性欲望及其界限 – Sexual desire and its boundaries

王全安是我非常喜欢的一个导演,《白鹿原》刚拍好时,片长有三四个小时,他给我单独安排了一个看片会,我猜是因为电影中的性表达稍稍超出审查尺度,他知道我是研究这个的,所以让我提前看看,提提意见。最近看到他因为嫖娼被抓捕的消息,动了恻隐之心,决定要好好想想这个问题:为什么那么多很优秀的人会去买春,他们受到的惩罚是应得的吗?

人的欲望有主观和客观的界限。主观的界限是生理极限,饱是食欲的界限,快感是性欲的界限。客观的界限是社会规则,强加于人是犯罪,通奸是违规,在中国,卖淫嫖娼也违反行政法规(刑事犯罪法只惩罚淫媒,不惩罚性工作者和嫖客双方)。

如果没有规则,社会将不成其为社会。具体到人的性欲这件事上,社会的规则有以下几种:

第一种是不可强迫。只要对方不同意,无论是强奸、猥亵、性骚扰,全都不允许,一旦发生,要受刑法处罚。否则天下大乱,或者像印度那样出现光天化日之下强奸游客的事情。

第二种是不可通奸。既然结了婚,对配偶就有忠诚承诺,否则为什么要结婚?单身就可以不犯通奸错误了。虽然根据统计调查,婚外性关系的发生率在40%上下,其中包括性交易但不都是性交易,但是也不能说发生率高就不是犯错误。

第三种是不可交易。这第三种规则涉及问题较多,不同国家和社会有不同规定。主要有两大类型,一类允许性交易,如荷兰、德国;一类不允许性交易,如中国。多数国家处于中间状态,即有轻微约束,不严厉,如英国只禁止性工作者强行拉客行为,其余不禁;如香港的“一楼一凤”等。

对于性交易的处置为什么会有不同?原因在于性交易是人类社会中性质模糊不好定义的一种活动。狭义性交易只包含一次性的用金钱购买性服务;广义性交易却可以包含长期包养关系(包二奶),甚至包含妻子不工作完全由丈夫供养的夫妻关系(恩格斯所谓“资产阶级婚姻中的卖淫”)。如果采用对人类性交易的广义定义,那就绝对无法实施惩罚(例如不能用刑法惩罚二奶),按照这个定义,单独把一次性金钱交易的行为拿出来惩罚,理由就不够充分。

王全安等人的买春行为除了违反现行行政法规之外,引人深思的还有以下几点:

一是中国的性交易到底有多大规模?抓到的只有王全安、黄海波、薛蛮子,没抓到的还有多少?从他们的轻易得手,至少证明这种服务是很容易找到的,性服务业从业人员据调查统计当以十万百万计,看来所言不虚。

二是仅仅从效果看,现行对卖淫嫖娼的处置方式是否能够缩小性交易行为的规模?如果说十起交易中只抓到一起,如果说百起交易中只抓到一起,如果说一万起交易中只抓到一起,那么这种处置方式能有什么效果?

三是从性交易的广义定义看,我们到底应不应当坚持现行的处置办法?可不可以思考一下荷兰德国等国家以及世界上大多数国家对性交易的处置方式的内在逻辑,可不可以借鉴一下他们的成功经验,把中国人的同等行为处置得更合理一些?

WANG Anquan is a director I am extremely fond of. When “White Deer Plain” had just finished shooting and the film length was three or four hours, he organised a private viewing session for me. I guess this was because the sexual expression in the film had somewhat overstepped the censorship standard, and knowing that I research this stuff, he let me have a watch and make some suggestions in advance. Recently I saw news that he had been arrested for visiting prostitutes, and feeling sympathetic I decided to properly think over this issue: why are there so many outstanding people that go and buy pleasure, and is the punishment they suffer deserved?

People’s desire has subjective and objective boundaries. The subjective boundaries are physiological limits. Feeling full is the boundary of appetite and orgasm is the boundary of sexual appetite. Objective boundaries are the regulations of society. Forcing oneself on someone is committing a crime, adultery is breaks the law, and in China, buying and selling prostitution is also against administrative regulation (criminal law only punishes the prostitution intermediary and does not punish either the sex worker or the patron).

Without regulations society would not be called society. The following are a few of society’s regulations specific to sexual desire:

The first is that it cannot be forced. So long as the other party does not agree, all acts of rape, molestation and sexual harassment are prohibited and will be subject to punishment under the criminal code if they are to occur. Otherwise, there would be pure chaos, or the occurrence of things like tourists being raped in broad daylight, as happened in India.

The second is that adultery is not allowed. Since one is married, one makes a promise of loyalty to one spouse – otherwise why get married? Being single one can avoid committing the error of adultery. Even though according to statistical surveys the incidence of sexual extra-martial affairs is around 40% (including commercial sex, although it is not all commercial sex), one cannot say that just because the rate of occurrence is high that one isn’t committing an error.

The third is that commercial sex is not allowed. This third regulation touches on a relatively more issues since different countries and societies have different regulations. There are mainly two large categories. One category allows commercial sex, like the Netherlands and Germany. The other category does not allow commercial sex, like China. The majority of countries fall somewhere in the middle by having minor restrictions and not being strict. For example, England only prohibits sex workers to from coercively soliciting customers and does not ban the rest; or for example Hong Kong’s rule of having only one prostitute per residence, and so on.

Why are there different ways of handling commercial sex? The reason lies in that commercial sex is an activity in human society that is ambiguous and difficult to define. Commercial sex in the narrow sense only includes one-off use of money to purchase sexual services. Commercial sex in the broad sense however can include long term relationships supporting a mistress, even including husband and wife relationships in which the wife does not work and is wholly supported by her husband (Engels’ so called “prostitution through marriage of the capitalist class). If were are to use the broad definition for humans’ commercial sex then it would be absolutely impossible to exercise punishment (for example criminal code cannot be used to punish mistresses). According to this definition, there are insufficient grounds for solely picking out one-off exchanges of money for sex to be punished.

Apart from breaking current administrative regulations, people such as WANG Anquan buying pleasure also causes one to ponder the following few points:

First is, what is the true scope of commercial sex in China? Only WANG Anquan, HUANG Haibo, and XUE Manzi have been arrested – how many are there who have not been arrested? Considering the ease with which they found it, this at least proves that this kind of service is very easy to find. It seems that the number of workers in the sex service industry being in the hundreds of thousands or millions according to survey counts has some truth to it.

Second is, merely looking at the effects, can current ways of dealing with the buying and selling of sex reduce the scope of commercial sex activity? If we say that only one in ten transactions is caught, versus only one in a hundred is caught, or only one in ten thousand is caught, then what effect can these kinds of punishment methods have?

Third is, using the broad definition of commercial sex, should we or should we not persist with current approaches in handling it? Can we consider for a moment the logic behind the ways countries such as the Netherlands, Germany and most of the rest of the world handle commercial sex? Can we borrow from their successful experience and deal with Chinese peoples’ same behaviour in a more reasonable fashion?

1 Comment

Join the discussion and tell us your opinion.

adminreply
August 3, 2018 at 4:55 am

Original translation by Samuel Lar / Xiaoshiyidian

Leave a reply