I found this video on Yahoo the other day, just as I was about to sign in to check my email. I chose to post this media moment because I felt it mirrored our class discussion the other day on Gender and Sexuality. The video is about Aphrodisiacs: 5 Foods to Spice Up Your Sex Life. Food historian Francine Segan introduces five aphrodisiacs at the Museum of Sex in New York City, that is thought to work and talks about why. In the video, Francine talks about the first aphrodisiac, garlic. After explaining how garlic stimulates blood flow in the body, she ended her sentence with, “essential for penis erection.” She also insinuates throughout the segment that all these aphrodisiacs enliven ‘males.’ (Do keep in mind that the interviewee is a woman) She further explains how Antler Tea is an ancient aphrodisiac that ‘men’ would drink, and how Casanova the Italian lover would use different foods to get women in the mood. Not until the end, did Francine suggest that Good & Plenty licorice candy has been used for arousal in both ‘men and women.’ I just found the whole bit quite interesting, in terms of assuming the normative sexual relationship. The segment just presumed heterosexual relationships were the standard when explaining the five foods that are used for inducing sex. This is a piece of media that perpetuates the ideology of heterosexual relationships. Media such as this just reinforces men and women sexual relationships and hinders the opportunity for homosexual relationships to further blossom.
Do you think aphrodisiacs really work?
Do you think there should be more segments like this but used in more of a general context, as to not isolate any other sexualities?