Wednesday, July 24, 2013

Unwanted Sex

By Sherry Colb

In my column for this week, I wrote about the topic of sexual surrogacy, an arrangement in which a sex therapist has sex with a patient in exchange for payment.  In my column, I discuss the question whether sexual surrogacy is distinguishable from prostitution and how we ought to think about the practice, from a legal and ethical standpoint.  One of the things that bothers me about prostitution (and thus, about sexual surrogacy as well) is the fact that, almost by definition, the job involves someone who would prefer not to be having sex with a particular person nonetheless having sex with him or her because it is part of her (or his) job.  In other words, someone is having unwanted sex.

As a college student, I worked for over a year on a study of stress and pregnancy at Columbia Psychiatric Institute.  The work involved conducting two telephone interviews of each of many pregnant women, each interview lasting approximately one hour.  I still remember two of the many questions that I had to ask each woman during one of the interviews: first, how often was she having sex?  And second, was that sexual frequency just right, more often, or less often than she'd like? (This is a paraphrase).  Many of the women told me that the frequency with which they were having sex was "more often" than they would have liked.  In other words, many of the women to whom I spoke were, on numerous occasions, having sex that they would have preferred not to have.

In 2008, Robin West wrote an article, entitled Sex, Law, and Consent, in which she discussed this phenomenon.  She made it very clear that unwanted sex is not the same thing as rape, and she was not proposing that unwanted sex ought to be criminalized.  She affirmed strongly that there is an important distinction between nonconsensual sex, on the one hand, and unwanted sex, on the other.  Unwanted sex occurs when one of the parties to a sexual interaction voluntarily participates in a sexual encounter in which she did not want to participate.  She said "yes" even though she would have preferred to say no.  Nonconsensual sex involves a participant who does not agree to participate in sex but instead has it imposed on her by her "partner."

When people complain about the criminality of acquaintance rape, they seem sometimes to have confused unwanted sex with nonconsensual sex.  I say this because I hear questions like "how is the guy supposed to read her mind?" when, in reality, the "guy" need not read minds but simply hear his partner's words.  If "no" is taken to mean what it says, then the sex stops (or does not start) at the very moment that the word is uttered. It is, ironically, the very people who challenge the legitimacy of acquantance rape statutes that want to argue that "no" sometimes mean "maybe" or "yes" and that accused rapists were somehow able to read the minds of their alleged victims and could tell that their advances were actually welcome.

In any event, in a case of unwanted but consensual sex, both participants in the sexual interaction are willing participants; it is just that one of them does not really want to be a participant.  Why does "unwanted sex" occur?  Undoubtedly, it occurs for many reasons.  Sometimes, it is because the person giving consent is worried that her (or his) partner might lose interest in the relationship if she (or he) rejects a sexual overture. Other times, the person giving consent may believe that it is what she (or he) is "supposed" to do.  In talking with the pregant women in the Columbia study, I suspected that this was what was motivating them.  They did not seem to feel "entitled" to refuse to have sex with their partners, notwithstanding their lack of desire (and sometimes even the nausea they felt, due to their pregnancies).

As West suggests, unwanted sex is a problem, though not the sort of problem that should be addressed by legal prohibitions (a proposition with which I agree).  In response to this view, some might point out that people regularly do all sorts of things that they would prefer not to do, out of a sense of "obligation" or generosity toward a partner.  Examples can include cleaning the floors, cooking, washing dishes, taking out the garbage, mowing the lawn, etc.  Yet it is difficult to imagine anyone seriously contending that as a categorical matter, consensual but "unwanted dish-washing" or "unwanted lawn-mowing" is a problem worthy of critical analysis.  If someone asked most people, "why do you do the dishes?" they would likely say something along the lines of "because it needs to be done and my partner does the cooking" rather than "because doing dishes is, for me, a source of great pleasure,  gratification, and joy."

So why should sex be different?  If it's fine for people to take out the garbage so their partners will cook dinner, why isn't it fine for people to have sex for similar reasons?  Perhaps it is fine in just this way.  Yet I share West's misgivings about unwanted sex.  For the most part, I think it is unfortunate that people have sex that they would prefer not to have.  Unlike washing dishes, a person having sex is expected to be having a good time of it.  If he or she is not having a good time, then either (a) he or she is faking having a good time for his or her partner's benefit, or (b) he or she is making his or her displeasure plain, but his or her partner either does not notice or does not care.

If one of the people in the interaction has to fake pleasure, then the dishonesty of the encounter is disturbing.  No one feels betrayed by a partner who "fakes" enjoying washing the dishes, but a person is likely to feel quite betrayed upon learning that his or her partner found their sexual encounter dull and uninspiring but was only pretending to enjoy it. And if, on the other hand, the person is plainly not enjoying himself or herself, and this fact is irrelevant to the partner, then that disregard -- while qualititatively distinct from the disregard inherent in nonconsensual sex -- seems at least a distant cousin of it.

In the case of prostitution, of course, both of these things are routinely going to be happening -- the prostitute is likely pretending that the john is giving her (or him) great erotic pleausre, even though that is almost certainly not the case -- and the john, who must realize, despite apperances, that the prostitute is not actually enjoying herself (or himself) is content to continue the sexual encounter without regard to that fact.  In a sense, then, the john is using the prostitute as a mechanical tool for sexual gratification, the very definition of a sexual object.  And to the extent that sexual surrogacy shares this feature, it is troubling, as unwanted sex is, and in the same ways.

As I suggested here and in my column, I do not support criminalization of prostitution or of sexual surrogacy. Nonetheless, I regard neither one as positively promoting sexual autonomy, so long as one of the participants is doing it for the money.


Kilo said...

The claim that sexual autonomy deserves special consideration may well be right, but several of the inferences in this article are unjustified. From the fact that many pregnant women were having more sex than they wanted, the author infers that they have said "yes" when they would have preferred to say "no", that they have had sex they did not enjoy, and that their partners are ignorant of or indifferent to her displeasure. None of these follow.

A woman might well prefer that the question of sex never arise, but prefer to say "yes" rather than "no" if it does. Even if she'd have preferred to say no, she might well enjoy it (though another option might have seemed to her like a better use of time, ignoring her mate's preferences). Finally, a man may be perfectly well aware of the sacrifice his partner makes for his benefit and honor that sacrifice--obliviousness or indifference impute an unnecessarily inhumane (though undoubtedly too common) character.

Taken together, these inferences seem to reflect a bias on the author's part. Certainly a thought-provoking piece, though, and I appreciate her perspective.

My Opinion Rules said...

A lot of people who are the beneficiaries of unwanted sex really don't care if the partner is enjoying him/herself. Therefore it is not even necessary to pretend. There is no way to regulate this within a relationship but it is most definitely damaging over the long run.

Kevin Jon Heller said...


I'm not sure it's entirely accurate to describe a sex therapist's activities as "unwanted" sex. A prostitute may "not really want to be a participant" in sex; I imagine most prostitutes would much prefer to make a living doing something else. But sex therapists have presumably freely chosen to try to help people overcome their sexual problems by having sex with them; doesn't that mean that they are getting some kind of gratification out of the sex, even if that gratification is not physical? Why is sex for any reason other than physical gratification "unwanted"? That seems unduly normative -- and descriptively inaccurate -- to me.

Joe said...

I found the article curious because a sex surrogate is quite different from your garden variety prostitute in various respects. The use of a surrogate, e.g., to build a healthy sex life, perhaps to correct problems a couple are having, or to deal with a serious hang-up of some sort, is not like your typical john going to a prostitute.

And, if the person is a sexual surrogate, in various cases having training (consider the one portrayed in "The Sessions"), how can we say they "prefer not to be having sex" ... what does that mean? They chose to be a sex surrogate.

A garden variety prostitute (though not always) often has limited options and very well might be in a coercive position. A sex surrogate is much more like to have chose his or her profession. Where is the lack of agency there?

Then, there is the comment is it "troubling" that the person is pretending. Now, a sex surrogate might not do that. I don't know their techniques, exactly, and it can be more about dealing with certain issues than faking pleasure. Some very well might enjoy having sex.

But, ultimately, why is that a problem in itself? If the other person should know it is a game of pretend, there isn't some sort of fraud involved. Acting is about pretending too. We don't find it "disturbing." Role playing games are well known. If consensual and aboveboard, it seems something of a curious value judgment to find them inherently "disturbing."

Finally, it is felt that using someone for sexual gratification is an issue. If a person chooses to be used for some purpose, such as brunt labor, I think it is okay generally speaking.

Sex surrogacy is more than that anyway -- it suggests some sort of therapy. Some therapy might be talking (again, does the therapist "really" find the person interesting? has to pretend to some degree at times ... is this wrong?). The person, like some other physical therapist, might be used physically in some respect, but if consensual, fine.

Joe said...

Bottom line, interesting article since it suggests very debatable value judgments.

Unknown said...


Unknown said...


Unknown said...

I was suggested this blog by my cousin. I am not sure whether this post is written by him as no one else know such detailed about my difficulty. You are wonderful! Thanks! |

Unknown said...

This is such a great resource that you providing and you give it away for free. |

Anonymous said...

I am really enjoying reading your well written articles. It looks like you spend a lot of effort and time on your blog. I have bookmarked it and I am looking forward to reading new articles. |

Unknown said...

thanks so much i like very so much your post
حلى الاوريو الفطر الهندي صور تورته حلى قهوه طريقة عمل السينابون طريقة عمل بلح الشام بيتزا هت كيكة الزبادي حلا سهل صور كيك عجينة العشر دقائق

Randy Greenfield said...

I was looking for the light information from this platform, it could also proved to be some sort of great idea to influence the visitors to look forward it for the research on global basis. See More essay paper for best Papers.

Unknown said...

pengobatan kutil kelamin kutil di sekitar kelamin benjolan seperti kutil di kelamin obat kutil kelamin di jakarta penyebab kutil di alat kelamin cara mengatasi kutil kelamin kutil di sekitar kemaluan cara menghilangkan kutil di kemaluan kutil di kemaluan obat kutil di kemaluan

Unknown said...

obat penis keluar cairan nanah alat kelamin pria keluar nanah keluar nanah pada kelamin pria penyakit kencing nanah pada wanita kemaluan keluar nanah keluar nanah dari vagina

Unknown said...

obat gonore kenapa kelamin keluar nanah obat kutil kelamin obat kencing nanah di apotik herbal denature indonesia penyakit gonore dan obatnya

Unknown said...

Obat kencing Nanah De Nature Obat Herbal obat Kutil Kelaminobat kutil kelamin dan kutil kelamin dan kutil di kemaluan dan kutil di sekitar kemaluan dan obat kutil di kemaluan dan obat kutil kelamin di apotik dan kutil pada kemaluan pria dan obat herbal kutil kelamin dan obat kutil di sekitar kemaluan dan muncul bintik kutil pada kelamin dan obat ampuh menghilangkan kutil kelamin dan obat kutil di kemaluan merupakan solusi pengobatan herbal dari denature indonesia