youth and with the influx of GI veterans under the GI Bill. As universities accommodated this changing clientele, boundaries weakened between regions, towns, classes, races, and the sexes. More personal freedom resulted for all.

The struggles over the new freedoms were centered between the college students and the establishments. The students were not a uniform and well-organized group, but rather existed as different groups brought together out of their struggles with the university administration and the city and county governments. The university administration and local governments were caught up in trying to keep a front on the established "norms" and maintaining the taxpayers' support. Students and "hippies" were trying to break out of the control and oppression they were experiencing under the established norms.

The struggles lead to demonstrations, fires, and battles with students and hippies against the forces of the establishments. The most symbolic struggle resulted in the campus student union being burned. Over time the university administration and local government found ways to save face while appeasing the demonstrators.

Although "sexual revolution" was the title given to what went on during the 1950s to 1970s, sexual freedom was not the central focus of the revolution. Rather, sex was a tool for the cultural revolution; the word sex was what caught the public's attention and provided an avenue for change. Also, the word sex provided energy for youth in their struggle for greater autonomy and choices.

In this book, Bailey traces a shift in redefining certain behaviors from misconduct or sin to be punished to mental illness to be treated. As the therapeutic language replaced the moralistic language, there were subtle shifts in public thinking and increased freedoms for all. In time this change in wording, language, and thinking trickled down to the general populace. This resulted in a more humanistic approach to dealing with differences.

One of the major outcomes of the sexual revolution was the remaking of gender as a partnership between two people rather than as the difference between men and women. Much of the sexual revolution was about greater equality between the sexes. Both men and women had been penalized by the rigid roles and older ideas about gender.

This book is an excellent piece of historical social research. It is apparent that the author spent many laborious hours researching materials in writing the book. If it has any shortcoming, it may be that it does not give any indications of how the sexual revolution impacted the smaller rural areas of "heartland" America. University communities are different in many ways from small rural communities, especially those in more remote areas. Still, there is most likely a trickle down of mores and social customs from universities and larger communities to rural areas.

Sex in the Heartland is about sex in its broadest meanings; it touches on the struggles for gender equality, reducing cultural barriers, feminism, power (both personal and political), language's impact on thinking and actions, the shifts in meanings of words, sexual orientation, and the liberation of youth. Bailey has presented an interesting and readable glimpse into how culture is modified by different social forces acting both together and separately. These processes are going on at all times in urban, suburban, and rural America. This book is an excellent read on how these processes impacted a public university in mid-America.

Glen H. Jennings, Ed.D., Texas Woman's University, Family Sciences Department, P.O. Box 425769, Denton, TX 76204-5769; e-mail: [e-mail].