Graduate School of Social Sciences
Master of Gender, Sexuality and Society
Unveiling Virginity in Iran
Azadeh BadieiJaryani Student ID: 11096012 E-mail: badieeazade@gmail.com First Supervisor: Sherria Ayuandini Second Supervisor: Dr. Marie-Louise Janssen
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Marcel Proust (1871-1922), the great novelist, once said: “Let us be grateful to the people who make us happy; they are the charming gardeners who make our souls blossom.” At this moment, more than ever, I am filled with joy and happiness. Therefore, I would like to put into words my profound gratitude to those who encouraged and assisted me to pave the way for my desire and live the day that was once a dream to me.
First of all, I would like to express my deepest appreciation to my supervisor, Sherria Ayuandini, who always believed in my abilities and inspired me to work on this topic and write down my thesis.
Secondly, I would like to thank my professor and second reader, Dr. Marie-Louise Janssen, for her great support and motivating comments throughout the past year.
Above ground, I am indebted to my parents for their unequivocal support and tremendous love, without whom I would never have enjoyed so many opportunities. My best regards and
appreciation goes to my family, particularly my brother and uncle, for their never-ending love and encouragement.
Additionally, I would like to offer my sincerest gratitude to my friends Hooman, Elif, Hamide, Ashkan, Tom, Maria, Eddy, Alex, and Jynx for providing me with unfailing support and constant motivation throughout this year of study.
Finally, I would like to extend my thankfulness to my informants. I want to acknowledge and appreciate their aid and transparency during my research. This thesis would not have been possible without their dauntless participation.
Table of Content
Chapter 1: Introduction 5
I. Problem Statement and Research Question 7
II. Context 10
II.I. Education 10
II.II. Marriage 12
III. Academic Significance 13
IV. Methodology 14
V. Thesis Structure 14
Chapter 2: Literature Review 16
I. Virginity and Virginity Loss 16
II. Sexual Script Theory 17
III. Gender Identity and Gender Performativity 19
Chapter 3: Methodology and Data Collection 22
I. Setting 22
II. Finding Access 22
III. Informants 23
IV. Interview Process 24
V. Ethical Considerations 26
VI. Study Limitations 26
Chapter 4: Definitions, Perceptions, and Experiences 28
I. How Do You Define Virginity? 28
II. How Do You Perceive and Experience Virginity? 33
III. Living Virginity 38
III.I. Patriarchy and Inequality 39
III.II. Honor, Sexual Assaults, and Rape 40
III.III. Hymenoplasty 44
III.IV. Virginity and Gender Performativity 46
Chapter 5: Conclusion 50
I. Definitions, Perceptions, and Experiences 50
III. Limitations and Suggestions for Further Research 53
Chapter 6: Bibliography 54
Appendix 63
Verbal Consent Script 63
Interview Guide 64
Chapter 1: Introduction
In the summer of 2016, I was at a cafe in Tehran, sitting with four of my female friends that I have known for more than twelve years, talking about our lives and friends. After a while, one of my friends, Kiyana (28), mentioned that a mutual friend of ours, who had married two months ago, is having a difficult time with her husband. We all got surprised by this news and asked Kiyana to explain what has happened.
Our friend had met her husband at her work about a year ago. A few months later they started to date, and after seven months of a non-sexual relationship, they decided to get married.
While they were discussing their ideas, needs, and expectations before marriage, he had told our friend about the high value of virginity to him and had asked her whether she was a virgin or not. Our friend had stated that she was a virgin. She had explained she had had a few boyfriends, but none of her relationships had lasted too long, and they had broken up as soon as they had
figured out that they were not a good match for marriage. As this answer seemed enough, without any further questions or conversations regarding virginity or sexuality, they had moved on and considered it to be resolved. Following the social and cultural norms and rituals, they married soon after the consent and agreements of their families and began their mutual life. A month after their marriage, when they had anal sex for the first time, he suspected that our friend is not completely inexperienced in anal sex. This suspicion became the starting point of his sensitivity about the sexual manners of our friend. Two weeks of close observations were enough for him to open up about this issue and express his concerns. He had reminded her of his words regarding the importance of virginity to him and had confronted her with his suspicion. She had argued that virginity means having an intact hymen which she possessed when they married. Objecting to her definition, he had clarified that to him virginity means having no experience of penile-oral, penile-anal, or penile-vaginal intercourse. Their conversation gradually had switched to a quarrel and was continued with a debate over the right definition of virginity. Subsequently, she had accused him of not being a virgin when they got married based on his familiarity with a woman's body. Our friend had criticized his non-virginity and had blamed him for deceiving her. She had complained that a person cannot perceive virginity as an important concept while he, himself, is exempt from it. He had defended himself by expressing that virginity is only a concept that can be defined for girls. Eventually, their quarrel had ended up with the disagreement of our friends with her husband's definition and perception of virginity and her admittance of being experienced in anal sex.
This declaration had not surprised her husband as it had just proved his surmise, but it had genuinely hurt him. He had taunted that he was hugely disgruntled, and he would need a while to be alone and think about the future of their marriage. However, he had demanded her to stay at their house during this time, as he would have been more discontent if this issue became a notable problem to their families. He then left the house.
It was ten days since their quarrel that he had left their home and was living in a hotel. He had only called our friend twice during this time to check whether she was all right, but no decision was made yet.
We were all silent for a while, drowned in our own thoughts. Our friend was stressed, and her husband upset. Each of them was right based on their beliefs and perceptions, which leads me to wonder how virginity is defined, perceived and experienced by each individual. How many varieties are out there? What is the significance of virginity in our lives?
This incident became the starting point of my interest in the concept of virginity and motivated me to look for an answer to my questions. Therefore, the central goal of this thesis is to
understand how young heterosexual adults define, perceive and experience the concept of virginity in Iran.
Although virginity is a concept that cannot be defined easily or conclusively, many scholars who work on this subject believe that the first sexual experience of individuals has a significant meaning to them (Barnett et al., 2016, 2017, in press; Barnett & Moore, 2017; Carpenters, 2001, 2002, 2005, in press; Holland et al., 2010; Humphreys, 2013). Additionally, scholars agree the first sexual encounter of individuals is an impressive milestone in people's life which can profoundly influence their mentality, sexuality, and gender identity (Barnett et al., 2016; Barnett & Moore, 2017; Carpenter, 2002, 2005, 2009, in press; Holland et al., 2010; Humphreys, 2013).
I. Problem Statement and Research Question
Iran has been theocratically governed, based on the Islamic Sharia (Islamic laws) and regulation, since the 1979 Islamic revolution after being socially and culturally profoundly influenced by Islamic ideologies for almost fourteen centuries (Abdolmohammadi, 2015; Kaivanara, 2015; Mahdavi, 2007; Rahnema, 2011). The religious, social and cultural dynamics of Iran changed after the revolution owing to the fact that Sharia determines not only religious duties, but also the secular obligations of people (Ahmadi, 2016; Mahdavi, 2007; Rahnema, 2011). However,
religious and non-religious scholars have shown that in the past two decades, the social and attitudinal outlook of Iranians has been known to increasingly include behaviors that were at odds with Islamic principles (Mahdavi, 2007; Motamedi et al., 2016). One of the drastic changes is considered to be the sexual behaviors and expression of people, particularly young adults, in urban areas which, in turn, affected the concept of virginity, particularly before marriage (Mahdavi, 2007; Moruzzi & Sadeghi, 2006; Motamedi et al., 2016). Even though there is no doubt in the existence of old religious and cultural values, Iranian society, despite the critical view of the state, is becoming more open towards approving and engaging in premarital heterosexual interactions and premarital intimate heterosexual relationships (Ahmadi, 2016; Farahani et al., 2011; Hedayati-Moghaddam et al., 2015; Kaivanara, 2015; Khalajabadi Farahani & Cleland, 2015; Latifnejad Roudsari et al., 2013; Moruzzi & Sadeghi, 2006; Noroozi et al., 2015; Rahimi-Naghani et al., 2016, Tabatabaie, 2015; Vakilian et al., 2014).
In Iran, traditionally, girls are expected and taught to preserve their virginity and their chaste reputation until marriage (Ahmadi, 2016; Moruzzi & Sadeghi, 2006; Motamedi et al., 2016). In contrast, there exists virtually no scrutiny of sexual behaviors or virginity of boys (Ahmadi, 2016; Moruzzi & Sadeghi, 2006; Motamedi et al., 2016). The post-revolutionary Islamization of Iran suggests the prohibition of cross-gender social relations of unmarried heterosexual people
(Latifnejad Roudsari et al., 2013; Moruzzi & Sadeghi, 2006). According to this perspective, a cross-gender relationship is an illegitimate relationship because it raises the unwanted sexual gazes and desires in unmarried people (Moruzzi & Sadeghi, 2006). However, in this context, studies show that premarital sex has increased after the Islamic revolution in Iran, and there is evidence to suggest that premarital relationship has become more and more common among young people in the country (Ahmadi, 2016; Farahani et al., 2011; Hedayati-Moghaddam et al., 2015; Kaivanara, 2015; Khalajabadi Farahani & Cleland, 2015; Latifnejad Roudsari et al., 2013; Moruzzi & Sadeghi, 2006; Noroozi et al., 2015; Rahimi-Naghani et al., 2016, Tabatabaie, 2015; Vakilian et al., 2014). It should be noted that this research is not intentionally excluding
homosexuals but the participants are exclusively those with heterosexual preference. Same-sex acts became illegal after the revolution of Iran by the laws of Sharia. This means homosexuals cannot act on their sexual preference and identity in public nor can they marry (Bucar & Shirazi, 2012). If they are caught in the middle of a sexual act, they can be punished or persecuted (Bucar & Shirazi, 2012). Due to these social and legal circumstances in Iran, it was prudent to aim for participations of people in heterosexual relationships only.
Nowadays, the younger generation in Iran is publicly engaging in non-conventional behaviors such as hanging out, kissing, and flirting, which in result, compels the state authorities to control the public areas by establishing a new police department named moral police (Moruzzi &
Sadeghi, 2006). Noting the cultural and socioeconomic status of young adults, particularly young women in Iran, they usually have to stay in the homes of their parents up to their marriage
(Moruzzi & Sadeghi, 2006). With the strict supervision of the state which has imposed a
dichotomy between the safety and comfort of the outdoor and indoor spaces, young people often invite the person they are in a relationship with to their private family spaces while their parents are not home. This strategy gives them more freedom and opportunities to experience sexual intimacies indoors without being caught by the agents of the state, particularly the police (Moruzzi & Sadeghi, 2006). However, these free sexual experiences are still mostly male dominated (Farahani et al., 2011; Kaivanara, 2015; Moruzzi & Sadeghi, 2006). The double standards concerning the female and male sexuality and the significance of virginity before marriage leads young unmarried girls to locate themselves at the intersection of the conventions of virtue and the discourse of sexual freedom (Farahani et al., 2011; Kaivanara, 2015; Moruzzi & Sadeghi, 2006). To retain the social conception of virtue and honor, some of the girls who have had premarital sex which caused the loss of their virginity would undergo hymenoplasty (Ahmadi, 2016; Kaivanara, 2015; Moruzzi & Sadeghi, 2006). Hymenoplasty “is a surgery to alter the shape of the hymen membrane in the vaginal canal, commonly performed to minimize the aperture.” (Ayuandini, 2016, p. 352; Ayuandini, 2017, p. 62) As in most of the countries the
hymen is an indication of the virginity of the girls, this surgery restores the “broken” hymen tissue of the girls and allows them to satisfy the traditional ideas that a virgin girl must bleed while her first intercourse is taking place (Ahmadi, 2016; Ayuandini, 2016; Ayuandini, 2017; Kaivanara, 2015). Taking this option into account, girls are able to bend the Islamic principles rooted in society, and escape the cultural consequences such as violence, not finding a suitor, or ostracism while still engaging in premarital heterosexual practices (Ahmadi, 2016; Kaivanara, 2015). Since Tehran, the capital of Iran with over eight million habitants, is hosting the migrants and people with cultural, social and religious diversities even from other urban and rural areas of Iran, this major metropolitan city will be the site for my research (Kaivanara, 2015).
Because of the high sensitivity of this topic, detailed or accurate studies on the concept of virginity and premarital heterosexual behaviors and practices have not been conducted or published in Iran. Some studies indicate that 58% of male and female college students have had heterosexual premarital interactions while 12% of female college students and 28% of male college students reported to have experienced heterosexual premarital sex (Farahani et al., 2011; Motamedi et al., 2016). However, it should be noted that these statistics were based on data that was collected through surveys and questionnaires which are, to some extent, unreliable because of their limitations on establishing a nuanced and personalized definition of virginity, sexual contacts, acts, and experiences (Farahani et al., 2011; Farahani-Khalajabadi, 2014). Scholars argue that the definition of each of these words can vary for each person according to their gender, age, culture and social class. (Farahani et al., 2011; Farahani-Khalajabadi, 2014). One person might think of oral sex as a reason for virginity loss while a different person might only consider vaginal penetration as the only way for a girl to be considered non-virgin (Farahani-Khalajabadi, 2014). According to Farahani (2014), due to the sensitivity of the usage of the words such as “mogharebat e jensi” or “Nazdiki e jensi” (meaning having sex in Persian
language), in the surveys concerning the premarital sex or the loss of virginity, these words were replaced by “tamas e jensi” (meaning sexual contact). The other noticeable matter is that people have addressed their sexual attitudes as complete or incomplete which also raises the questions of which sexual contacts or acts are considered to be complete and what do they complete (Farahani-Khalajabadi, 2014). This lack of data in the academia can also influence the results of the previous data collected by the scholars (Farahani et al., 2011). Therefore, scholars believe there is a demand for an in-depth qualitative research on this topic to gain more knowledge regarding the perception of youth on virginity and the words, terms, and phrases that are used to refer to sexual experiences (Farahani et al., 2011; Farahani-Khalajabadi, 2014).
Consequently, this research aims to provide insights on the definition, perception, and experiences of young adults in Iran regarding the notion of virginity in heterosexual relationships. As such, the main research question is: How do young Iranians perceive and experience the concept of virginity in heterosexual relationships? I will also be asking the following sub-question: (1) How do they perceive hymenoplasty?
II. Context
As it was mentioned before, Iran has experienced profound cultural, social, and political changes after the Islamic revolution of Iran (Ahmadi, 2016; Mahdavi, 2007; Rahnema, 2011). The
monarchical system was replaced by Sharia laws, and the clergies started to govern the state (Abrahimian 1982; Ahmadi, 2016; Mahdavi, 2007; Rahnema, 2011). The theocratic rules became the fundamental element of people's daily life which monitored and dominated even their very personal and private aspects of lives (Abrahimian 1982; Mahdavi, 2007). The Islamic ulema called for a social modesty which included sexual restraints of the citizens (Mahdavi, 2007; Tabatabaie, 2015). Various policies were developed to fulfill this demand, such as censoring any explicit nudity or sexual content from the media, veiling women to become desexualized, and sex segregation which was applied in schools, mosques, and even public transportations like subway trains and buses (Tabatabaie, 2015). Furthermore, based on Sharia laws, premarital sex became a crime which if discovered will cause the lawbreakers to be imprisoned for ten days to two months or receive up to one hundred lashes. Additionally, in cases of adultery, their sentence is death by stoning (Mahboobi, 2016; Mahdavi, 2007; UK Government, 2016). Moreover, the application of Sharia and the new policies mostly affected the everyday lives of women in Iran (Kaivanara, 2015). Aside from the dominant impact of the post-revolutionary regulations on sexuality and the sexual lives of women, their social position and status were redefined by them (Kaivanara, 2015). Women were restrained from holding certain positions in society such as being a judge or a pilot, in the Qanoon-e Qessas penal code, women are only considered to be worth as half of a man, and the permission of a relative male figure (e.g. the father, grandfather, or husband) became necessary in their most important decision-makings like marriage or getting out of the borders of the country (Justice for Iran, 2013; Kaivanara, 2015; Moghadam, 2004).
II.I. Education
In support of the values of the Islamic revolution, the educational system and materials changed (Mehran, 1990; Piavandi, 2012; Shorish, 1988). On the one hand, with the help of the new free
education policies and the national literacy campaign, more people all over Iran gained access to education (Basmenji, 2005; Mahdavi, 2007). The number of female students who enrolled and completed any educational level drastically increased, which subsequently reduced the gap between the literacy of male and female students. However, new policies are being applied to control the enrollment of female students in higher education, as they have outnumbered their male peers by two to one, which is directly affecting the Islamic values by delaying marriage, wanting fewer children and competing with male peers in the labor market of Iran (Mehran, 2003; Zahedifar, 2012).
On the other hand, the new educational materials became prominently concerned with the discourse which advocated Islamic culture, restraining the impact of Western culture, and nurturing Muslim individuals via and committed to the religious socialization (Paivandi, 2006, 2012, in press). Additionally, the content of the textbooks is highly influenced by the Islamic and Sharia laws which represent the unequal position and status of both sexes (Paivandi, 2006, 2012, in press). Not only this inequality between men and women is justified within the Islamic
framework, but also the assigned gender roles are discussed in the social and personal contexts, vindicating the unquestionable superiority of men and the secondary position of women
(Mehran, 2003, Paivandi, 2006, 2012, in press).
As Islam prohibits premarital sexual relationships, in a country which 97% of its population are Muslims, it is assumed that young people are not sexually active (Tabatabaie, 2015). Moreover, the sociocultural and legal consequences of premarital sex in Iran encourages youths to conceal their sexual relationships from their parents and the society (Tabatabaie, 2015). Several studies in Iran have proven this assumption wrong and revealed the occurrence of premarital sexual
relationships of pupils (Ahmadi, 2016; Farahani et al., 2011; Hedayati-Moghaddam et al., 2015; Kaivanara, 2015; Khalajabadi Farahani & Cleland, 2015; Latifnejad Roudsari et al., 2013; Moruzzi & Sadeghi, 2006; Noroozi et al., 2015; Rahimi-Naghani et al., 2016, Tabatabaie, 2015; Vakilian et al., 2014). A recent survey which was done with the participation of nearly 142,000 Iranian students in 2008 indicates that 74.3% of all respondents reported being in a relationship with the opposite sex. In another study, 30% of 1610 Iranian students reported having the experience of sexual relationships (Tabatabaie, 2015).
However, the Iranian authorities are convinced that pupils do not need to officially receive any sex education in the schools, universities or at any organization (Farnam et al., 2008; Tabatabaie, 2015). They argue sex education is a Western concept and will motivate students to become sexually active while the emphasis of the state is on the sexual modesty (haya) of unmarried individuals (Tabatabaie, 2015). The only sex education courses that are allowed to take place in Iran aim to provide insights into the sexual health and hygiene of the newlywed couples (Farnam et al., 2008; Yousefzadeh et al., 2017). These classes are sex-segregated, and the contents of
these classes which vary from place to place are limited to pregnancy, contraceptives, and breastfeeding (Rahimi-Naghani et al., 2016). Several studies have shown that 83.5% of married individuals are still facing sexual problems and lack sexual knowledge despite the fact that these classes were held for them (Bolourian & Ganjlo, 2007; Pakgohar et al., 2006; Yousefzadeh et al., 2017). Experts have announced that 50-60% of divorces in Iran occur due to the sexual problems and dissatisfactions of couples (Aganj et al., 2009; Yousefzadeh et al., 2017).
II.II. Marriage
Marriage is considered to be one of the most important events in the individual's life (Ahmadi et al., 2012; Dhami & Sheikh, 2000). In the context of Iran, marriage adds more value to not only the sociocultural status of people but also their religious status (Dhami & Sheikh, 2000). Marriage fulfills the religious obligation and duty of Muslims as it assists them to preserve the moral values and keep the balance of the society (Dhami & Sheikh, 2000; McGlinn, 2002). Additionally, marriage is the only legal, social and cultural option that legitimizes the sexual experience and relationships of people (McGlinn, 2002). According to Sharia laws, unmarried women should remain virgin to the night of their marriage to prove their chastity and purity (Ahmadi, 2016; Kaivanara, 2015). An intact hymen brings honor and value to the family of the girl, and according to these doctrines, the unmarried women are under the pressure of the state to control their sexual instincts before they marry (Ahmadi, 2016; Kaivanara, 2015). However, there is neither emphasis nor scrutiny over the virginity of the boys in Iran (Ahmadi, 2016; Moruzzi & Sadeghi, 2006; Motamedi et al., 2016). Practically, two types of marriage are well known in Iran: the temporary (sigheh or siqa) and permanent marriage (aghd-e-daem) (Haeri, 1989; McGlinn, 2002).
Sigheh means the union of an unmarried Muslim woman with a married or unmarried Muslim man based on a contract which has a fixed period of time in exchange for a certain amount of money (Ahmadi et al., 2012; Inhorn, 2006). Men have no limitation regarding the number of sigheh contracts that they can have. However, women are only allowed to have one contract at a time (Haeri, 1989). If a woman is a virgin, in order to have a temporary marriage, she needs the permission of her father or her male guardian (Moghadam, 2004). Although the Islamic ulema consider sigheh as a helpful strategy to avoid sins and sexual deviances, especially when the individuals do not meet the marriage conditions, the society holds a negative view towards it and perceives it as a taboo topic (Ahmadi et al., 2012, Haeri, 1989; Moghadam, 2004). In spite of the advocation of Islamic ulema, sigheh is seen as a legal way for widowed women to resolve their
financial problems (Ahmadi et al., 2012). In addition, some people associate sigheh with prostitution as it involved the sexual service of an unmarried woman with a man who is usually much older than her and rich (Moghadam, 2004). Consequently, sigheh is not common among Iranians, particularly the youths (Ahmadi et al., 2012).
The permanent marriage is the widespread form of marriage in Iran. Similar to the temporary marriage, the consent of the male guardian of the virgin bride is necessary (Moghadam, 2004). Traditionally, before marriage, the families agree on a certain amount of money or a valuable commodity (known as mehrieh) that the prospective groom has to pay in return for the bride’s sexual services (Ahmadi, 2016). In other words, mehrieh is the price that men are paying for of the chastity and virginity of their wives. On the other hand, to assess the marriageability of a girl, the family of the girl or the prospective groom or his family may demand a virginity certificate (Ahmadi, 2016; Kaivanara, 2015). This certificate proves that the hymen of the prospective bride is intact and it can be obtained from the legal forensic medical examiners or gynecologists (Ahmadi, 2016; Kaivanara, 2015). Bearing in mind that studies suggest that premarital sex in the contemporary state of Iran is on the rise, one of the options for women who believe they do not possess an intact hymen is to undergo a hymen reconstruction surgery (Ahmadi, 2016;
Kaivanara, 2015). According to Ahmadi, an Iranian scholar who works on the medicalization of virginity, “hymenoplasty basically builds a corporeal appearance of virginity in women by surgically restoring the hymen.” (2016, p. 222) Women who do this surgery are often those who have acted on their sexual desires, broken the taboo of premarital sex and seek to protect their social and cultural values by simulating an anatomical marker of virginity (Ahmadi, 2016). Reports indicate that the number of women who undergo this surgery has increased (Ahmadi, 2016; Kaivanara, 2015). This research aims to probe the understanding of young heterosexual Iranians on the concept of virginity and the notion of hymenoplasty in contemporary Iran.
III. Academic Significance
To understand the narrative of the young heterosexual adults regarding the concept of virginity in Iran the theories of Simon and Gagnon (1986) and Laura Carpenter (2001, 2002, 2005, in press) are going to be used to explore the presented ideas and set of experiences of individuals.
Carpenter, a leading scholar in the field of virginity, has identified four cognitive frameworks about virginity which are based on the studies that she has done in the United States (2001, 2002, 2005, in press). The cognitive frameworks that Carpenter presents are what individuals
associated with their perception and experiences of virginity (2001, 2002, 2005, in press). These frameworks are virginity as a gift, stigma, process and an act of worship (2001, 2002, 2005, in press). Along with the stated frameworks, the sexual script theory of Simon and Gagnon (1986)
is going to be used to discover the underlying notions of individual's ideas, attitudes, and
behaviors. The cultural scenario, interpersonal script and intrapsychic script constitutes the three layered model of the sexual script with which the sexual behaviors of people can be studied in relation to each other at a macro and micro socio-cultural level (1986).
Moreover, the theory of Judith Butler on gender identity and performativity will be used to analyze the everyday experience of informants regarding the concept of virginity. According to Goffman (1976), gender is associated with roles and displays. Meaning, each individual accepts a gender role and presents it differently based on the given context. However, West and
Zimmerman (1987), contended that the gender display is not peripheral as Goffman considered it to be. Gender roles are inevitable, and they are always occurring and reoccurring in our everyday life (West & Zimmerman, 1987). Therefore, people are continuously doing gender (West & Zimmerman, 1987). Butler (1990), rejects the idea of biological sex and refers to gender as a social construction that exists since we were born. She argues that gender is a set of acts that guides us to the verb of "being" instead of "doing" (Butler, 1990). Additionally, she states that people are performing their identities which do not make any difference if it is a racial, sexual or gender identity (Butler, 1990). Thus, the theory of gender performativity suggests that the gender identity of individuals is shaped by the social norms and language of society and people are performing their identities all the time.
IV. Methodology
To find the answer to my research question, I conducted thirty-eight in-depth, semi-structured face-to-face interviews with both girls and boys who identified as heterosexuals from 28 March 2017 to 7 May 2017 in Tehran, Iran. The interviewees were between the age of eighteen to thirty-four years old since it is the common age of marriage in Tehran. The interviews took place in Tehran, as this metropolitan capital with over eight million inhabitants, is hosting the migrants and people with cultural, social and religious diversities even from other urban and rural areas of Iran. Moreover, people living in larger cities tend to be more open talking about sensitive topics. Due to the high sensitivity of the study topic, I accessed the participants of this study through my network in Tehran and asked each informant to refer me to a potential interviewee who is
interested in sharing his or her ideas.
With the assistance of semi-structured interviews, I was able to start the interviews with general topics and broad questions about the personal background, understandings and ideas of the informants about sex education, or how they gain information regarding sexual issues. This approach allowed me to build rapport with my informants and prepare them for more in-depth and personal questions (Bryman, 2012; Hennink, Hutter & Bailey 2011). Further, the informants
were questioned about their general and personal perceptions, observations and experiences regarding the concept of virginity and hymenoplasty in Iran. Last but not least, I finished our sessions with questions regarding our interviews and asked them to evaluate it. This strategy enabled me to refine the coming interviews and be more prepared for the upcoming reactions of informants.
V. Thesis Structure
This thesis consists of five chapters. The first one which is coming to its end is an introduction which represents the content of the thesis and illustrates the methodology and literature which was used. The second chapter is dedicated to the literature review in which I have elaborated on Carpenter theories on virginity, Simon and Gagnon sexual script theory and the theory of gender identity and performativity by Judith Butler. The third chapter is focused on the methodology and data collection followed by the ethical considerations and limitations in the same chapter. Chapter four presents the findings of this study and the analysis of them. The last chapter is concerned with the conclusion. The verbal consent script, the interview questions and the summary can be found in the appendix.
Chapter 2: Literature Review
Throughout this chapter, three different theories are presented which are about virginity and virginity loss, the sexual script theory, and gender identity and gender performativity. I. Virginity and Virginity Loss
It is difficult to specify the definition of having sex, virginity and virginity loss since it is a reflection of individual's ideas, emotions, and expectations (Barnett et al., 2016; Carpenter 2002, 2005, in press). It is essential to understand the definitions of people of different behaviors are also based on the interpersonal agreements and individual perceptions (Barnett et al., 2016; Carpenter 2002, 2005, in press). There are certain factors, such as culture, gender, age,
orientation, and the context of the people that, depending on them, the terms and definitions used to address various sexual behaviors differ between individuals (Pitts & Rahman, 2001; Randall & Byers, 2003; Sanders et al., 2010; Trotter & Alderson, 2007; Walsh & Leonard, 1974; Wells, 1989; Wells, 1990). For example, actions such as penile-vaginal intercourse, genital contact, kissing, or hugging might be understood differently by various individuals. Each can become a part of a particular sexual understanding, like sexual contact, sexual act, complete or incomplete sex, having sex, or virginity loss (Farahani-Khalajabadi, 2014; Horowitz & Bedford, 2016; Trotter & Alderson, 2007). According to some studies, the adequate definition of virginity loss among people is the occurrence of penile-vaginal intercourse followed by penile-anal intercourse (Trotter & Alderson, 2007; Bersamin et al., 2007). Scholars report the existence of a hierarchal pattern in the way sexual terms are defined and used despite most of them remaining unnoticed (Bersamin et al., 2007; Randall & Byers, 2003). As an example, the inclusion of orgasm in the definition of having sex was addressed more by male than female participants (Randall & Byers, 2003; Trotter & Alderson, 2007).
Laura Carpenter (2001, 2002 and 2005), a leading scholar on the topic of virginity, has
conducted various qualitative research with the participation of people from different social and cultural backgrounds in the United States. Her findings shed light on individual's definitions and perceptions of virginity and virginity loss and highlighted the underlying associative notions of the culture and context with the concept of virginity (Carpenter 2002, 2005, in press). Based on her findings, Carpenter (2001, 2005, in press) offers four cognitive frameworks which can be used to illustrate the perception and experience of individuals regarding virginity and virginity loss. The mentioned frameworks are gift, stigma, process, and an act of worship (2001, 2002, 2005, in press).
The gift frame portrays a positive outlook of virginity. It is seen as a precious belonging which the individuals have proudly accepted and are comfortable and satisfied with it. The fundamental conviction of people who believe in this framework is to share their gift with the right person whom they love, which is why they are often seen as the romantic partners. However, it should be noted that among the four presented frameworks, the gift believers are the ones who are most likely to go through emotional traumas at the time of their virginity loss if they had not chosen their partner wisely and the expected experience of giving their gifts away was not fulfilled (Carpenter 2001, 2002, 2005, in press).
The second framework is stigma. It represents people who are dissatisfied with and ashamed of their virginity status. In contrast with the gift framework, the individuals have a negative and uncomfortable view towards the concept of virginity. It is regarded as a forced burden which needs to be constantly concealed from others. Stigma believers do not recognize their virginity and try to get rid of it the first time that they find the chance of it. Their main focus is to become a non-virgin, and they are not obsessed with waiting for or finding the right time, place or person (Carpenter 2001, 2002, 2005, in press).
Process as the third framework characterizes individuals who believe life consists of ongoing stages and there are inevitable phases in each person's life which transform the inexperienced, innocent youth to a knowledgeable adult. They perceive this transition as a new way of communication and bonding with another individual which can provide more sexual insights, knowledge, and understanding of the sexuality, one's partner and oneself. Process-oriented people are not concerned whether they are in love with their partners or not; However, they will welcome the fact that their partner is sexually experienced as this opportunity adds more value to their first sexual experience (Carpenter 2001, 2002, 2005, in press).
Finally is the act of worship frame. This perspective is based on the religious doctrines of evangelical churches and conservative Christian institutions. Although this frame shares the positive outlook towards the concept of virginity with the gift-oriented people and emphasizes on the mutual love and affection between the sexual partners, however, the essential essence of this perspective is that one must hold on to their virginity up to their marriage. Therefore, act worship believers do not approve of premarital sex and perceive the preservation of their virginity until marriage as a part of their religious obligations (Carpenter, 2005).
II. Sexual Script Theory
Simon and Gagnon (1967, 1973, 1986, in press) introduced the sexual script theory arguing that sexuality needs to be studied more closely and contextually as it is not perceived and
socially learned concepts, with the aid of this theory they tried to explore the dynamic of sexual behaviors and relationships of a person (Gagnon, 1990). They defined scripts as "a metaphor for conceptualizing the production of behavior within social life (Simon & Gagnon, 1986, p. 98)." Simon and Gagnon (1967, 1973, 1986, in press) demonstrate three layers of sexual scripts which are the cultural scenario, interpersonal scripts, and intrapsychic scripts.
Any actor at the institutional level such as the state, medicine, church, family, school and so on can be considered under the category of cultural scenario (Gagnon, 1990). All institutions and their arrangements form an interrelated hegemonic system which indicates the role of the actors (Simon & Gagnon, 1986). The cultural scenarios determine the entry role of the actors,
performances and the possible outcomes of it for both actors and others meaning the roles are defined and expected to be fulfilled in the society no matter whom will be the actor (Simon & Gagnon, 1986). Although the miscellany of institutions and the variety of actors sometimes make it hard to understand how a cultural scenario was shaped, this task can be done by focusing on the generic scripts that are pertinent and applicable in various contexts and circumstances (Gagnon, 1990). The second layer of scripts is the interpersonal script which connects the social interactional life of a person with the experience of each individual of the cultural scenario (Gagnon, 1990). The interpersonal scripts signify the way a person deciphers the cultural scenario within a certain context which is dependent on the time, place, and the people who are involved in it (Simon & Gagnon 1967, 1973, 1986, in press). Finally, the intrapsychic script is at the individual level. This script is concerned with the internal dialogues and personal desires and fantasies of a person in regards to the subject of sexuality and sexual relations (Simon & Gagnon 1967, 1973, 1986, in press).
The three layers of sexual scripts are influencing and modifying each other (Simon & Gagnon, 1986). There are times that the close interrelated effects of these layers make it impossible to identify the starting point of the changes (Simon & Gagnon, 1986). According to Masters et al., (2013) the cultural scenario and the interpersonal scripts are the elements that shape a
considerable portion of our intrapsychic scripts. In other words, the cultural institutions plant the seed of sexual expectations and appropriate scripts in the individual's mind while they are still young and inexperienced with the usage of their facilities such as policies and regulations, school textbooks, and media (Carpenter, 2009; Kelly 2010; Morgan & Zurbriggen, 2007; Paivandi, 2006, 2012, in press). Interpersonal scripts assist the cultural scenarios to become internalized in an individual. They are the element which nourishes the planted seed by the cultural scenarios in the callow youths and monitors its growth.
Carpenter (2009) and other authors believe that the cultural scenarios are the primary sources which are reproducing the heteronormative norms (Kelly, 2010; Peter & Valkenburg, 2011;
Schock, 2011). This might be one of the main reasons that penile-vaginal intercourse is still perceived to be the most acceptable definition of virginity loss (Carpenter, 2009; Ingraham, 2002; Medley-Rath, 2007) and it is still believed that a virgin girl should bleed when her first sexual intercourse occurs.
The discourse regarding the concept of virginity is gendered which reinforces the double standards and gender roles of its actors (Carpenter, 2001, 2005, in press; Holland et al., 2002; Humphreys, 2013). The sociocultural backgrounds of individuals produce and reproduces
gendered sexuality, sexual beliefs, expectations, and desires which later at the intrapsychic script level might be adopted or rejected (Carpenter, 2010). For example, the studies have shown that women are more likely to consider their virginity as a gift while young men feel empowered by shedding the unpleasant state of virginity (Carpenter, 2001, 2005, in press; Humphreys, 2013). It is crucial to understand that the cultural scenario and interpersonal scripts are not the only forces which shape the sexual and gender identity of a person. The intrapsychic script which can also be perceived as the agency of the individuals can change the scripts surrounding the topic of virginity (Carpenter, 2010). The four frameworks that Carpenter offered on virginity and
virginity loss illustrates the cultural scenarios which had been internalized and gendered in individuals (Carpenter, 2010). However, their practiced agencies determined the extent of their obedience or resistance of the cultural scenarios (Carpenter, 2010). The composition of gendered scripts, experiences, structures and power relations create distinctive sexual trajectories for both women and men which as a result profoundly impacts gender trajectories in turn (Carpenter, 2010).
III. Gender Identity and Gender Performativity
Goffman (1976) associates gender with the words "role" and "display." He refers to both gender role and gender display of individuals as a behavioral aspect which is chosen by the person to be expressed in certain situations (Goffman, 1976). He states that "If gender be defined as the culturally established correlates of sex (whether in consequence of biology or learning), then gender display refers to conventionalized portrayals of these correlates (Goffman, 1976, p. 69)." What is perceived from this statement is that Goffman believes gender expressions which are displayed by individuals can signify the underlying constructions of being a female or a male in society. However, according to him, gender performances are elective (West & Zimmerman, 1987).
Elaborating on Goffman's ideas, West and Zimmerman (1987) introduced the theory of doing gender which is concerned with the constant involvement and reproduction of gender in
based on individuals’ interactions (West & Zimmerman, 1987). Doing gender is defined as "creating differences between girls and boys and women and men, differences that are not natural, essential, or biological (West & Zimmerman, 1987, p. 137)." Doing gender helps the socially significant constitutions of a gender to be preserved by linking them to the essential nature of that gender (West & Zimmerman, 1987). Each individual has many social identities which depending on the circumstances may be revealed, concealed, shunned or so on (West & Zimmerman, 1987). According to West and Zimmerman (1987), gender is not merely a social status that makes individuals select particular ideas and behaviors. Each person “does” gender every day of his/her life, within a specific institutional and sociocultural context (West & Zimmerman, 1987). Individuals become gendered by the continuous experience of gender rules such as obeying, breaking and modifying them which shape their gender performances
(Carpenter, 2010; Lucal, 1999; Pascoe, 2007). As stated by Heritage (1984), all the members of society are involved in the affair of state, others and themselves. Meaning individuals are
engaged in the cultural scenarios, intrapersonal and intrapsychic scripts. Therefore, depending on the scripts they are involved with, each person presents a variety of identities.
Judith Butler in her book Gender Trouble (1990) talks about the notion of gender. She rejects the biological determination of sex and gender and presents them as social constructions which exist since a body is born (Butler, 1990). Gender is a series of acts which leads us to the verb “doing” rather than just “being” (Butler, 1990; Salih, 2002). Gender creates norms which on the one hand determine the proper functions of gender and on the other hand, provide the ground for the resistance (Butler, 1990). According to Butler, the gender identity of individuals is constantly manipulated based on their sex and their proper behavior which matches their body (Butler, 1993). She states the identity of individuals, no matter if it is sexual, racial, or gender identity, is something that is performed (Butler, 1990). Therefore, identity is not something that we
inherently are, but rather something we become (Butler, 1990). It is worth mentioning that gender performativity does not equal gender performance. Butler explains:
"Gender proves to be performative – that is, constituting the identity it is purported to be. In this sense, gender is always a doing, though not a doing by a subject who might be said to preexist the deed […] There is no gender identity behind the expressions of gender; that identity is performatively constituted by the very “expressions” that are said to be its results (Butler, 1990, p. 33)."
As she believes those who do not succeed to do their gender properly will be punished by the society, she perceives gender performance as a tactic for surviving the essential systems (Butler, 1990).
Moreover, Butler believes that language shapes and constructs gender identities (Butler, 1990; Salih, 2002). This statement clarifies the position of language and discourse in doing gender (Butler, 1990). As language and discourse effect are affected by the sociocultural values of the societies, therefore, doing gender varies from one culture to another and is dependant on the words, phrases and linguistic structures that they use to address concepts regarding gender.
Chapter 3: Methodology and Data Collection
This part of my thesis is dedicated to my methodology and data collection. Having my research question in mind, to understand the perception and experiences of young heterosexual Iranians on the concept of virginity, I collected the required data for this research by conducting thirty-eight in-depth, semi-structured face-to-face interviews with both girls and boys who identified as heterosexuals from 28 March 2017 to 7 May 2017 in Tehran, Iran. In the following sections, I explain in details how this research was designed and carried out. More information on the setting, finding access, informants, interviews, methods, ethical considerations and limitations of this research can be found bellow.
I. Setting
I picked Tehran, this major metropolitan city, as the site for my research for multiple reasons. The capital of Iran with over eight million habitants, which is hosting the migrants and people with cultural, social and religious diversities even from various urban and rural areas of Iran was an exceptional place for the aim of my research (Kaivanara, 2015). Moreover, due to the new modernism wave and the influence of the internet, Tehran is a spectacular place from which a new form of heterosexual norms are arising (Kaivanara, 2015). This giant capital has provided space for boys and girls to hide their cross-gender relationships from the public eyes and particularly, the moral police and move in to the apartments which in result has created more room for them to engage in intimate premarital relationships (Kaivanara, 2015). Consequently, to study the sexual ideas and behaviors of Iranian youths, Tehran became the site of my research.
II. Finding Access
As I mentioned in the previous section, talking about virginity and sexuality is highly sensitive in the context of Iran. Therefore, finding access to people who were willing to share their ideas on these topics was challenging. I contacted my trusted friends, former colleagues, and
acquaintances at the beginning of March in Tehran and explained my research question and the goals of this study to them. Then, I discussed the possible ways that I could carry out this research and asked them to look for potential informants in their networks for me. After two weeks, I got access to fifteen informants by being referred to them through my networks in Tehran.
Later, after each interview, I asked the informants to refer me to someone they knew who might have had an interest in participating in this research. Most of them referred me to at least one other person from their networks. Consequently, all my informants are people who voluntary took part in my research by being referred to me.
III. Informants
Among the thirty-eight respondents, there are nineteen girls and nineteen boys. They have different social, cultural, traditional, and religious background. Eight of them are married, and thirty are unmarried. The majority of the respondents are Shi'ah Muslims, but among them are Sunnis and Zoroastrians as well. Fifteen people were born or have the experience of living in other cities besides Tehran such as Kermanshah, Yazd, Lahijan, Abadan, Tabriz, Rasht, Kerman, Arak, Isfahan, Fuman, Kish, Mashad, and Semnan. Among these fifteen informants, some were born in Tehran but had the experience of living in other cities because of the situation or job of their parents. Those who were born in other cities had moved to Tehran either in the past six years for the purpose of studying, working, and marriage or since they were kids, due to the job or condition of their family. The lowest obtained educational level of the interviewees is pre-university and the highest is Ph.D. Their subjects of study vary from art, literature, social sciences to computer engineering, chemical engineering, architecture, and marketing. The majority of the informants are working full-time. Some are working part-time besides their studies, and a few are only studying. Additionally, three married informants are at home taking care of their children.
The age of the informants is between eighteen to thirty-four. According to the chairman of the Information and Statistics Department of the National Organization for Civil Registration, the most common age of marriage in Iran for men is twenty to thirty-four and for women is fifteen to twenty-nine (Iran Daily, November 2015; Almonitor, June 2015; Tasnimnews, May 2016). However, media reports in metropolises such as Tehran indicate that the marriage age could reach even higher than twenty-nine years for women (Iran Daily, November 2015; Almonitor, June 2015; Tasnimnews, May 2016). Even though the legal age of marriage for women in Iran is thirteen years old (with the approval of their guardian), the age of majority is eighteen years old (Jokinen et al., 2014). As doing research with minors needed the consent of their parents, the minimum age of my interviewees is eighteen.
Research as a fluid practice, particularly in the field of social sciences, needs to be capable of changing and including a more participatory methodology that guarantees a more equitable relationship among parties through its design and construction (Darou, Kurtness, & Hum, 1993; Piquemal, 2001). Additionally, while trying to have a better understanding of a specific
phenomenon, it is crucial to use methods which bring more insight to the topic of study (Bryman, 2012). Thus, this research used in-depth, semi-structured face-to-face interviews for the
following reasons.
Firstly, this method assisted me with picking on the spontaneous answers and the benefits of "social cues" such as facial expressions, intonation, body language and voice of the informants which Opdenakker describes as additional information added to the verbal data in the interviews (2006). It was important to me that the answer of my respondents were their instant reflections on my questions. This helped me to evaluate the reliability of their answers and verify with them any paradoxical responses I received from them throughout the interviews. Subsequently, I composed an interview guide list which later aided me with knowing the direction of my questions and having a better understanding and gaining more details and new insights on and around the topic of my research question (Bryman, 2012).
IV. Interview Process
One of the key factors during the interview stage is to make sure the participants are not only willing to participate in the research but they also felt secure and respected to share their thoughts and experiences (Karnieli-Miller et al., 2009). The first and foremost step towards showing respect and gaining the trust of the participants that I decided to do was to send them a message before the interviews and give them a brief description about myself (Råheim et al., 2016). In this description, I explained who I am, where I study, what my research question is, and assured them regarding the confidentiality of the data collection process. The second step was to focus on the importance of their comfort and safety. To put them at ease, I always asked them to choose the time and location of our meetings. Some indicated the exact location, either at private spaces such as their houses or offices or at public spaces such as their universities, parks, and cafes. However, some were hesitant about the location of our meetings. In these cases, I suggested them a few options namely my house, various cafes in different areas of the city, or even in my car. The majority preferred the cafes with outdoor spaces and distant tables in which their voices could not be echoed and no one could hear his or her voices during the interviews. One of the informants came to my house, and one was interviewed in the car.
I met all of the informants at the location of our interview session. To prepare the informants to open up about their sexual lives, a researcher must build up a sense of rapport with them (Karnieli-Miller et al., 2009). The first fifteen to twenty minutes of our meetings was dedicated to establishing a mutual understanding and rapport with the respondents. The small talks and an introduction to the process of the interview were helpful to break the ice and create an
environment where the informants talk freely (Hannabuss, 1996).
During the small talks, I was enlightened by two interesting facts. The first fact is that I asked all of the informants about the reasons that they took part in this research. Their answers can be categorized into four groups. 1. Those who thought there is an emergence of research on sexual topics in Iran and they were happy to be a part of it. 2. Those who believed people do not value virginity as much as the previous generations and wanted to be the voice that represents this value again. 3. Those who had the experience of conducting a qualitative research and knew the difficulty of finding an interviewee. They wanted to help me as a researcher with participating in my research. 4. Those who were curious to know more about me, what I am studying, how I chose this field of study and research, and what kind of questions I will ask throughout the interviews. The second interesting fact is that some of the male respondents expressed their astonishment when they were told the person who is doing research on the concept of virginity is a female student. "I was shocked. The subject of sexuality is a great taboo in our country, and it is even more stigmatized if a girl conducts research about it." (Kamran, 24)
Eventually, after creating a mutual sense of affinity, I read the verbal consent to them and ask for their permission to audio record their voices and continued with the interview. I began the interviews with general topics and broad questions about the personal understandings and ideas of the informants about sex education, or how they gain information regarding sexual issues. This approach allowed me to build more rapport with my informants and prepare them for more in-depth and personal questions (Bryman, 2012; Hennink, Hutter & Bailey 2011). Further, the informants were questioned about their general and personal perceptions, observations and experiences regarding the concept of virginity. Based on the preliminary contact I had with Iranian young adults, I was aware they were willing to open up about their perception of sexuality and share their stories. This gave me an opportunity to go further with my questions and explore their personal ideas and conceptions on the topic of my research not only about themselves but also about the Iranian society. I noticed that some of the respondents who had the experience of living in other cities besides Tehran kept answering my questions in a parallel way distinguishing between before and after having the experience to live in Tehran.
I had also added questions inspired by case studies to my interview guide to switch my direct questions to indirect questions, allowing the informants to distance themselves from the subject and reveal potential unspoken new information (Leech, 2002; Mann, 2011). These case studies
were chosen from the stories, statements or ideas that I had heard from multiple people or on popular television programs. I believe using hypothetical questions allowed me to address the underlying theories on the concept of virginity and to understand the perception of my target group on them.
I finished the interviews by asking them to give me feedbacks on our interviews to detect its drawbacks and if necessary, modify my questions for the upcoming interviews. The average length of the interviews was one hour and a half. The shortest interview was an hour, and the longest was three hours and ten minutes. All of the interviews were audio recorded with the verbal consent of the interviewees and kept on a secured device which was only accessible to me.
V. Ethical Considerations
Ethical concerns are a prominent element of any human interaction (Singer, 1993). I am acutely aware that doing research on highly sensitive topics requires taking measures to secure the confidentiality of the interviewees and safety of the collected data. After deciding on the method, I prepared a verbal consent script which outlined all the details of the interview and the rights of the informants. During my preliminary contact with my informants, I discussed and named the potential risks and the measurements I had prepared to avoid them, such as using pseudonyms and conducting the interviews in the place and time they felt more at ease and secure. I also briefly declared their rights through the interviews namely their right to avoid answering the questions that they did not feel comfortable with or withdrawal of the interview in case they did not want to continue.
However, at the course of our discussions, I became aware of two main concerns of the respondents. The first concern that I was confronted with was whether I work for the Iranian government, and the second was if I needed their written consent. Therefore, I realized the necessity of clarifying for which organization I am working whenever I contacted a new
informant. I also then decided to only ask for a verbal consent from my informants rather than a written consent because of the sensitivity of this topic. Additionally, as Kurtness and Hum (1993) suggested, to gain more trust and avoid the ethical problems I offered the interviewees that if interested, they could receive the translation of the results of this research.
One of the limitations of this research was the time restriction. Luckily, I was able to interview a large number of informants which allowed me to include more diversity in my study. However, it cannot be denied that there might be a difference between the ideas of those who have only lived in the rural areas and those who have been exposed to the lifestyle and ideas that exist in large cities. The other limitation was that I only interviewed those who were referred to me by my due to the high sensitivity of the research topic. Although the participants have diverse backgrounds and experiences, nevertheless, the unique perception, understandings, and experiences of thirty-eight informants are not inclusive of all the great diversity of views and ideas that exist in Tehran and Iran.
Additionally, the age of my target group was between eighteen to thirty-four as these ages are the minimum and maximum age of marriage in Tehran and there is no need for parental consent to interview them. As the topic of this research is about the perception and experiences of Iranian youths on the concept of virginity, it should be noted that there are people bellow the age of eighteen who are engaging in sexual behaviors but were not a part of this research (Alikhani et al., 2007).
Last but not least, I traveled to Tehran and started my fieldwork from 28 March 2017 to 7 May 2017 because of my study schedule. But, I do not recommend the period of mid-March to the beginning of April to the prospective researchers to conduct any research in Iran because of the inconvenience they might face due to the Iranian New Year occurring during this time. As most of the people are on vacation for this national holiday or have guests, they are not available or willing to make an appointment and take part in research. In my case, I missed seven days of interviews and used my time making appointments for the next weeks and translating the verbal consent script and the guide list from English to Farsi.
To sum it up, more studies are needed to be done to include more range of varieties based on the age and the location of informants.
Chapter 4: Definitions, Perceptions, and Experiences
"[...] Virginity? Um, I think it does not have a single definition for everyone, and like any other phenomenon not everyone experiences it the same way." (Arash. Male, 34)
Many scholars believe that the definition, perception, and experiences of individuals regarding the concept of virginity cannot be simply understood by a unique elucidation (Barnett et al., 2016; Bersamin et al., 2007; Byers et al., 2009; Carpenter, 2001, 2002, 2005, 2009; Gute et al., 2008; Hans et al. 2010, Holland et al., 2010; Humphreys, 2013; Peterson & Muehlenhard 2007; Pitts & Rahman, 2001; Remez, 2000; Sawyer et al., 2007; Trotter & Alderson 2007). With the aim of having a better understanding of how Iranian heterosexual youths define, perceive, and experience the concept of virginity, in this section the narratives of the informants are illustrated and explored which shed lights to the the variety of ideas that exist on this topic.
I. How Do You Define Virginity?
As various studies about sexuality have indicated, most of heterosexual adults associate virginity with having an intact hymen or no occurrence of penile-vaginal intercourse (Ahmadi, 2016; Humphreys, 2013; Kaivanara, 2015; Moruzzi & Sadeghi, 2006; Motamedi et al., 2016). All the informants who participated in my research agreed that one or both of the associations above are believed to be the primary and sole definition(s) of virginity by the majority of society, or at least within the medical realm.
"Virginity, um [silence], I think the definition that we are all familiar with which comes from the society and the medical institutions is that virginity belongs to girls and it means having an intact hymen." (Saman. Male, 23)
“I define virginity same as the scientific biological definition of it. It means having an unbroken veil of virginity (hymen) for the girls. But I am not sure whether virginity can have a meaning for boys or not." (Mahsa. Female, 26)
"I think virginity can be defined as, [silence] not having the first-time experience of penile-vaginal intercourse which means it exists for both men and women. [silence] However, I must say when you asked about the definition of virginity, the first definition that popped into my mind was a girl with an intact hymen. It is what the society has drilled it into our brains. I have to remind myself that I think boys can also be considered as virgins and they do not possess a hymen. So, to me, its definition is based on the penile-vaginal intercourse. " (Parand. Female, 24)
In the context of Iran, the state and society have a great emphasis on the virginity of young adults and prohibition of cross-gender relationships of unmarried individuals as it might lead them to engage in premarital sexual relationships (Tabatabaie, 2015). As the standard definition of virginity in Iran highlights the absence of penile-vaginal penetration which in its essence
includes the virginity of both sexes, not all the informants agreed with it. A few respondents who agreed with the stated definition of virginity did not approve that virginity can equally be defined for men.
"I think virginity does not have a meaning when it comes to men. They have an erection during their sleep and ejaculate while dreaming. So, it is not a new sensation to them when they are experiencing their first penile-vaginal intercourse." (Tannaz. Female, 27)
"[...] I do not think virginity can be defined for boys. If it made sense, then there should have been a way to examine or medically prove whether a boy is a virgin or not. But I believe virginity can be defined as having an intact veil of virginity (hymen) and/or no penetrative intercourse for girls. I mentioned the second part for two reasons. Firstly, a girl may own a broken veil of virginity (hymen) due to various incidents such as practicing extreme sports like diving or horse riding. Secondly, nowadays girls are involved in other types of sexual behaviors such as penile-oral and penile-anal intercourse just to preserve their veil of virginity (hymen). Therefore, I think using penetrative sex is a better choice than penile-vaginal intercourse to define virginity
according to it." (Maziyar. Male, 24)
Partially assenting to the viewpoint of Maziyar, some informants considered penetrative intercourse to be the standard definer of virginity for both boys and girls. According to these informants the act of penetration was what made people non-virgins. This view is based on the heteronormative culture which assumes heterosexuality to be the natural form of biological sex between a man and a woman and is evolved around the genitalia of both sexes (Ingraham, 1994).
"If you had asked me to define virginity for you a few years ago before I come to Tehran, I would have told you that is it something biological just for girls! But now my view has changed. I think virginity is set for both boys and girls, meaning not having the experience of penile-anal or penile-vaginal sex. [...] I consider oral sex as a part of the foreplay process to get to the
penetrative sex. I understand that sex is not all about penetration and people can have orgasms during this process, but to me, virginity is only affected by having penile-anal and penile-vaginal intercourse." (Atrin. Female, 26)
"If a definition should be uttered regarding the meaning of virginity, I think it should be fair and include both sexes in it. I think virginity means no occurrence of any penetrative
"I define virginity equally for both men and women, and the refers to the period that individuals have not experienced any penetrative sex including oral, anal or vaginal sex." (Kaveh. Male 23)
However, the definitions of virginity are not only limited to the predominant meanings that were revealed above. How virginity is defined by different individuals is widely diverse depending on their racial, cultural, social, political and religious background. (Berger & Wenger, 1973;
Bersamin et al., 2007; Carpenter, 2001, 2002, 2005, 2009; Humphreys, 2013). With respect to all the differences and divergent viewpoints of participants, the similarities between their definitions were considerably noticeable. Besides what has been stated till now, the following definitions are presented and ordered according to their popularity among the respondents.
Some informants indicated that virginity could be defined as anything an individual encounters or experiences for the first time which necessarily does not have to be sexual. Virginity to them meant being inexperienced. Considering the topic of my research, they continued the interview focusing on the naivety of individuals in any form of sexual interactions.
"I think when we talk about virginity we should consider the age and the naivety of the individuals. The age of puberty differs for each person, and there is no homogenous sexual education or access to sexual information in Iran. At some point, we all reach the age of puberty and exploring our sexual dimension does not physically harm us. So, idealistically, we are inexperienced or in other words, virgins in kissing, cuddling, touching a naked body, oral sex, anal sex, ..." (Mina. Female, 27)
"I believe we are all virgins in things we do not know about or have not experienced yet. It is the same thing when it comes to our sexuality. I can be a virgin when it comes to penile-anal
intercourse, and another person can be a virgin of penile-vaginal and penile-oral sex. It totally depends on the variety of the experiences of the individuals." (Keivan. Male, 23)
Besides the physical virginity, the informants introduced a new form of virginity which they called it mental virginity. Based on the narrative of the interviewees, mental virginity only exists
