Cornelius Walker wants us to stop treating women’s bodies and sex as something to be bartered for political gain.
What is going on in the comments on Joanna’s post Would You Fall For A Sex Strike? When I first heard of this strike, I immediately put it into the “gimmick” bin in my mental filing cabinet. Also filed there is the story of the pastor who spent 24 hours with his wife in bed, on the roof of his church, and every other “story” about sex that turns out to be a sell-job.
For some reason — typical mind fallacy? — I thought other commenters would see the absurdity in the proposal, nodding their heads in agreement that the entire stunt is premised on gender role essentialism and an allusion to Aristophanes’s play.
Boy was I wrong.
First, let’s all just agree that Rick Santorum is not going to be president. However “on fire” evangelicals are about him, campaigning for an interventionist military and against sex and college is not the way to win the youth vote. Why are we taking his assault against contraception seriously? Didn’t Monty Python, author the definitive sendup of this idea, do this nearly thirty years ago?
It saddens me that these issues have fallen prey to the same old stereotypes I thought we were working against. First is the idea that men are ruled by their lust, and women should play their strongest hand against them: access to their genitals. Instead of rejecting that narrative, some apparently have embraced it, suggesting that their wives and girlfriends were fungible commodities, ready to be swapped at the drop of a dime should they ever pull such a stunt. And then there are women who support this idea that the quickest way to a man’s brain is through his penis.
Next we have the idea that it’s only conservative men who take this anti-contraception stance. There’s an old joke that I think applies here:
Jews don’t recognize Jesus as the Son of God.
Protestants don’t recognize the Pope as head of the Church.
Baptists don’t recognize each other in a liquor store.
If you’ve ever driven through the Bible Belt you’ll notice two things. One, there’s a heck of a lot of churches. Small, ramshackle churches, churches in homes, churches in strip malls, gigantic stadium-sized churches. The other thing you’ll notice is that not far from those churches you’ll often find just as many liquor and sex stores. Location, location, location.
It’s not just men supporting this type of legislation, it’s women too. It’s not only conservatives, even though the evangelicals behind this legislation usually vote Republican. Women are not in lockstep agreement when it comes to the proper care of the female reproductive system. Both men and women have signed on to the legislation in Texas, in Virginia, in Arizona, and twenty other states. Men and women who are using or have used contraception. This entire issue is shot through with hypocrisy.
The irony of the reference to Lysistrata is that everyone knows the gimmick — women denying sex to their men to stop a war — but no one seems to know the play. In it the women are the ones who are considered hedonistic and driven by their passions. It is the women who need to be policed so as not to break the strike. The very premise of the play contradicts our current assumption of women as prudes and men as being ruled by their burdens, even as we rely on its setup.
As someone who has genitals, I don’t understand why anyone else cares how often I use them, in what manner, and with whom. (Except for my wife, that is, I’m sure she cares an awful lot.) If everyone is consenting — and old enough to consent — that’s good enough for me. Perhaps I am falling to the typical mind fallacy again, but I think this is because how you use your genitals never crosses my mind. Ever. Unless you’re a potential sex partner, I’m just not that interested in them.
Can’t we just stop? Stop trying to police each other’s sex lives. Stop trying to enforce on others a morality we don’t even follow ourselves. Stop portraying sex — procreational, recreational and otherwise — as something shameful or sinful, something to be bartered, something to be withheld. And if I might send Rick Santorum a personal message: If Jesus is truly concerned about whether I’m making enough babies or what position I like, I trust He’ll let me know. And I’m fairly certain it won’t be you that he chooses to send the message.
Photo by iamtheo
Yes proper exercises and methods can help cure premature ejaculation problem.I have my own free course called ‘Bret’s 30 night challenge’ to help men last longer in bed and overcome premature ejaculation.But there are also a lot of misleading information available in internet that spoils the chances of men overcomming this PE problem.
“Stop trying to police each other’s sex lives.” Is that what the republican’s are trying to do? Their stance on abortion doesn’t say don’t have sex. It isn’t trying to enforce anything in regards to sex. It is trying to enforce some degree of accountability for failing to consider the consequences… you know, just as men are legally enforced to do with child support obligations and the ever touted “if you don’t want that responsibility, keep it in your pants”. Why is it a war on women to hold women to that same standard men are being held to? Does… Read more »
Wonderful piece, addressing all the troubling aspects of the strike itself as well as many of the men’s reaction to it. I can’t believe no one has referenced the Monty Python song yet… As for taking Santorum seriously. It’s not that I believe that he has a chance, it’s that a vein instinctively pops out of my head when I realize that there are people in 2012 who actually support his views–and, yes, that a lot of them are women.
I will give you an example of using the age of consent as a controller of sex. In my country , a female of ANY AGE can get an abortion for ANY REASON at ANY STAGE of pregnancy. Now think about that, a 12 year old girl can get an elective surgical procedure without her parents consent or permission right up to the moment of birth, have it paid for by the government BUT that some girl is too young to have sex to begin with and the person who has had sex with her, if he is more than… Read more »
Is it that she’s too young to have sex, or that her paramours need to be of a similar age for it to be considered consensual sex? I’ve seen three styles of law around age and consent. The first is an absolute prohibition against sex by a minor, regardless of the age of their partner. The second is an allowance that minors can have sex with each other, but not with someone who has reached the age of majority. I prefer the third, a sliding model for minors: ±3 years, or ±5 in your example, until you reach the age… Read more »
Yeah, I agree that the third model, sliding-age scale, is best, and many states in the US are surprisingly restrictive about it. Ours allows for modest age gaps in teen relationships, but even with the age of consent set at 16, partners over 18 can wind up with “corruption of a minor” charges, even when the two parties involved are 17 1/2 and 18! My husband’s first relationship in college at age 18 was with a high-school senior girl who was just 10 months younger, but he was concerned about her dad retaliating against him for sullying his daughter, and… Read more »
Janet, you’re a Canuck aren’t you? I say this based on the fact (or I believe it’s a fact) that Canada is one of the few (if not the only) countries in the world with no abortion laws. That’s not the case almost anywhere else in the Western world (if not the entire world).
Am I correct?
The use of the term “sex strike” is itself derogatory. It implies that wives are sex workers employed by their husbands. They would withhold their services (sex) that benefits their employers (husbands) to obtain better remuneration.
If you want to get some idea of what a sexually positive and differently regulated (less regulated?) society than our looks like then read about the polynesians:
http://www2.hu-berlin.de/sexology/IES/frenchpolynesia.html
“As someone who has genitals, I don’t understand why anyone else cares how often I use them, in what manner, and with whom. (Except for my wife, that is, I’m sure she cares an awful lot.) If everyone is consenting — and old enough to consent — that’s good enough for me” We obviously have some regulation regarding sex no matter what society we live in. The above sentence points to two. Marriage as a massive regulator of sex and age of consent as a less important regulator. There are many many others. I would argue that sex in the… Read more »
I wouldn’t say it is specifically marriage, in my case or in general. Rather in most relationships we enter into sexual agreements with each other, usually monogamous, which gives the other person an interest in whether or not you’re upholding the agreement. In my case I’ve made a monogamous agreement that I choose to honor, which is why I privilege the opinion of my spouse as concerns whether or not I’m using my genitals with someone else. Aside from that, you bring up some interesting points. The line for me is always consent, and in the interest of brevity I… Read more »
There are many many many other ways in which we police sex including sexual attitudes and culture. Examing the Polynesians provides a good point of reference to how different a society can look in regards to sexuality. Here are some things the polynesians had no problem with: 1. Sex play between children including public sex play 2. Public masturbation, public sex, nudity in public 3. Sex in religious places 4. Multiple partners, extra-marital sex, sex in public 5. Sex between old men and women and young teenagers…lets say 40 year men/women with 14 year olds. This includes multiple partners….a chief… Read more »
What I find interesting about the backlash against acceptance that there exist rules for sexual exchange is that it is the act of speaking about those rules, making them come to life, which creates the tension and backlash. Part of the suppression of speaking about the rules is the not wanting to acknowledge the less than romantic mechanics of the rules, in the same way a cook does not want to provide the ingredients of their mysterious and superb culinary concoction. The irony is that the mystery obfuscates and enforces the practice. Santorum uses religion and dogma to obfuscate and… Read more »
Even in the most sexually liberal sub cultures, there are rules that are policed by the members. I cannot see us functioning beyond savagery without rules pertaining to sex and reproduction tbh.
Here is an interesting study on the cultural suppression of female sexuality, the evidence points to it being of female design. http://www.femininebeauty.info/suppression.pdf
Political movements attach themselves to our sexuality to exert control too via it. Big religion and feminism have been good at that.
We can’t stop policing sex because somehow, in 2012, it is the most taboo act in America. Just look at how we critique and rate movies. Gore is awesome, but any more than modest nudity is enough to earn a film an X-rating. In their most extreme, respectively: • The far left can’t stop policing sex because they find it threatening, subversive, and by most accounts, to be an act worse than many types of criminal violence. They view women as children incapable of making their own choices, who need to be protected from the big, bad men who all… Read more »
These people today who claim to lead the ‘Conservative movement” are frauds! The conservatives I knew as a young man believed in smaller less intrusive government. Barry Goldwater, who was a leader of Conservatism when I was young , basically said that the mission of government should be to deliver the mail, pick up the trash, pave the streets and keep them safe, protect the shores and stay the hell out of my bedroom! I guess I’ll have to change my affiliation to Jeffersonian Liberitian!
Conservatives still want small government. As Dan Savage is fond of saying, they just want to shrink government small enough to fit inside a woman’s vagina.
And I find this totally creepy and repulsive! Like a grown man who likes watching young girls get sweaty while excercising in Gym class creepy!
I hadn’t heard that Dan Savage quote, but it’s awesome!
“Maxims” like Savage’s are harmful because they allow people to ignore men’s issues. Do you really think conservatives are proponent’s of men’s rights? Conservatives are almost always against legalizing drugs. Drugs laws overwhelmingly harm men.
You’re aware that he is a humorist, right? He tosses off lines like a high school girl does a prom dress. (There, that was another joke) But humor is used to shine light on uncomfortable truths. The truth is that women and men aren’t equal in this birth control debate because women have to carry the “horrible gift from God” for nine months. The pill is something women take, IUDs are inserted into women. If there were a pill for men, I’d take it. But there isn’t, and until there is this debate will always be asymmetric. This isn’t a… Read more »
“The truth is that women and men aren’t equal in this birth control debate because women have to carry the “horrible gift from God” for nine months. The pill is something women take, IUDs are inserted into women. If there were a pill for men, I’d take it. But there isn’t, and until there is this debate will always be asymmetric.” This is true, but this isn’t to say that men aren’t affected by this area: Women have to carry the kid for nine months, men have to pay for her decision for two decades. And the only reason there’s… Read more »
Um, yeah, that’s what I said. Like here:
and here:
Peter, with all due respect, I have yet to see a women’s interest site that hasn’t advocated for a male pill. In fact, many of us ladies are advocating for better contraceptive choices for all of us, and we’re shouted down by an equal number of women and men alike for “not being grateful enough.” In truth, our choices are lousy, male and female alike. As couples, we have three methods only: 1. We have hormones, which are limited to use in women for right now, and women like me who are migraine and depression patients, those are no-gos. For… Read more »
Oh, and the political forces holding up the male pill have to do with the fact that unlike the female pill, which can aid in treating endometriosis, pelvic pain, menorrhagia, and PCOS, the male pill would only work as contraception. Absent the “compelling medical need,” the female pill would be severely restricted or held up here in America too, thanks to the political lobbying power of the moral majority, which collectively frowns on the idea of sex outside of male-female marriage for reproductive purposes only. We’re all fighting together to keep religion out of politics, but it’s been an uphill… Read more »
“You’re aware that he is a humorist, right? He tosses off lines like a high school girl does a prom dress. (There, that was another joke) But humor is used to shine light on uncomfortable truths.” You contradict yourself. If a joke, because of its need to be funny, has to exaggerate and generalize to the point that the idiotic masses can get a chuckle out of it, then it does not shed light on the truth, but muddles it instead. One reason why comedians should never be relied upon to make sense of difficult topics. “If there were a… Read more »
Hahaha! 😀
Ah for all the crap Savage says…sometimes he comes up with some pretty funny stuff. 🙂
Instead of rejecting that narrative, some apparently have embraced it, suggesting that their wives and girlfriends were fungible commodities, ready to be swapped at the drop of a dime should they ever pull such a stunt. [1], And then there are women who support this idea that the quickest way to a man’s brain is through his penis.[2] [Numbers added.] I mostly agreed with your post, but I don’t understand the pairing of 1 & 2 as both embracing the narrative. I sure wouldn’t describe my wife as an interchangeable, easily replaced commodity, but I did comment in the other… Read more »
I think, and speak very publicly when I can, that withholding sex— which is NOT the same as just not having the desire for sex at any given time and refusing for genuine reasons—is manipulative bullshit.
Withholding sex, withholding love, withholding communication, is emotional abuse.
You phrased it much better and more concisely than I did, but yeah, that’s what I was getting at. Thanks for saying it better.
Hear hear.
I didn’t mean to suggest they were embracing the sex strike narrative so much as the assumptions about sexuality underlying them. That said, the idea of withholding sex being a DTMFA offense was not always couched in terms of the overall relationship. Quite frankly, it sometimes had the sound of “if she cut me off for a week then we’re through,” as if the injustice were how he was being manipulated, not that he was being manipulated. Would the same be true if she was pissed and bought Coors Light instead of Guinness to show her displeasure? This seems no… Read more »
I dislike the idea of a strike, but this “If my partner were to do this, I would presume it to be an act of solidarity, or as an awareness exercise, rather than an attempt to manipulate my viewpoint or spur me to action.” to me speaks volumes. I love your example from the Rabbi, and yes, in a case like this, a singular week is not a “manipulation of the husband” but a defiance of the State. In any case, I like my Sex In better.
Thank you, Nick, for refusing to respond to and dignify the suggested appropriateness of penis control only for third world women.
Evidently, even the “Yay! Internet” has not been able to make a dent in the strong prejudices of some white, and therefore privileged and somehow better-than-third-world, men.
If my partner were to do this, I would presume it to be an act of solidarity, or as an awareness exercise, rather than an attempt to manipulate my viewpoint or spur me to action. But that’s not how the sex strike has been described in it’s purposes and aims. What you’re describing is more like some sort of abstinence-as-solidarity campaign, which I don’t really understand, but it’s the sort of thing women and men who did could mutually choose to engage in or respect while the other person did. In other words, you’re describing something like a fast, but… Read more »
Let me clarify. Given the person I am married to, that I think I know, it would be out of character for her to attempt to manipulate me through withholding sex. Therefore, if she were to tell me she was participating in this stunt, I would not assume she was trying to manipulate me through withholding sex. Instead, I would assume her participation was for some other reason: as an awareness exercise she wanted me to participate in with her, or in solidarity with other women who might have discovered through the recent debates that they didn’t know their spouses… Read more »
It sounds like you and your wife have a mutually shared view toward sex and its role in your marriage. I think that’s terrific, and commend you both. I’m not even remotely trying to say your relationship is flawed. Your logic, on the other hand, doesn’t make sense to me. Therefore, if she were to tell me she was participating in this stunt, I would not assume she was trying to manipulate me through withholding sex. But “this stunt” according to the organizers’s FAQ page is intended to “…[urge] our abstinent partners to raise their voices and their votes in… Read more »
The assumption you make, that I do not, is that people do things for the official reasons. One year my wife and I fasted for Ramadan. The purpose of abstaining from food, drink, and sex during the day is to teach Muslims about patience, spirituality, humility and submissiveness to God. Except we’re not Muslim, and we weren’t doing anything for spirituality, humility, or Allah. I know someone who is a Republican strictly because of his belief in fiscal conservatism; he repudiates the culture war social agenda of Santorum and his ilk. He’ll likely vote for Romney, in part because he… Read more »
The irony here is that I think we’re in agreement on all the substantive points, and only differ on the logic involved. If someone tells me they’re doing something for Reason X, I believe them, whether it’s a sex strike to “make me support their reproductive rights” (even if I already do), or that they’re fasting for Ramadan *because* they’re a Muslim. I would believe such a person that they really are “sex striking for reproductive rights” or “fasting for Ramadan”. What you’re describing as the reasons you’d assume or be okay with are just pretending for…well, I don’t know… Read more »
“Stop portraying sex — procreational, recreational and otherwise — as something shameful or sinful, something to be bartered, something to be withheld.” Sex trade, sex trafficking, and child porn and pedophilia are bartered in some form or other. Sinful is in the eye of the beholder these days; moral relativism is encouraged. That’s why people don’t have to think anymore…anything goes. Rick Santorum is looking to ban pornography too, as it encourages all of the above sins and lead people away from societal and family values. In an ideal world, Rick Santorum would get his wishes. (I don’t like doctors… Read more »
I’m not sure who you think is encouraging moral relativism, but somehow I doubt you understand what it means anyway. Particularly when you say “anything goes” because that’s not moral relativism, that’s amorality. It’s interesting that an atheist might call these things “sins,” but less interesting when you suggest that pornography leads to them. We have very good data that shows quite the opposite, so I’m going to presume your atheism to be just as unstudied as some Christians are. Look, I don’t mean to pry, but have you actually had sex? I’m pro-condom, but I’m not going to lie… Read more »
Or free from a student center or birth control clinic. Well known brand condoms are pretty pricey, but there’s plenty of cheaper brand condoms out there that still pass all the tests.
Yeah, a lot of people frown on the idea of a committed married couple using condoms, but in our case, we have no choice, and it gets expensive due to our needs. Hormones are off the table completely for me, owing to my health record, and my gyno says my small pelvis holds an even smaller uterus which can’t fit an IUD. That leaves condoms, but he’s a bit bigger than is safe for Magnums, and rather than risk breakage, we wind up with the fancypants condoms from specialty sex shops. They feel better, since they’re thinner and sized right… Read more »
Where do people get the idea that atheists should be without morals or should be liberal, or for that matter be a homogeneous bunch like those with a religion? Now who’s the unstudied one? Moral relativism varies between individuals and cultures and so there is no objective right and wrong. In other words, really, anything goes! No worries about women’s birth control, because men’s birth control will become available in the near future — thus giving men can more control over reproduction and avert pregnancies. So we get down to the really key issues for men on why they support… Read more »
“This is a true committed relationship, not for convenience”
A true committed relationship? So are those of us who use the pill not in true committed relationships because we use the birth control pill to prevent pregnancy? Just curious.
Where do people get the idea that atheists should be without morals or should be liberal, or for that matter be a homogeneous bunch like those with a religion? Now who’s the unstudied one? I didn’t say they should be without morals or liberal. However, I would comment on two things here. First, like Christians atheists probably should study up to understand basic theories of morality. Second, given the GOP’s current entanglement with the Christian Right and their willingness to see atheists as immoral people, I’m not sure why any would join that group. Most — no, make that all… Read more »
Condoms CHEAP: 20 per condom, taking one a day for a year = $73 EXPENSIVE: 2.50 per condom, taking one a day for a year = 912.50 Female Birth Control CHEAP: .40 per pill, taking one a day for a year = $146 EXPENSIVE: 2.28 per pill, taking one a day for a year = $ 832.20 OR you could use The Patch costing 429.96 per year or The Ring costing 693.33 per year. BUT WAIT, THERE’S MORE: Since Women can’t drive to the gas station to pick up their birth control they have to spend yet some more money… Read more »
“BUT WAIT, THERE’S MORE: Since Women can’t drive to the gas station to pick up their birth control they have to spend yet some more money on a Dr. visit in order to obtain said birth control.” Dishonesty won’t help your argument. If the woman doesn’t have health, then health insurance paying for the pill or not makes no difference. So claiming without health insurance costs is dishonest. Once we do look at those with health insurance, we will see that at no point in the current debate is women’s check-up/doctors visit costs being objected to, so that doctors visit… Read more »
“I”m luck enough to be in a relationship with a GROWN ASS MAN who takes pride in owning his responsibilites in the relationship and even offered to pay half of the bill before I was even on the birth control….” You’re a very lucky woman! Your man is a keeper. I think the sex strike is silly, but I’m all for men understanding everything that goes into birth control and how it affects THEIR sex lives too. You mention ovarian cancer, but there are so many other things that go into it as well–from not so serious side effects (leg… Read more »
You’re absolutely right. Unfortunately, that’s not how society raised us. For some people (both men and women) sex is a source of power that they exploit to control others.
I’m curious how you see men controlling women through sex.
This is an honest question.
…through the legislature -or other overt power.
That would be a religions or political organisation, not men. Female sexuality appears to be suppressed mainly by women and mainly in order to control men.
So, yes women have used sex to extract favors from men either from financial desperation or greed. But also sometimes because their own arousal and romantic engagement is a function of how much a pursuing lover is willing to sacrifice for her. Regardless, this form of ‘control’ is at the personal level and generally innocuous in a larger social context. But let’s not confuse this with a more insidious form of control that is exercised by religious, political and commercial interests. It’s these institutions that systematically limit and/or control female sexuality to control men. As a group, women are no… Read more »
Random stranger.
“religious, political and commercial interests” are not men as a group working for the benefit of men as a group, they are political organisations that use it for their own ends.
And religious suppression of female sexuality was found to be female in origin, not male. http://www.femininebeauty.info/suppression.pdf
“through the legislature -or other overt power.”
How many male-bodied individuals have access to power through the legislature? And do these male-bodied individuals in power actually identify as male or do they identify with their ideologies over their gender?
Well, its not that men are of these orgs than these orgs (political, religious, commercial) are of men (at least historically). The power center in these groups have certainly sought to limit female sexuality and maintain its scarcity (often through threat of violence or ostracism) ultimately to control the terms of other men’s reproductive opportunities and so, cajole them into whatever risky activity the org needs.
I love this post. So much. It is soothing the deep rage within me from all this War on Contraceptives bullshit.
I love this kind of sanity.
Dear Lord. You must be sane or something.
Agreed.
Agreed x 290,000,000. Is the other 10,000,000 that cause all the problems.