By Raha Boshra
Marriage is seen as a simple part of life to many. A milestone of trust, connection, and love, whether it is same-sex or not. But, looking into this topic is far beyond that simplicity. Marriage has complex factors and anxieties related to politics, gender, sexuality, religion, morality, and belonging. Which all depends on the timeline and which part of history is being discussed. However, there is also a heavy focus on sex and sexuality in marriage, as most marriages with a lack of sexual satisfaction are deemed to fail, leading to divorce.
Faced with a time of uncertainty, with anxieties raised by the rise of divorce and abortions, and with single men and single women stepping out together in the evening, the new sex doctors prescribed a new cure: reinvigorating the marital bond based on mutual sexual satisfaction (Seidman, 2014). But, it should be clear that eroticism or the pursuit of sensual pleasure was considered legitimate in heterosexual marriage only, and sex before or outside of marriage was considered unacceptable and a sign of personality disorder and social danger during the twentieth century. After the second World War, Men and women incapable of experiencing erotic pleasure or uncomfortable with eroticism were labeled prudes or, in medical scientific language, “frigid” or “impotent” or suffering from a neurosis or personality disorder (Seidman, 2014). It is not specified if Seidman is specifically speaking about being uninterested in sex or those experiencing sexual dysfunction, but it was a surprising read that this was the common opinion on those with a lack of interest in sex. Yet, considering the focus and pressure on reproduction is a valid consideration as to why this was happening. From the 1950s onward, Americans have looked to sexual fulfillment as essential for self-fulfillment and intimate happiness (Seidman, 2014).
Throughout the decades, the connection between sex to love, and marriage has changed. The women’s movements, as well as the gay movements, directly challenged the norms of heterosexual marriage as well. These movements raised great questions related to the position of women post-marriage, as well as the focus of heterosexual marriage on reproduction and having a family instead of love and connection. However, these soon changed due to the rise of anxieties related to these movements in America. The Christian Right and the right wing of the Republican Party have tried to rally the nation around a defense of heterosexual marriage. Initially they blamed the current ills of America—AIDS, sexual disease, high divorce rates, abortion, teen pregnancies, single-parent households—on women’s new freedom of sexual choice and on the gay/lesbian movement (Seidman, 2014). These fears and oppressive behaviors, as well as a strong focus on heterosexual marriage only, also challenged the expression of gender and gender nonconformity. So, heterosexuality is anchored by maintaining a gender order through either celebrating and idealizing gender or by stigmatizing and polluting gender nonconformity (Seidman, 2014).
Later on, during the 1990s, the promotion of viagra began with a heavy focus on heterosexual sex and marriage to Americans who had a physiological “medical” problem. Viagra was initially marketed as the solution to the medical problem of “erectile dysfunction” (ED), but quickly was advertised as a way to enhance the sex lives of men and women in general (Seidman, 2014). However, women were not entirely satisfied with the promotion of viagra, as it reduced their control in sex and only promoted heterosexuality, and it also took away the emotional aspect of sexual connection. Despite the failure of viagra and doctors also figuring out “female erectile dysfunction” (FSD), the doctors still happened to blame women for not urging their husbands to be turned on.
The change in time and decades shows that marriage is not so simple after all. Even nowadays, the norms within connections, love, dating, and marriage are being challenged. All in all, marriage should be about the trust and the comfort of being with someone you love, getting the best out of life by someone’s side, and not purely focusing on reproduction or creating a family.
Reference:
Seidman, S. (2014, October 10). The Social Construction of Sexuality, 3rd Edition. [[VitalSource Bookshelf version]]. Retrieved from vbk://9780393270235
Blog Site 