Sexuality & The State
As this system of power relations works to constrain sexuality, the state reaps numerous benefits. In “Blood Talks,” anthropologist Jennifer Robertson explains, “Nation-states have always maintained a vested interest in the sexual and social reproduction of the population” (2002). The reproductive capacity of the populace is of primary interest to the state because the family-unit serves as an incubator of both physicality and ideology. Sanctioning appropriate sexual expression allows the state to control the means of biological and cultural reproduction. When people enter into acceptable forms of sexual relationships, they reproduce the physical capacity of the nation, while their compliance deepens the legitimacy of state-sanctioned sexual practices.
The prevalence of monogamy provides a clear illustration of this phenomenon. The state itself actively makes its interest in sexual monogamy clear by offering married couples myriad economic benefits. Outside of modern relations, it is unlikely that monogamy would be such a pervasive ideal. Even within present sociality, polyamory is increasingly common, while monogamous arrangements are marred by high failure rates. This points to monogamy’s culturally contingent nature, and suggests a deeper reason behind its present prevalence. On a physical level, monogamy advances state interests by reducing the risk of venereal disease. This is beneficial to the state because it enhances the vitality of national biopower. On an ideological level, sexual monogamy allows partners to work as a unit through which to reproduce socially sanctioned ways of being, both laterally and on their offspring. Additionally, it is thought that the practice of sexual monogamy enhances social harmony. These factors, when taken together, point to the vested interest the state holds in constructing monogamy as a sexual ideal. By harnessing desire, the state can latch onto a viscerally human emotion and channel this powerful force in ways that serve its own ends.
To explore a deeper manifestation of this phenomenon in the Japanese context, refer to the pages "Women's Soccer and Queer Sexuality, Housewives' Magazines and Gender Confinement in Post-War Japan, Sex Work and Venereal Disease in Occupied Japan, & Madame Butterfly and the Westernization of Sexuality Discourse."
Robertson, Jennifer. 2002. "Blood Talks: Eugenic Modernity and the Creation of New Japanese." History and Anthropology 13 (3)(September 24): 191-216.