Sex and Power: A Reflection on Amber Musser's Claims

**TW: discussions of sex, sexual assault and forced sterilization, specifically that inflicted upon Indigenous women**

When Amber Musser writes that “[w]hen one is talking about sex, one is always implicitly talking about power" (200), she is talking about how sex can and does wield power over people and thus when talking about sex, it is impossible to not talk about power. Giving the examples of sex being used as a tool of coercion and control, and rape being used as a tactic in war, she argues that in these instances, the power sex has is evident; here, sex is not about pleasure or, from a heterosexual viewpoint of sex, procreation. Rather, it is about fear, domination, and intimidation (Musser 200).

Discussing sex and its power is not only about the act of sexual intercourse, but about reproductive systems and the impact that those in power have over them. Most often, this is the control that female reproductive systems are subject to from white, colonial, patriarchal structures. Musser discusses this in terms of private and public spheres of sex; private meaning viewing it as simply something that occurs between people, and public meaning it is something that has significance within a public, social setting, often affected by the controls of the state (Musser 200). Viewing sex as being ‘public’ is important when discussing how it holds power, as this is where these other aspects of one’s sex life that are regulated by the state, and the colonial, patriarchal systems upon which it is built, is especially evident, as well as how different aspects of one’s identity affects the extent to which they are regulated. Factors such as race, class, and age all affect a person’s experience with sex and, as Musser points out, their access to privacy is dependent on them. Those who are more dependent on the power structures which do the regulating of sex, such as government housing and food programs, are not only often members of one or more minority group, they are more at risk to being subject to control and surveillance of their sex lives (Musser 201).

Audre Lorde suggests various ways humans have become programmed to deal with the differences between themselves and others. When it comes to differences that are considered inferior, humans’ way of coping is to destroy (Lorde 46). People in these groups who are more dependent on the state for help and thus are more subject to surveillance of their sex lives, are viewed as inferior, hence why the ways in which their sex lives are regulated is through destructive means such as forced contraceptive and forced sterilization (Musser 201).

One example discussed in lecture was the forced sterilization of Indigenous women in Canada. Between 1928 and 1972, the Alberta Sexual Sterilization Act was a government policy allowing for the sterlization of released inmates of mental hospitals who were thought to be able to pass their ‘disability’ to their children. While anyone, regardless of race, could and was sterilized, Indigenous women were especially subject to the process, making up 25% of all sterilizations, despite only accounting for about 2.5% of the population. Even after the Act was struck down, Indigenous women continued to be sterilized against their will, forced to sign consent papers while medically vulnerable (Rutherford). Here, Musser’s claim regarding discussions of sex implicitly being about power, is evident. Although the act of sex is not present here, the sexual and reproductive rights of individuals are impacted by the power held by the Canadian government. Not only this, but the power and control the government holds in this example disproportionately affected Indigenous women, illustrating Musser’s claim regarding the intersectionality of race, sex, and power, as well as Lorde’s point regarding ‘inferior’ differences being destroyed as a way of dealing with them. Women are already viewed as others, hence why powerful institutions are able to justify their oppression. Here, race and ability especially impact this ‘otherness’ and these women being viewed as subordinate, as it is what was used to justify the harm inflicted upon them with sterilization.

Musser’s theorizing of discussions of sex being inextricable from discussions of power is also evident in Audre Lorde’s, Uses of the Erotic. She states, “every oppression must distort sources of power within the culture of the oppressed” (Lorde 23). In this specific context, the oppressed culture is that of women and their source of power is the erotic/sex. She argues that in order for the state, and any other structural system, to keep women under their control, they conceptualize their sources of power as being wrong and make them come to fear not only their craving for it, but its existence as a whole. Their source of power is the erotic/sex and when they fear it and view it as being a sign of their inferiority, they come to accept it, the dissatisfaction it brings them, and as a result, dissatisfaction in any and all other aspects of their life. These structural systems are dependent on this fear in order to keep these women docile, as they would like them to be, in order to more easily hold power over them and subject them to other areas of oppression (Lorde 24). Sex and power goes back and forth here between the oppressor and the oppressed, as it is taken from those which it can empower in order to inflict harm.

Similarly to Musser’s points of discussion, the power that sex holds here is misused. However, when in the correct hands, it can be a source of liberating power. When women take back the power that has been stolen from them, they are able to experience the erotic to their fullest capacity. As a result, they come to realize they can experience that capacity of enjoyment in other aspects of their life and reject the dissatisfaction they have, up until this point, accepted. This rejection is what the state fears as it means a loss of control and ability to inflict harm. (Lorde 25). Lorde’s arguments demonstrates Musser’s claim that talking about sex means always talking about power. In this sense, sex as a form of power can be both good and bad. While its power can be, and often is, stolen and misused by structural systems over communities they wish to control, that power can also be stolen back to empower themselves in not only their sexual selves, but in every aspect of their life.

The power that sex holds that Musser brings up is not only about sex in the physical act. It is also about how people sexual and reproductive systems are affected by power imbalances. Abuses of this power are evident in powerful structural systems that work to oppress those already disadvantaged by factors such as race, class, age, or ability and can be seen in the ways that the government regulates the sexual lives of these bodies through means of forced sterilization, as seen in the Alberta Sexual Sterilization Act and how it disproportionately affected Indigenous women. When discussing the power that the act of sex wields, Audre Lorde’s discussion of the erotic illustrates how it is a source of liberating power for oppressed groups and is precisely why it is distorted and misused within those communities by those wanting to control them. Amber Musser’s claim that speaking about sex implicitly means talking about power means that sex holds power - both good and bad - and it is impossible to separate the two in daily life, so it is impossible to separate in our discussions of it.