ABSTRACT

Advocates argue that sexual safety, access to sexuality-related services, sexual health and well-being, sexual privacy, and sexual autonomy are universal and inalienable rights of all people. However, for those relegated to the social, economic, and political margins, their sexual rights can only be secured with the support of others. In the current study, we examined whether a sample of 307 majoritized women (i.e., white, cisgender, and heterosexual) would endorse the sexual rights of four theoretical groups of marginalized women: those who identify as lesbian; those with low incomes; those who are adolescents; and those labeled with an intellectual disability (ID). Whereas results indicated broad and equivalent support for the sexual rights of lesbians and low-income women, participants were somewhat equivocal about the sexual rights of ID-labeled women and least supportive of the sexual rights of adolescent women. We consider how protectionist attitudes toward adolescent and ID-labeled women may explain these findings and ultimately undercut their sexual rights. Rather than restrict the rights of marginalized women, even in the interests of protection, we advocate committing energy and resources to reducing their vulnerability so that all women may exercise a full complement of sexual rights.

摘要

倡导者认为，性安全、获得与性相关的服务、性健康和福祉、性隐私和性自主权是所有人的普遍和不可剥夺的权利。然而，对于那些沦落到社会、经济和政治边缘的人来说，他们的性权利只有在他人的支持下才能得到保障。在当前的研究中，我们检查了 307 名占多数的女性（即白人、顺性别者和异性恋者）的样本是否会认可边缘化女性的四个理论群体的性权利：自认为是女同性恋者；低收入者；青少年；以及标有智力障碍 (ID) 的人。鉴于结果表明对女同性恋者和低收入妇女的性权利给予广泛和同等的支持，参与者对身份标签女性的性权利有些模棱两可，最不支持青春期女性的性权利。我们考虑对青春期和身份标签女性的保护主义态度如何解释这些发现并最终削弱她们的性权利。我们提倡投入精力和资源来减少她们的脆弱性，而不是限制边缘化妇女的权利，即使是为了保护她们的利益，以便所有妇女都可以行使充分的性权利。