Abstract
Pleasure Activism is A. M. Brown’s recent anthology, which is a best seller in the New York Times’ listing. Her collection of writings and images is dedicated to decolonizing and transforming how we perceive pleasure. Brown’s conceptualization of pleasure activism is deeply rooted in sex-positive references, such as somatic bodywork and Black feminist theory, that both aim to channel the healing properties of pleasure into sociopolitical liberation from systemic and structural forms of oppression. The following analysis and review of Brown’s Pleasure Activism is guided by several core social work perspectives: strengths-based theory, ecosystems theory, and a power, race, oppression, and privilege (PROP) framework.
Pleasure Activism is at heart a deeply personal collection of poems, interviews, artwork, and reflections curated and written by Brown to maximize pleasure and joy within our lives while also reducing trauma-induced pain, guilt, and shame. This collection of diverse works not only serves as an inspiration and guide for readers, enabling them to explore barriers to accessing and utilizing pleasure within their own lives but additionally provides a grounded and dedicated space for Brown’s evolving relationship with pleasure as a black, pansexual, and cisgender woman. Each chapter examines how different forms of pleasure can be reclaimed from the dominant capitalist, patriarchal, and white supremacist norms that frequently impede radical self-love, happiness, and satisfaction in our own everyday lives. Brown primarily focuses on how pleasure can manifest in the form of sex, intimacy, and drug use, but she also briefly explores other sources of overlooked simple pleasures, such as fashion and comedy.
Notable examples of how Brown illustrates pleasure as a guiding force for sexual liberation are found among chapters dedicated to eroticism and intimacy as healing, transformative, and even community-building pathways for those who have experienced pain through sexual trauma as well as chronic illness and disability. Although Brown did not specifically name strengths-based theory as a formal influence of her work, it is clear that she embraces this core social work perspective that emphasizes sexual self-determination, resiliency, and resourcefulness among marginalized people. Brown does not urge her readers to rely on or seek sexual empowerment from outside influences, such as sexual partners or capitalist-driven materialism, but instead reiterates that power derived from pleasure and satisfaction can be entirely cultivated within ourselves. Brown’s use of self-derived sexual pleasure as a form of strength and resiliency among marginalized people, specifically among black queer women, is a relevant and critical lens for social workers to utilize when discussing human sexuality.
Social work’s ecosystems theory helps to structure our understanding of how individuals interact with and are shaped by their environment. Throughout Pleasure Activism, Brown frequently references her positionality in the context of her environment that has shaped and guided the text’s narrative. Brown not only references her own identities, particularly her gender, race, and sexual orientation, but she also highlights the intersecting self-definitions of her interviewees and role models as well. However, the repeated emphasis on individuality, specifically individually sourced power through pleasure as the solution to broader systemic oppression, risks placing both the success and failure of pleasure activism on the shoulders of individuals. Although it is critical to understand how our positionality and behaviors affect our outlook on topics such as sex and pleasure, we cannot discount the powerful effect of broader environmental systems that cannot be dismantled or understood solely through individualism and individual pleasures. For example, Brown often assigns “Hot and Heavy Homework” to her reader at the end of a chapter. An example is the sentence: “Your pleasure assignment this week is to discover or upgrade the pleasure relationship you have with your nipples” (p. 92). This particular example is centered on the behaviors of the individual as a form of pleasure activism. How could this pleasure activism concept instead be centered on a particular ecosystem, such as sex education anatomy lessons within a school setting? What would a “Hot and Heavy Homework” assignment on a macrosystem level look like? For example, such an assignment could ask the reader to examine the pleasure-related implications of disorderly conduct laws that criminalize the exposure of women’s nipples and areolas in public. Interrogating the role of the individual within the context of pleasure activism is one key dimension; however, it would be advantageous to also acknowledge the impact of broader environmental systems that interact with and shape the individual’s perceptions of pleasure.
A PROP framework is an additional core social work perspective that is relevant to Brown’s conceptualization of pleasure activism. Pleasure, as a form of power, is consequently susceptible to systems of social inequities. Brown’s perception of pleasure is that it is an abundant source of positive energy, one falsely depicted as a scarce resource controlled by white people and men. Possibly as an antithesis to white supremacist, patriarchal, and capitalist power structures that attempt to hoard pleasure and power among the privileged groups, Brown argues that excess and overindulgence inherently destroys the spiritual nature of pleasure. Pleasure, according to Brown, only truly exists in moderation. This assertion begs the question, “Do powerful white cisgender-heterosexual men paradoxically have problems experiencing pleasure due to an excess of power?” As a reader, I wasn’t entirely convinced that pleasure as a form of power can only exist in a temperate ecosystem of moderation. In fact, this line of conceptual thinking led me to wonder if privileged groups can derive pleasure from forms of domination and control, such as white supremacy, patriarchy, colonialism, and imperialism. Do men not only benefit from the patriarchy but also derive pleasure from it? Is it harder to give up or reallocate power if it is experienced as pleasurable? When we say that a dominant group benefits from oppression, as opposed to saying that they derive pleasure from the oppression of others, does the use of the word benefit obfuscate or sterilize a relationship to power that is more complex and insidious? Instead of pleasure being an inherently good or bad force, I conclude that it, instead, be conceptualized as a morally neutral form of power that can sustain both liberating and oppressive projects. Although, as a reader, I differed from Brown’s conceptualization of pleasure, I appreciate the rich space that Pleasure Activism provides for deeply thought-provoking analysis of the relationship between pleasure, power, race, oppression, and privilege within our society.
Overall Brown’s Pleasure Activism is a welcoming and engaging intellectual space for discussion, analysis, and reflection around the liberating potential of reclaimed pleasure. Social workers who utilize numerous critical anti-oppression frameworks to dismantle systemic and structural forms of inequalities would benefit from concepts within Brown’s Pleasure Activism, as well as further exploration of how pleasure is relevant to radical practices within clinical work, policy, and research.
