 | men offer nothingand we women must accept this, even if we don't like it. Throughout the centuries women have gotten the short end of the stick. We're still getting it."
|
| 2. See Kathleen Barry,
Female Sexual Slavery
(Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1979).
|
| 3. See Marilyn Murphy,
Are You Girls Traveling Alone?: Adventures in Lesbianic Logic
(Los Angeles: Clothespin Fever Press, 1991); Irena Klepfisz, "they're always curious," in Snitow et al.,
Powers of Desire
, 228; Paul Gregory, "Against Couples,"
Journal of Applied Philosophy
1, no. 2 (1984): 26368.
|
| 4. See Naomi Wolf,
The Beauty Myth: How Images of Beauty Are Used against Women
(New York: Anchor Books/Doubleday, 1991), 28488; Ehrenreich et al.,
Remaking Love
, chap. 5.
|
| 5. For the function that sexual exclusivity in monogamous marriage serves under patriarchy, see Shulamith Firestone,
The Dialectic of Sex: The Case for Feminist Revolution
(New York: Bantam Books, 1970); Kate Millett,
Sexual Politics
(Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1970); Anne Koedt, Ellen Levine, and Anita Rapone, eds.,
Radical Feminism
(New York: Quadrangle Books, 1973). For excellent overviews of both the radical and conservative backlash to sexual liberation, often referred to as "the sexual counterrevolution," see Steven Seidman,
Embattled Eros: Sexual Politics and Ethics in Contemporary America
(New York: Routledge, 1992), chaps. 2 and 3, and Ehrenreich et al.,
Remaking Love
, chap. 6. For ways in which the AIDS epidemic has fueled this backlash, see Seidman,
Embattled Eros
, chap. 4, and chapter 2 in this book, "Pregnancy and Sexually Transmitted Diseases."
|
| 6. Seidman,
Embattled Eros
, chap. 3; also see the selections in Snitow et al.,
Powers of Desire
, and in Carol S. Vance, ed.,
Pleasure and Danger: Exploring Female Sexuality
(London: Pandora Press, 1989).
|
| 7. Frederick Elliston, whose analysis I take to task in the pages that follow, is one of the few philosophers in the last twenty years who has written a detailed conceptual and moral analysis of sexual promiscuity; see his "In Defense of Promiscuity," in
Philosophy and Sex
, ed. Robert Baker and Frederick Elliston (Buffalo, N.Y.: Prometheus Books, 1975), 22243. This article does not appear in the second edition of Baker and Elliston,
Philosophy and Sex
(1984).
|
| 8. Elliston uses the example of a married man widowed two times or more to show the dangers of trying to stipulate a numerical criterion for promiscuity, "In Defense of Promiscuity," 224.
|
| 9. Our "craving for generality" that prompts the philosophically dangerous search for such definitions is discussed in Ludwig Wittgenstein,
The Blue and Brown Books: Preliminary Studies for the "Philosophical Investigations"
(New York: Harper Colophon Books, 1965), 1719. For a discussion of how the resemblances, but not identity, among English language uses of a single term mark out the particular contexts of its use and so the "language game" in which the term appears, see Ludwig Wittgenstein,
Philosophical Investigations
, trans. G. E. M. Anscombe (New York: Macmillan, 1960), 67, 11, 19, 3134, 48.
|
| 10. Examples of using the notion of family resemblance to do conceptual analysis in the philosophy of sex can be found in Janice Moulton, "Sexual Behavior: Another Position," in
The Philosophy of Sex: Contemporary Readings
, 2d ed., ed. Alan Soble (Savage, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield, 1991), 6371; Richard Wasserstrom, "Is Adultery Immoral?," in Baker and Elliston,
Philosophy and Sex
(1984),1023.
|
|
