Showing posts with label sex politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sex politics. Show all posts

Thursday, October 14, 2010

reblog

If you are from Vancouver and you read the news, you probably know that there have been two sexual assaults on the UBC campus recently. Two women in seperate instances were approached by a man who groped them, then fled. It’s not known yet whether or not it was the same man, but the police are doing the standard routine: urging women to be careful, and asking anyone who sees someone matching the description in the article or a similar event to report it.

On Facebook I’m friends with a lot of very cool, intelligent, articulate feminists. That’s awesome, because I love feminists; I love feminism and everything to do with it, even Sarah Palin Feminism, because we can all use a laugh sometimes. And generally I agree with what they have to say on current events, but I’m diverging this week. The general response among my friends to the articles that caution women to walk in groups, carry cell phones, and be aware of their surroundings is to declare that they are victim blaming. And to give the often used and often correct response that society should focus less on telling women what to do and more on educating men not to commit sexual assault.**

For those of you who don’t spend your free time reading up on feminism and gender politics, “victim blaming” is a term that refers to the problematic and common response to sexual assault that implies it was the fault of the victim somehow. Usual instances in the case of rape, especially acquantance or date rape, was to suggest the victim was “asking for it” through her clothing, make-up, alcohol or drug use, personality, sexual history, or behaviour. So, it goes, if you are wearing a short skirt and drunk and this man here rapes you, what did you think would happen? This is very, very bad for two reasons: first, it further victimizes the person who has just been brutally victimized by implying that she got herself raped and shifts the blame from the rapist, who is wholly responsible for the crime; second, it reinforces “rape culture,” the culture that for a long time and in many ways has implicitly educated men to think of some women as deserving of sexual assault because they are whores or sluts and therefore they don’t get to say no. This is transparently awful to everyone, but it’s the reason that very few rapists that are charged for their crime (which is a very small number of the total rapes committed) actually get punished. Society likes black-and-white crimes: virginal schoolgirls abducted on their way home from church by an evil, toothless, sadistic rapists. We’re much less likely to feel sympathy for a drunken sorority girl with a checkered sexual past who went to a frat party in stilettos and got drunk, even though they have the same crime committed against them. This is why I hate the word “slut” so much: every time someone uses it they’re saying that a female’s sexuality is a bad thing when it’s too expressive, too open, too intimidating, whatever. And that makes it easy for us to stop caring about some women, and for rapists to get away with raping them.

The point of explaining all that is to make it clear that “rape culture” and the social dialogues that reinforce it are a massive problem, and gradually we’re realising that and turning towards not telling women to avoid getting raped by conforming to a certain, arbitrary code of behaviour, but instead teaching men why those ideas they’ve internalized about female sexuality and sexual mores are harmful. There’s good work going on around that: Men Can Stop Rape is a great project.

So I’m all for dismantling rape culture, and all for calling bullshit on victim blaming, but in this case I think that you, friendly feminists, are wrong. Some advice is just good advice. Telling women not to walk alone at night is not a rebuke, it’s a warning, and a damn good warning when they’re in danger. And yelling, “TEACH MEN NOT TO RAPE” is not going to help in this case, because we’re not talking about an entrenched social value system from which some men learn to believe that you can force sex on a woman because she is slutty or vulnerable. We’re talking about a pathologically criminally behaviour that the perpetrator already knows is pathological and a crime. And the police are condemning it; they’re condemning it by looking for the criminal. It’s not a case where they’ll be sympathetic because the groper says, well, that woman was wearing a short skirt, what could I do? And the policeman won’t nod and say, Good point, she’s probably a slut.

Walking alone at night always makes you vulnerable to assaults, because you’re alone in the dark, and in this circumstance it’s women who are being targeted and they’re doing their fucking job by warning you about it. I would love to live in a world where women can walk alone at night and not be raped or assaulted or robbed, but I’m not there yet, and in the meantime I do appreciate concern for my safety. It would take the focus off the vital message at this point in time to say “POLICE TELL MEN NOT TO ASSAULT WOMEN” because DUH, the criminalization of sexual assault and the ongoing search for the assailant makes that self-evident. They could include it in the article as well, but come on, it’s a news article, not an academic paper. It has to be direct and singularly focused or people won’t actually read it. And the vital message is if you can make yourself safer, make yourself safer; you shouldn’t have to, maybe, but it’s not a perfect world yet. So please, friends, lay off the police. They aren’t pointing the finger at you. They’re probably just legally bound to tell you not to be an idiot.

** I do need to point out that not all sexual offenders are men, but most are, especially in cases of so-called date rape (aka rape-rape) and overwhelmingly in stuff like flashings and gropings. Society should educate everybody not to rape, etc, but there are longer treaties on this particular gender topic that I don’t have the energy to reiterate.

Reblogged from ponymalta, because I like what she has to say and agree that we have a long way to go in educating individuals on victim blaming, educating and working with men to stop rape, and recognizing when good advice is good advice.

Wednesday, January 27, 2010

feministing

At the same time as anal penetration is held up in hetero male culture as the ultimately painful/humiliating/unpleasant experience, it’s also held up as one of the premium sexual experiences any man can have - IF he’s on the penetrating end. The plethora of articles in men’s magazines and on men’s websites that instruct men on how to get their girlfriend/wife to have anal sex is staggering…

If anal penetration is the horrible, painful, humiliating thing you imagine it to be, why would you ever want a woman you love, or one you respect and to whom you’re attracted, to experience it? If it’s this horrendous experience, why, oh why, are you expending so much energy trying to inflict it on someone else? And if you expect women to be open to trying it, why continue to use it as the ultimate analogy for all things negative? Don’t you think we hear you when you talk? Don’t you think we get that you associate anal sex with pain and humiliation?

Feminist Critique of Hetero Male Culture Causes Mass MRA Hysteria


Yes, yes...plenty of guys and girls (straight/bi/gay) are fine with anal play and I do understand that when talking about negative things boys (and girls) talk about being 'fucked in the ass'; but I think what the author is getting at here folks is that by using this type of reference for describing a painful experience, essentially what we are doing is condemning the act and making it something that only queers or the sexually provocative do and through this, are saying that this type of sexual act is painful and humiliating.

I'm sure this topic has plenty of different opinions, and both sides have people that are in an uproar about it all...but really folks, the fact of the matter is that for some anal sex is painful and humiliating, for others it is erotic and the ultimate turn on.

Basically, my opinion on the matter is: if a guy wants a girl to have anal sex and she is apprehensive and worried about the matter, he should respect that and not push it (literally). If she's willing to maybe give it a try, on the condition that he does as well, then he has the option to say "yah, why not", or "no" and leave it at that. Or maybe she's willing to give it a try without that little step, but I'm personally of the mind that if it's something that he could not fathom or he himself finds a daunting prospect, then why would you want to have anal sex with your girlfriend/lover if she's probably going to have the same reaction?

Thursday, January 7, 2010

It’s been declared that the g-spot does not exist...

I remember in Sociology of Sexuality last spring discussing in class the current research that is going in to determine whether or not the g-spot does exist. My initial reaction was, "What a croc, who do these 'scientists' think they are, trying to justify that the g-spot doesn't exist? Who are they to say that I haven't had an orgasm originating from g-spot stimulation, or that neither have thousands of other women? I wonder how many of these researchers are men and just trying to justify not being able to find their lady friends g-spots."

Then further into the discussion, we also discussed the women who feel that they don't have a g-spot and the other sides to the arguments surrounding whether or not this is a mythical or real thing.

Essentially I came to the conclusion that perhaps the g-spot is all a psychological thing, that some women perceive an increased stimulation and excitement leading to an orgasm. I suppose I'm open to other people's opinions, and do agree that by saying there is a definite g-spot, it may make women who are unable to attain g-spot stimulation (or 'don't have one') feel dysfunctional, but a similar argument can be made regarding scientists who are trying to tell women that we don't have one, they never existed and never will, in terms of disqualifying our experiences.

I maintain that indeed I do have a g-spot, that I gain pleasure from its stimulation, and will continue to enjoy foreplay and sex because of it. Ultimately, I think people need to keep science out of the bedroom and our sexual lives (to a point, because knowing about the HIV and where our organs are and how they work is essential), because it puts a limit on what we then experience or allow ourselves to experience. AND because I think every woman should have the opportunity to experience the gloriousness that is a g-spot orgasm.

PS: This rant all originated from a post over at filthygorgeousthings: "Does the G Spot Exist? Fuck Yeah!"

Sunday, December 27, 2009

To hear many religious people talk, one would think God created the torso, head, legs and arms, but the devil slapped on the genitals.

Don Schrader

Tuesday, December 8, 2009

point!

“Boy, these conservatives are really something, aren’t they? They’re all in favor of the unborn. They will do anything for the unborn. But once you’re born, you’re on your own. Pro-life conservatives are obsessed with the fetus from conception to nine months. After that, they don’t want to know about you.”

- George Carlin


Friday, November 13, 2009

Is sex for the disabled the last taboo?

Claims that health professionals ignore the sexual needs of disabled people arguably reflect a general taboo about sex and imperfection. In March this year there was much media debate after Lucy Baxter told a BBC television programme that she wanted to help her 21-year-old son Otto, who has Down’s syndrome, to lose his virginity. She said she would support him if he chose to visit a prostitute.

The fact that this made headlines suggests a perception of sex as something that only “perfect” people can enjoy.

Is sex for the disabled the last taboo? - Times Online via sexisnottheenemy

Monday, November 9, 2009

Hey Stupak, women’s bodies are not bargaining chips

You think abortion is wrong? Don’t have one. I think killing people is wrong, so I’m not in the army. My tax dollars still go to fund it, though (in fact about 21 cents of each of my tax dollars). My tax dollars also go to keep prisoners on death row even though I think the death penalty is morally wrong. My tax dollars fund Guantanamo and Bagram, extraordinary rendition, and Jim DeMint’s salary, all of which I find disgusting. So why is abortion, a legal medical procedure, so remarkably different that we have to go overboard making sure tax dollars don’t fund it?

- Sarah Jeffe via pcquotes: spinning: yerawizardharry: quitecheeky

Sunday, November 8, 2009

crazies

Hmmm, interesting that there is only one woman in this photo. Granted this was taken in the 50's/60's, but I wonder how they would feel about breeding not bleeding nowadays considering the mass amounts of people the world is trying to sustain. They would probably still be trying to suggest murdering those people that weren't popping out babies every 9 months, or who are infertile. Man this is stupid shit.

Tuesday, September 29, 2009

Sexuality

Just a bunch of random posts from 'sex is not the enemy' that I agree with and wish more people in today's society would spend a little time thinking about.

The "Myth" of Female Bisexuality
Bisexual women are ‘celebrated’ by men on Facebook and in real life, while many of us find ourselves unable to truly be proud of our sexuality, finding it easier to identify as straight or gay instead. Popular culture virtually ignores us, except where sexualized images can be used to appeal to a straight male audience. In an increasingly tolerant age, bisexual women remain misunderstood, misrepresented, and disrespected by both gay and straight communities.
Re: Male Gaze

It’s interesting, isn’t it, how on most of the video porn sites there’s a “straight” or “gay” option. ”Straight” gets you porn focused on sexy women, “gay” gets you porn focused on sexy guys.

Can you spot the unspoken assumption?

I know, I know, market forces and all that, they’re assuming all their visitors are male because most of them are, but still, would it kill them to give even a token attempt at acknowledging the other half of the human race?

Slut Shaming
I am always annoyed when people shame girls and women by calling them sluts. The very premise rests on the idea that sex is something that degrades women, which is a facet of sex-negativity. In a sex-positive world, calling someone out for having sex would make as much sense as calling them out for breathing or eating.

Dr. Charlie Glickman - Slut Shaming Doesn't Sparkle