Sex, in a sense, has become one of the most commercialized phenomena of our evolutionary biology. Evolving for over 2 billion years, the first archaeological record of penetrative intercourse dates to 385 million years ago between prehistoric fish named Microbrachius dicki (giggle now if you need to).
Since the time of Mycenae Greece, however, sex has been streamlined into embodying the more sociocultural aspects of our societies, with the biological effects of pregnancy and disease being redefined as a simple and banal prologue to the complex and emotionally-enriching processes of sexual intimacy.
Often the source of drama and action in art as much as in real life, sex has come to define humanity and its transience, influencing political beliefs and policy, cultural and structural development of societies and our self-identity and relationships. The psychology of sex, in a way, supersedes its physicality because the meaning behind the act distorts our cultural values more so than physical penetration ever could.
The most notable contributions to our contemporary values of sex stem from the works of psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud, who rose to prominence for his outlandish (and often correct) hypotheses about sex.
Of the most striking — and trust me, there’s a lot — notions is the foundation and definition of the Madonna-Whore complex. The term came about when the shifty, yet often spot-on, psychoanalyst had observed a strange dichotomy in his male patients, who came to him complaining that they didn’t feel any sexual desires for their wives as they did for prostitutes.
Mostly applicable to heteronormative ideals of sex, this complex, as defined by Freud, is the black-and-white splitting of female partners into two groups: the chaste and virtuous Madonna, and the immoral and promiscuous Whore. Freud illustrated the paradoxical nature of this phenomenon by explaining that “where men love, they have no desire and where they desire, they cannot love.” This theory turns respect and attraction into mutually exclusive traits, with tumultuous implications in the scope of sexual dynamics.
What drew me in about this complex was the absurdity of this subconscious rationale, how the male-centered fallacy views a woman’s modesty as a determinant of the respect she is owed, and the implication that a woman who has liberated herself from the anxiety of social scrutiny ought to be ousted from the societal hierarchy. This dichotomy must be entirely self-imposed and constructed from subconscious fears of losing control, as I, myself, have never glared at another woman and thought to myself: Is she worthy of respect, or do I find her sexually desirable?
I know other men have done this to me, though. As someone who was somewhat of an ugly duckling in my earlier years, there’s almost another layer of listening that men can turn on when they’re speaking to someone they’d sleep with.
Further, the concept of a Madonna and the Whore relinquishes the vital understanding that female sexuality exists on a spectrum, instead ascribing abstinence to be synonymous with virtue, and outward expression of hypersexuality to be equanimous to vice.
The Madonna-Whore complex is usually represented by two figures in modern pop culture: first, the biblical Madonna, which translates literally to “my lady.” This Madonna is known as the penultimate icon of virtue and purity in Christian theology, admired by followers for her chastity and faith, and worshiped by people who know nothing more about the Virgin Mary, the person, than the simple, dominating quality of her dutiful virginity. She carried the son of God, and that is all we should wish to know.
In contrast, the Whore is represented by another Madonna, the pop singer and worldwide cultural icon who vehemently usurps the negative connotations associated with the infamous name. Contrary to popular belief, Madonna is not a stage name chosen by the singer to represent some higher-order ideal — rather, she was born Madonna Louise Ciccone to Catholic parents in Bay City, Michigan (woot-woot) and built a successful career based on an egregious defiance of labels.
Named one of the most influential figures of all time — with an entire field of academia devoted to “Madonna Studies” and a separate Wikipedia page listing her extensive cultural impact — Madonna has managed to build a robust, era-defining career that merges sexuality with virtue and femininity with power. She even briefly attended the University of Michigan on a dance scholarship before dropping out and moving to New York City in the 1980s. Her professional advances have not failed to garner criticism and hate from more conservative sects of society, from family organizations to anti-porn feminist advocates to even the Islamic State of Syria, who banned her name and music in the 2010s.
Madonna’s platform, which has synthesized Christian iconography and ideals with provocative and erotic imagery, stands as a stark contrast to the purity culture that flickers like a dim flame in the outskirts of modern society. Here, certain conservative religious groups find refuge in the control and indoctrination that they exercise over young girls and their bedroom habits.
The Church of Latter Day Saints, known colloquially as the LDS Church or just LDS, is perhaps the most infamous exemplar of modern American religious conservatism. Riddled with stories from excommunicated members that range from the indifferent to the horrific, the once-mysterious traditions of the LDS Church have recently been catapulted into mainstream discourse thanks to our favorite social media app: TikTok.
One of the things that came to light from the Tiktok users that inhabit “Mormon Tiktok” is the practice of “soaking,” which is fully penetrative sex that lacks any movement or hip thrusting. Because pre-marital sex is defined as a sin within the LDS church, this practice is supposed to act ask a loophole for young Mormons who just can’t wait until holy matrimony to get it on. And for those who find soaking to be inadequate for satisfaction, they can ask a friend to assist them by jumping on the bed, which is known as “jump humping.” Apparently, having an arousing movement produced by a third party is just chaste enough to secure a spot with the man upstairs.
But these quirky practices point to a broader systemic issue about bodily autonomy within religious organizations. The trends going viral on Tiktok are just the tip of the iceberg, as any hyper-obsessed researcher can predict that the stuff that followers are not sharing about their religious organization must be significantly worse than what they are sharing.
Beyond mere religious doctrine, the purity of women becomes increasingly manipulated and standardized by social institutions, as seen in the case of purity dances. These formal events, hosted by conservative American religious groups, such as Evangelical Christians, are attended by fathers and their daughters, ranging from as young as four years old to as old as college-aged. There, both parties make a commitment to protecting the daughter’s virginity — girls not yet old enough to comprehend the topic itself make a pledge to abstinence, as their fathers recite vows to keep them that way. After light refreshments and some desserts, it’s the fathers who rise and all chant a vow together, promising “before God to cover my daughter as her authority and protection in the area of purity.”
Other sex-shaming practices include the use of purity rings, which are worn by unmarried girls as a physical representation of their pledge to pre-marital abstinence. These rings, however, are not particular to the LDS Church but are most prominent in conservative American Christian sects. In fact, one program, called “The Silver Ring Thing,” that advocated for premarital abstinence education through the use of chastity rings, ended up being partially funded by the U.S. government in 2006, before they were sued by the ACLU of Massachusetts for violating the separation of church and state.
The social ostracization of female sexuality and sexual expression is a taut indicator that these overbearing policies and radicalized institutions still maintain an iron grip on the market economy of feminine-presenting people, controlling their bodies like stocks and bonds, silently traded in offices we’ll never get to step foot inside of.
Moreover, the lack of agency and incapacity for retaliation that women are subject to across the world highlights the latent danger of possessing a uterus in this day and age. Without their volition, women continue to be subjected to the toxic structure of the Madonna-Whore complex on a state-wide scale, and even though the extent of this vilification varies from culture to culture, nonetheless it persists.
Control can come in many forms, and the subjugation of a woman’s sexuality doesn’t always have to be as overt as purity rings and abstinence-only education programs, but it is just as sinister.
In 2009, Egyptian government officials discovered the importation of artificial vaginal hymens from China and subsequently called for a ban on these products. The artificial hymen itself is relatively inexpensive — $15 in post-recession American dollars — and is inserted into the vagina, which then releases a red liquid upon penetration, allowing uterus-bearing people to fake the “loss” of their “virginity.”
In a locale where pre-marital sex is highly stigmatized and even punishable by death, this cheap alternative to hymen repair surgery has likely saved countless uterus-bearing individuals from being abused or even killed. Egyptian politicians have condemned these devices for “spreading vice in society,” clearly not fully understanding that these tactics are a result of prior meddling in the bodily autonomy of femme people, arising out of a need for self-preservation, rather than a desire for an orgasm.
So which way is it? Misogynists want nothing more than to pop the fictional hymen of a virgin, but it seems that a hymen purchased off Amazon is just one step too far. A person’s freedom to choose, it seems, is a divine right that is not extended to women in the bedroom. Thus, virginity culture proves itself to be a product of various institutions’ commitment (religious and statewide) to the ownership of women.
Naturally, the only retaliation to radical theological conservatism is an overtly sexual and perverse display of vice — but just how liberating this can be for women should be duly re-evaluated.
If encouraging women to fit into the stifling Madonna mold is an indirect attack on personal choice, then how equally free can the Whore really be?
When theology is so heavily thrust into the sphere of cultural values, the seemingly logical approach would be to defy everything it stands for. Instead of condemning “whores” like the church does, we — the secular institution — applaud openly sexual women for their strength and valor. For not allowing religious organizations the satisfaction of taking control. For not giving in to the patriarchy.
These ideas, ones that celebrate the hypersexual tropes of the Madonna-Whore complex, are generally accepted in the realm of fourth-wave feminism, defined by its focus on intersectionality, empowerment and equity.
But while today’s sex-positive feminist efforts have contributed a great deal to liberation and freedom of sexual expression, it’s difficult to not attribute such movements to retaliation — like the flip side of the chastity coin, one side reads ‘Madonna’ the other reads ‘Whore.’ Supporting sex work and advocating for a woman’s right to take back power over her sexual lifestyle are topics that have been dividing feminists for decades, and they’re particularly important because they tie in directly to workers’ rights and class struggles.
Thus, the Madonna-Whore complex makes itself known in yet another facet of our society, from church congregations to the labor market. While it’s vital we consider all sex workers in the discussion of workers’ rights and safety, it’s challenging to log onto Pornhub and argue that the stars on screen represent the quintessence of feminine empowerment.
Don’t misconstrue my words — legalizing prostitution can improve a number of variables for female sex workers, from decreasing rates of STDs and accidental pregnancy to better access to medical services. But that doesn’t mean the act of legalizing sex work, of formally welcoming prostitution as a part of our 21st century labor market, does not come with harmful repercussions.
Regardless of work setting, a prostitute is raped at least once every week. Legalization also means placing the burden of proof on the sex worker in rape and assault cases, while also making it tougher to imprison individuals who have committed violent acts against them. There are many ways that legalization can improve the function of sex work on the mechanics of capitalist desire, but only so many ways that it can benefit sex workers.
It is hard to make the claim that sex work is not an institutionalized form of exploitation. When chosen, sex work can often be a fulfilling and profitable career for many others — but at the end of the day, it is work under a capitalist global economy, a market system that exploits all of its workers, whether they’re involved in sex work or not. The only contrast is that, of all the various careers that constitute the working class, female sex workers must sacrifice more of their safety and well-being than any other worker.
Agency. Choice. Desire. Volition. Despite any of these things being present (though they demonstrably are not), the Madonna-Whore complex is a component of our cultural dynamics that deconstructs women into controllable entities, and never in a way that women reap any benefits.
Men love the Madonna because they enjoy control, and men love the Whore because they benefit from this exploitation. But, in the grandiose sense of human chronology, I fear that men do not love women at all.
“Confessions on a Dance Floor” is my favorite of Madonna’s albums, and I would sell all ten of my fingers for a chance to have seen her perform live in 2006 during her record-setting “Confessions” tour. Her ability to construct originality and develop aesthetics is unrivaled, and the empowering aura of her musical immanence is a necessity for morning walks to class. I love the way her voice sounds strong and sweet, never failing to show apathy toward those who love to hate her.
I do not know her at all, but she is someone I express love for. There is so much complexity to her verse. I always think about how tragic it must be — for men — that they will perhaps never quite grasp the extent of her mellifluous symphony.
What a tragedy it is for them to be unable to comprehend the complexity of women because they are too preoccupied with ensuring the chastity of the Madonna, and too focused on ostracizing the Whore.
Statement Correspondent Valerija Malashevich can be reached at valerija@umich.edu.