Coming at this as someone who has an interest in gender and sexuality but has not studied it academically, I found Riddell’s approach to the history of sex and sexuality to be eye opening. Using repeated examples throughout the book Riddle debunked my attitude towards Victorian sensibilities and laid out the fact that we are not as modern in our attitudes as we think we are. Her focus on LGBT aspect of history was also a welcome relief when our stories are often a footnote in other books or left out all together.

The themed chapters worked well – as much as they can when trying to outline a long complicated history – I particularly liked her chapters on Contraception, and Sex Work. Both areas deal with the policing of women’s bodies in one way or another and reading this you can see how our current attitudes developed. Her chapter on Rape was again eye-opening and depressing in how the legitimacy of rape claims are often weighted on ‘respectability’ of the women involved irrespective of the era.

I found the final chapter on The Future of Sex somewhat jarring and quite negative to begin with compared to previous chapters but it becomes evident that this is deliberate – perhaps a warning shot that we must learn from our history in order to forge a brighter future.

All told I would highly recommend for this an enjoyable and enlightening delve into our past.

Sexuality is learnt?

I think sexuality is learnt, in a sense. For example, you hear stories of brothers and sisters growing up apart, meeting as adults and being sexually attracted to each other. Brothers and sisters growing up together generally aren't sexually attracted to each other. (Yes, it does occasionally happen, I know; vide Eça de Queiroz’s “Os Maias”. Is this because we know the "rules" and unconsciously adapt our behaviour to comply with them? Would more people be attracted to the same sex if no-one had ever taught them that generally people are supposed to be attracted only to the opposite sex? The society that you live in tells you how to behave sexually, and you choose how to behave within those mores. There are broad 'rules' e.g. in the Western world it is usual to be monogamous, and cheating is frowned upon, and in a narrower sense current fashion dictates that young people tend to shave their pubes. The majority of people in Portugal don't object to homosexuality; in many other countries it is a punishable crime, and the majority in those countries will probably agree with that. Sexuality as a social concept changes over time, and as such sexual attitudes are learnt by each generation, in whatever form it is in their time. Evolutionary psychology is what explains why men can have erections when just being read to about sexual scenes? Or that it is the only explanation for why women (and men) have any feelings of care and love towards their children? Or why infants focus on their parents more than on others?

Not making any excuses for men behaving like arseholes: whatever evolutionary psychology tells us about our evolutionary inheritance, it is no reason for us men not to be completely on board with feminism, intersectionality and so on. I try, but I at least recognise that at times it goes against what I might call "instinctive" notions, but isn't that what morality is about? Knowing what you want to do, but doing something moral instead? It is peculiarly human, and I love it, but it is not the point that this book and its author is making.

We might want to define what is meant by "sexuality" before we start laughing about how somebody has used the word. That the definition of sexuality is not clearly and uniquely defined might indicate that it is conceptually not very clear. It could mean, for example, how we have sex or that we have sex depending on context (although I still believe that the dominant meaning is related to how.) Do you express yourself the same way when you walk as when you have sex? Because if you having sex and walking are for you functionally similar you probably have a very prosaic sex life or perhaps you walk a lot. The way a person walks is a beacon of their sexiness or a shroud drawn over it. They're intimately connected. Our arses and crotches are right there in the middle of the walk - the arch and suspension of it, whether hunched and hidden or slippy and slinky.

I do believe sexuality is learnt as I’ve said above. Sexuality is what describes our whole sexual behaviour, and humans are animals who learn how to behave (or are taught). The sexual need, the urge, that is one thing, which is the physiological need for sex to happen, you could call it the need for penetrative sex. But beyond that, we have developed a series or sexual rituals, craves and needs that are psychological in nature and that is where sexuality kicks in. Sexuality dictates what's taboo, what's acceptable, what's kinky, what turns off and what turns on. Sexuality is that complex mechanism that controls and regulates sex beyond it's mechanical in and out frictions. And it is learnt.

Looking forward to Dominatrix the Gaul next. ( )