Feminist theory is multifaceted and diverse (see, e. g., Tong, 1989). It is beyond the scope of this chapter to provide a comprehensive review. Many feminist theorists focus on gender roles and socialization, using role theory and script theory, discussed earlier. Here we will focus on another important aspect of feminist theory, power.
The concept of power is key to feminist analysis (Yoder &. Kahn, 1992). According to feminist theory, there is massive inequality of power between women and men. These inequalities of power occur at multiple levels of analysis, including interpersonal interactions, organizations, and national government. Men express power over women in interpersonal interactions in many ways, including interrupting women in conversations (e. g., West & Zimmerman, 1983) or sexually harassing women at work. At the organizational or institutional level, men have power over women. One example is the preponderance of medical school faculty who are men and wield enormous power over female medical students. A second example is women’s underrepresentation as managers and supervisors. Among Fortune 1000 companies, 37% of all employees are women, but only 17% of all managers are women, and only 7% of executives are women (U. S. Department of Labor, 1992). Decisions having an impact on female workers are therefore made primarily by men, with the typical scenario featuring a female worker supervised by a male boss (i. e., a man having power over a woman). At the level of government, men again exercise power and control over women. Decisions regarding women’s right to choose abortion are made by a Supreme Court that includes only two women.
One theme in this chapter is that men hold enormous economic power over women and that this has important consequences for sexuality. One factor contributing to men’s economic power is the wage gap. Women earn only 75 cents for every dollar earned by men (U. S. Department of Labor, 1993), making many women economically dependent on their higher-earning husbands. The glass ceiling (Morrison, White, & VanVelsor, 1992) contributes as well; subtle barriers keep women from rising as far in organizations as their qualifications warrant. This holds back women’s wages further. It is no surprise that the feminization of poverty has occurred. The bottom line, though, is that women lack economic power, and that men have economic power over women. In the sections that follow, we will examine how this leads to theoretical predictions regarding gender differences in sexuality.
Before leaving this discussion of feminist theories, it is important to note that many feminist theorists address issues of epistemology, that is, the origin and nature of knowledge. Many feminist theorists adopt an epistemology of social constructionism. In particular, they view gender not as a biologically created reality, but rather as a socially constructed phenomenon (Beall, 1993; Hare-Mustin & Marecek, 1988). The basic proposition of constructionism is that people—including scientists—do not discover reality; rather, they construct or invent it (Gergen, 1985; Watzlawick, 1984). According to social constructionism, we actively construct meanings for events in the environment based on our own experiences in our culture.
The extent to which we socially construct gender becomes clear if we view the issues through the lenses of other cultures. In European American cultures it is perfectly obvious—a clear reality—that there are two genders, males and females. However, among some Native Americans, such as the Sioux, Cheyenne, and Zuni, there is a third category, the two-spirit (also termed berdache): people who dress as and completely take on the role of the other gender. Some of these tribes consider the two-spirit to be a third gender, and it is perfectly clear in their culture that there are three genders (Beall, 1993; Kessler &. McKenna, 1985). What seems like an obvious reality to European Americans, that there are only two genders, turns out to be a social construction.
This perspective of social constructionism should be borne in mind when reading the sections that follow, reporting on empirical studies of gender differences in sexual attitudes and behaviors. From a feminist point of view, these gender differences should not be regarded as real differences rooted in biology, but rather as differences that arise from gender roles, socialization, inequality of power—particularly economic power—between women and men, and the ways in which gender is socially constructed in dominant American culture.