SEX, MORALITY, AND THE LAW, by Lori Gruen and George E. Panichas (editors). New York: Routledge, 1997. 454 pages. Hardcover $65.00, Paper $22.95. ISBN 0-415-91636-4.

Reviewed by Eileen L. McDonagh, Dept of Political Science, Northeastern University. Email: EMCD@neu.edu.
 

SEX, MORALITY, AND THE LAW, edited by Lori Gruen and George E. Panichas, is an interesting and innovative contribution to interdisciplinary literature focusing on the intersection of law and society. In this volume, the editors define the topical subject, "sex," to include same-sex activity, commercial sexual encounters, reproductive decisions, and sexual self-determination. Their primary concern is to produce a counterbalance to the irrational, contentious, and contradictory public discourse generated by a society all but saturated by sex. They seek to do by presenting "calmer, more careful assessments of matters of intimate concern" (p. v).

Their method for providing an antidote to the way "irrational prejudices and unfounded beliefs about sex and sexuality impede the creation and implementation of rational social and legal policies" is to explore relationships between social mores, philosophical perspectives, and court decision-making. They do so by juxtaposing scholarly writings representing diverse intellectual disciplines--including moral philosophy, history, and constitutional law--with excerpts from key court cases dealing with the wide range of issues involving sexuality. In addition to these materials, the authors offer several organizing typologies to structure their analyses of how society and law deal with sexuality.

The authors, for example, define three major perspectives in the social and legal debates regarding sexuality as being liberal, conservative, and feminist traditions. True to the spirit of John Stuart Mill, in the liberal tradition, the main criterion used to determine the parameters of permissible sexual activity is that the state should not exercise its power by interfering with the choices or conduct of people unless those choices or conduct threaten or constitute harm to others. By contrast, the authors define the conservative tradition as a view that justifies state interference in citizens' conduct when necessary to maintain a "certain social climate and moral tone," to preserve historical and cultural traditions, to protect and promote public opinion and values, or to protect the individual from self-inflicted harm (p. vi). The authors view the liberal and conservatives traditions as central to the framing of legal concepts and precedents, even though they view these positions as inherently incompatible in relation to each other. In addition, the authors define the third tradition, feminist analyses, as one that uncovers how both liberal and conservative traditions can foster the subordination of women by means of sex and sexuality.

The authors use a liberal criterion to organize their presentation of topics, namely, whether the sexual activity in question harms another person. On the basis of this standard, the six sections of their edited volume encompass the following sequence of topics: lesbian and gay sex, prostitution, pornography, abortion, sexual harassment, and rape. The authors' liberal contention is that one end of the continuum, consensual lesbian and gay sex, does not harm others, in contrast to the other end of the continuum, rape, which clearly does. The idea of ranking topics in this way is an interesting one, but the authors do not explain why they used only a liberal criterion. Nor do they provide any discussion about how different traditions would produce dissimilar rankings. If the authors' had used the conservative tradition, for example, and sequenced topics in terms of public perceptions of morality in relation to sexual activities or the historical acceptance of particular sexual activities, presumably, the relative placement of topics would be altered.

As with any ambitious attempt to bridge disciplines, of course, the very strength of the book in furnishing diverse viewpoints under one cover also somewhat undercuts its success. Although the authors claim that they will be presenting liberal, conservative, and feminist perspectives on the range of sexual topics selected for the volume, in more than a few instances the excerpts selected differ from each other more in terms of nuance and emphasis rather than in terms of different world views. Although there are ways this volume could have been improved, it is nevertheless certain to be a useful addition for undergraduate courses in moral philosophy and ethics and for undergraduate political science courses concerned with law and society perspectives and/or gender issues in relation to law and politics.