Anderson

 Amy Zhou

In Sex Under Pressure: Jerks, Boorish Behavior, and Gender Hierarchy, Scott Anderson defines what sexual pressure is to him, and whether or not sexual pressure is ethically suspect. What this means is he is arguing whether or not pressuring someone into having sex regardless of what the victim’s response is, is ethical or not. He argues that these pressures of interest are limited to “those of ordinary, if not laudable, social or familial interaction” (352). In other words, this could include emotional manipulation, mild intimidation, petty deceits, and threats to altar a relationship. Some might see this as a grey area because there is no explicit proof as there would be with violent assault or drugging someone. On top of that, there is also something emotional abusers are very good at, and that is gaslighting. Gaslighting is a form of psychological abuse in which a victim is manipulated into doubting their own memory and perception. Of course, taking this into account, it is absolutely possible a victim could be coerced into believe she wasn’t raped, when in fact, she was if we take into account “structural aspects of human interaction,” (350) which Anderson argues may affect consent’s value. Conly argues that sexual pressure is ethically suspect if it involves coercive threat, such as the threatener acting illegitimately such as an employer threatening to fire an employee unless she has sex with him. However, it can be argued that it does not have to be that explicit because the employer is still taking advantage of his position in power to achieve this type of sexual relationship with his employee. Another example of this might be with a teacher student relationship. Even if the student is the one who approached the teacher about a relationship, the teacher is still at fault because the teacher is aware of the power dynamic between the relationship and how that might appeal to a student. Anderson makes a point about this hierarchy when he discusses the study done by Robbins where sorority women gave the following as “reasons to have sex or sexual contact” (362), and how male seducers “are able to draw upon advantages conferred by male dominance within a gender hierarchy”(351). The reason why this study is so important is because of the reasons listed, where many, if not all, could be explained by said gender hierarchy. One criticism of this could be that women can also be in a position of power to manipulate their employee if they are the employer. In that case, it is not necessarily about gender dynamics anymore but simply just the power dynamic. However, in the case of the teacher student relationship, the gender hierarchy would still affect a male student, just simply in a different way. If he were to tell others, they would praise him, and tell him to “man up” and be proud of the fact that a grown woman is taking advantage of him. This goes hand in hand with toxic masculinity, and that is fed into by the patriarchy.