Philips and Reay’s Sex before Sexuality was interesting to me especially because of the opening paragraph with the subversion of the male seducer trope. Men are expected to be the ones that chase and dominate women, not the other way around. I’m not totally familiar with the history of Adam and Eve (except for the small discussion we had in class) but I am familiar with women being put into categories such as the prude, the temptress (or the ‘slut’ since temptress seems a bit outdated), etc. If you don’t belong in one of the categories, then you obviously belong in the other. It’s black and white without any type of gray area. If a woman has sex outside of marriage, she’s considered to be less ‘pure’. I remember talking about a similar topic in another one of my classes where we discussed Prosper Mérimée’s work. He believed all women to be the daughters of Eve; that they were there to lead men to temptation. This connects back to the idea of the image we get in the first paragraph in which men are the more pure sex and women are dirty, less than. Men are allowed to be sexual without repercussions but there is a stigma against women for doing the same. This also can be tied back to the other essay, Goldberg’s “The Utterly Confused Category” and the idea of policing sex acts. The ‘temptress’ trope is often used to pit the ‘pure’ girl against the ‘impure’ one and judge women based off of their sexual history. I think these two essays have a few similarities that would be interesting to point out and discuss. Sex is a slightly controversial topic and yet it’s very prevalent in the media, especially when it comes to television shows and movies. It’s odd how, as a nation, we seem obsessed with sex and still cannot have proper, open conversations about it.