Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Sodomy's Penumbra

Bibliographic Data

ID3606259
AuthorsJoseph J Fischel (Women’s, Gender, and Sexuality Studies, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, USA, corresponding author)
Year2017
Volume64
Issue14
Pages2030-2056
Publication date2017-12-06
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of Homosexuality (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0091-8369 • E-ISSN: 1540-3602
PublisherInforma UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/00918369.2017.1293403
PMID28278060
OpenAlexW2587750986
LanguageEN
References cited20

This article advocates a sodomitical approach to sodomy. Its approach is framed alongside and against three historical glosses on sodomy law: first, that sodomy law instantiates homophobia; second, that sodomy law targets sexual violence against boys; third, that sodomy law reaches assaultive sex against women that did not register as assaultive enough to qualify as "rape" by sexist juries. The first story of sodomy law is mostly wrong. The other two glosses pivot on protection: protection of boys or protection of girls and women. These accounts, tethered to identitarianism, underplay sodomy law's multiplicity, as a source and symptom of our conflicted understandings of when sex is sex and when sexual violence is rape. The first part of the article explains my choice of sodomitical sites. The second part complicates the story of sodomy as phobic. The third part complements the historiography of sodomy as protective against boys. The fourth part argues that the gloss on sodomy law as a corrective to disbelieved women is appealing but untrue. The final part makes the case that fellatio matters. The prevalence of forcible oral sex in sodomy cases intimates a cultural pluripotence of oral sex, as well as shifting definitions-in law and life-of sex and rape. This last story of sodomy law remains undetected under an identitarian radar

Criminology · Homosexuality · Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV · Men who have sex with men · Political science · Sociology · Sodomy · Feminism, Gender, and Sexuality Studies · Law · LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy · Medicine · Sexuality, Behavior, and Technology

  • Sex and Harm in the Age of Consent

    Joseph J Fischel•Sex and Harm in the Age of Consent•2010

  • Up Against a Wall

    Rose Corrigan•Up against a wall•2020

  • Redefining Rape

    Estelle B Freedman•Redefining Rape•2013

  • Feminists Theorize the Political

    Jean W Scott, Judith Butler et al.•Feminists Theorize the Political•2013

  • The Queen of America Goes to Washington City

    Open Access•Lauren Berlant, Lauren Gail Berlant•The queen of America goes to…•1997

  • State Austerity and the Racial Politics of Same-Sex Marriage in the US

    Open Access•Priya Kandaswamy•Sexualities•2008

  • From ?Welfare Queen? to ?Exploited Teen

    Carolyn Cocca, Carolyn E Cocca•NWSA Journal•2002

  • Theorizing Yes

    Katherine M Franke•Columbia Law Review•2001

  • Object Lessons

    Robyn Wiegman•Object Lessons•2012

  • And the Unnatural Afterlife of British Colonialism in Asia

    Open Access•Douglas Sanders•Asian Journal of Comparative Law•2009

  • Against Nature, against Consent

    Joseph J Fischel, Joseph Fischel•differences•2013

  • Is the Rectum a Grave

    Leo Bersani•October•1987

  • What Gay Studies Taught the Court

    George Chauncey•GLQ A Journal of Lesbian and Gay…•2004

  • Feminism, Marxism, Method, and the State

    Catharine A Mackinnon•Signs: Journal of Women in…•1982

Citation velocityhistorical
Highly citedNo

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae