Lili Bee interviews Dr. Robert Jensen about what’s at stake when talking about our sexual differences.
Recently me and one of my best male friends, Lance, who happens to be gay, were talking about our love lives and then about work, when I detected a shift between us. As I spoke about my work with people who found themselves partnered with sexual compulsives, he grew quiet.
It was hard not to notice that the room seemed suddenly darker, lifeless; the air wasn’t charged any more with the sparkle that Lance always delightfully brings in with him. When I finally asked if he was ok, he replied, “I just hope you’re not going to turn into Anita Bryant on us.”
After getting over the shock of hearing my work with sexual compulsion being conflated with a fundamentalist, conservative, religious, homophobic political leader of yesteryear, I asked why he’d even make such a comment. His response was that Anita Bryant and Co. seemed terrified of their own sexuality and needed to control everyone else’s as a result.
Lance and I always trusted one another with details about our intimate histories. I suspected he trusted me with his sexual details because he could tell from mine that I neither blush easily nor do I condemn others easily. He knew I had a secular education site specializing in often badly-needed resources when there is sexual compulsion/ addiction present and he knew we work with all sexual orientations. Anita Bryant?!
He went on to say,“I’m only talking about how the anti-porn groups always lobby to get politicians into office who are totally right-wing assholes, who hate gays and anyone who doesn’t fit their picture of mainstream, and that’s a no-win situation for us.”
My center doesn’t advocate for legislation against pornography and we certainly don’t shill for any religious groups. I created my business precisely because I could barely find resources that weren’t religiously-based, when I desperately needed help myself years ago and searched everywhere. How ironic Lance might find it, then, that when people call us who require religious reinforcement for their beliefs that what their husband (or wife) is doing is morally wrong, we send them to another site that is overtly religious in their approach.
“Google ‘sex positive’ and read everything you possibly can,” Lance said, “it’ll help offset anything puritanical out there while you’re doing your work on helping people who are freaking about sexual practices they don’t approve of. And remember, Lili, you might be cool, but just be careful because all this anti-sex stuff just ends up damaging people. Those conservative movements would be happy to get gays back into the closet and besides creating otherwise restrictive environments. Everybody’s sex life should be their own business.”
“So…what, Lance, if someone doesn’t want the stigma of being called “anti-sex”, does that mean they have to condone porn use in their relationships, just as one example?”
“I don’t know, but…”, Lance offered, getting more frustrated by the minute, “I moved to New York because I want to live in a sexually free environment. I just feel that sexual conservatism is so, I don’t know….backwards, so puritanical. “
“Ok! But then, who gets to decide what sexual “conservatism” even is? Your ‘sex-positive’ peeps?”
“Yeah! Why not? I’ll take Anthony Weiner over Anita Bryant any day!”
“Do you really think there’s nothing in between?”
But Lance wasn’t interested in any further questions; he was firmly entrenched in a belief system, one I’d like to know more about.
♦◊♦
Why couldn’t we work our way towards anything even resembling a constructive talk? Why was our conversation breaking down reliably into overly-simplistic categories of bad/ good? All the myriad distinctions worth discussing were being lumped into polarized categories: black and white, right and wrong. This was as bad as my childhood religion, and that was not a good thing in any way.
Whenever I tried to zoom out to discuss the big-picture implications of pull-out-all-the-stops, in-your-face, commercialized sexuality that many didn’t want questioned, he’d drop into using personal anecdote to shore up his point of view. I’d no sooner join him there in the personal realm, when he’d swoop back up into the higher strata of how my views would hurt the politics of the country. It seemed to me that trying to collect spilled mercury off the floor with a spoon would be easier than having this conversation.
I laid awake that night and wondered just how many educated, aware people like Lance linked anyone who had an opinion that didn’t conform to the “sex positive” ideology with that person being anti-sex, or sex-negative? What forces were at work, I wondered, that had all but obliterated any nuance, or even interest in all of us having an authentic, expansive, respectful conversation about sex, rather than frequently resorting to vitriolic put-downs of those with differing views?
I decided to include “Sex positive as a term” on my list of topics to bring up with one of my mentors, an educator and activist I most respect for his passionate, unapologetic and committed stance on politics, feminism, racism, patriarchy, classism and the military industrial complex, Dr. Robert Jensen. As Hurricane Irene barreled her way up the eastern seaboard, Dr. Jensen and I Skyped: me hunkered down at my storm-proofed lair in Manhattan, him out in Austin under a clear, blue Texas sky at the beginning of the fall semester where he’s a professor at University of Texas, Austin Journalism School.
We talked about a lot of things besides the sex positive issue. We talked about masculinity, humanism, erotica vs. porn, power dynamics between the genders, and some of the more profound and personal insights into the heart of intimacy I’ve had the privilege of hearing a man share with me. I’ll post those other portions of our talk next week.
♦◊♦
Lili’s talk with Dr. Robert Jensen Part I
Lili: So, Bob, let’s talk about sex. In particular, let’s talk about what I’ll call a movement with a cheery sounding name, the Sex Positive movement.
First, let me just say I find the term challenging. For all it’s implied positivism, there are problems with it, such as who dictates which activities are accepted, or not accepted within that movement’s sanctioned forms of sexual expression? To me, it comes across as a movement that just grants carte blanche to any and all sex acts/ sexual lifestyles and the only real issue seems to be, well, if you have an issue with any of it.
Premised on that, then, if one is ok with many or even most sexual activities, but expresses objections to, let’s say, one activity in particular, there are those within the Sex Positive movement who are very quick to dismiss that person, to call them a conservative, a rabid feminist or a religious fundamentalist.
Can you speak to the term “Sex Positive” because I’m more aware of the divisiveness of the term?
Bob: I think the whole notion of it is absurd. The notion of a “Sex Positive” category or a sex-positive feminism is truly ridiculous since no one I know of in these arenas is sex negative. The only people who might be truly sex-negative are extreme religious fundamentalists who believe that sexual conduct is somehow inherently shameful.
Within feminism I know of nothing that one would call sex-negative; in fact, the term sex negative isn’t a meaningful category, it’s an insult and an attempt to undermine a critique of the underlying power dynamics in sex.
I come out of a tradition called “radical feminism” and anti-porn feminism, feminism that’s critical of the sexual exploitation industries, critical of the oppression inherent in men’s buying and selling women’s bodies. That movement is sometimes called “sex negative” and I’ve never understood what that means. I’ve met literally hundreds of people in that movement and I’ve never met anyone who’s against sex or who thinks sex is a bad thing.
Lili: I live in sexually progressive New York City and everywhere I look, I see so many varied forms of sexuality being openly expressed. I also grant that New York is not an accurate litmus test of how sexual mores are received elsewhere in the country. Let me say that up front.
The people who call themselves “sex positive” seem to be advocating a sexual freedom that’s a response or even a rebellion against any kind of sexual repression. Where do you see us at this point in time with regard to repression?
Bob: Well certainly there are elements of contemporary culture that are repressive sexual arenas, especially conservative, religious trends for instance which have problems with all sorts of sexual expression. To me, the question isn’t about sexual liberation versus sexual freedom, the question is:
How do we construct a healthy sexual culture that understands sex in the context of fostering healthy human relationships?
The so-called sexual liberation of the 1960’s did many positive things: it broke down some of those old, repressive mechanisms. Much of that had to do with feminists critiquing the sexual control, the domination/ subordination dynamic in patriarchy. But that period of time also reinforced patriarchy in certain ways, especially in the way in which the sexual exploitation industries became more normalized and more mainstream. And by sexual exploitation industries I mean prostitution, pornography, stripping—the primary ways in this culture that men buy and sell women’s bodies for the sexual pleasure of men.
So, you have to look at how this played out. Some of it was positive, from my point of view, some of it was extremely negative. Some of it challenged patriarchy: the claim of legitimacy for lesbian and gay people was a challenge to the patriarchy, and it’s constricting gender norms and sexual rules. The assertion that women are fully autonomous sexual beings and not simply objects or vehicles for male pleasure – that challenge to the patriarchy was extremely healthy and positive. But there was also a flip side to it that reinforced some of that patriarchal ideology.
So the question now is: How does one fashion a healthy, sexual culture and the question I use to frame that is to ask: “What is sex for?” Sex has a role in human life. Obviously it has a basic role in procreation but it’s much more than that. The question is, and at any given point in time, sex can mean many different things and what do we want it to mean?
We have to fashion a sexual ethic, and by sexual ethic I don’t mean the assertion of rules that are imposed on people, but a sexual ethic that emerges from honest conversation.
|
To ask that question is not to impose a single answer, it’s to recognize that not all forms of sex are consistent with healthy, human relationships. The most obvious example is sexual assault- that’s a form of sex but no one would argue it’s consistent with healthy human relationships. And so those are the kinds of things we have to ask.
How do you build a culture in which human beings flourish? is the fundamental question – part of that question has to do with sex: How do you build a culture in which human beings flourish sexually? There’s no one answer to that, but that’s the conversation we have to have.
The sex positive or so-called sexual liberation perspective tends to assume that anything sexual is consistent with human flourishing but I think the evidence is quite clear that that’s not true. So, we have to fashion a sexual ethic, and by sexual ethic I don’t mean the assertion of rules that are imposed on people, but a sexual ethic that emerges from honest conversation. And as you’re pointing out, when especially women in contemporary culture resist the pornographic nature of this culture, by saying, “I don’t want to replicate pornographic sexual scenes in my personal life”, those women are often the targets of insults or pejorative labels like “sex negative” and that’s what we have to overcome.
Lili: When one looks at the tone of many of the comments following articles about porn use, one can really get a sense of the contention and hostility. So it leaves me wondering: Whom does it really serve to create distinctions like “sex positive”? Why even create the distinction?
Bob: Well, it serves the people who want to undermine critique by labeling any critique as being “sex negative”. That’s the only function it serves as far as I can tell, which is why I don’t use the terms and don’t accept the terms in conversations or debates I might be in.
♦◊♦
Lili: So let’s talk about what I call the language of “shaming.” One of the questions recently posed to the Advice Columnist at GMP centered on a man who felt uncomfortable with the vast amount of attention his new girlfriend attracted by insisting on wearing very little on the beach—“three half-dollar sized pieces of cloth”, was how he put it. He was looking for advice on how he might share his request that she wear even a small bikini, vs. almost nothing.
And one of the female commenters told him, quite aggressively in my opinion, that he should stop “slut shaming” her and basically, to get over it. This kind of exchange appears frequently enough that I wonder if we’re using the “shaming” term as a way to shut people up who have a different view of sexuality than our own. What are your thoughts on this?
♦◊♦
Bob: I think there are two separate questions about shame: one that has to do with men and one that has to do with women. So the question isn’t about shaming or not shaming in the context that you raise, the question is:
What leads people in an oppressed category to behavior that seems to intensify or deepen those oppressive forces?
So let’s say you have a society in which women are routinely treated as objects for male sexual pleasure, that is you have contemporary patriarchy in which women are routinely bought and sold for male sexual pleasure and in which women even outside the sexual exploitation industries are encouraged to present themselves as sexual objects.
The question when a woman engages in self-presentation like that is: “What is the motive force behind that choice of hers? Is she doing it because it’s some expression of her authentic sense of her own body? Is it an authentic style of hers? Or is she simply buying into the cultural pressure to present herself as a sexual object?” Because there are certain kinds of rewards for that.
I don’t know the answer to that in the case of any specific woman. If one is going to engage a specific person in that conversation, one would do it as you would engage people in any kind of difficult conversation: with respect, and with a sense of true openness, wanting to understand. But when you step back from any individual case and you look at the patterns, I don’t think there’s any doubt that women, especially younger women, increasingly engage in that kind of self-presentation routinely. And I don’t think there’s any doubt that one of the serious factors in that is the cultural pressure for women to present themselves that way. That has nothing to do with shaming, that has to do with inquiry into the nature of the society in which you live and how people shape their own sense of their own bodies, their own desires, and their own value in the world. Ok, well that’s what a decent society would do, to step back and look at those patterns, and ask: “What are the power dynamics in which those patterns are rooted?” and ask again,
“Are they consistent with human flourishing?
There is nothing new about this. Feminists have been critiquing the way women are pressured into self-presentation that objectifies themselves for male viewing—that critique’s been around for a long time, there’s nothing new about it. It’s just that, as you point out, in this particular moment, this fundamental feminist critique has been so marginalized, so beaten back, so buried, that it’s not part of the cultural conversation and that’s unfortunate from my point of view.
♦◊♦
Lili: Yes, and when I do raise the question in conversation, it’s not uncommon to get a considerable amount of pushback from women, who’ll say, “No, I do love walking around in a see-through dress with no underwear on in public”, or “I love when I know my man is out enjoying himself at strip clubs” or any of these statements which I have to admit, sound bizarre to me.
And with the colossal amounts of money being made in what you call the sexual exploitation industries, I can’t help but wonder if as women, we’re being hoodwinked into adopting these stances that prove that we’re cool, we’re the fun girls that are down with whatever, with the unspoken threat being that if we resist or question it, we risk marginalization or worse.
I believe in everyone dressing to please themselves, yes, but I also can’t help think many of us would be much happier if we didn’t feel this tremendous pressure to conform to the cultural standards of beauty which can be pretty fascist and plenty sexist. I really believe we would stop stressing about those extra five or ten pounds we carry around but which render us not “porn-worthy” as one man characterized the cultural ideal in conversation with me.
Bob: Well, that’s right, and body size is another thing—it’s very difficult to have a sensible conversation in this culture because on the one hand, there are cultural pressures on women to be thin, cultural pressures on women to look a certain way, to have a certain body type and those are unhealthy. They lead to eating disorders and all sorts of things.
These are difficult conversations to have in a society that’s essentially gone mad, from my point of view.
|
It’s also true however, that the celebration of non-traditional body types in a culture that has serious obesity problems and health problems is also difficult. The goal isn’t to impose a single body type on everybody. The goal is to ask, “What kind of nutrition and physical activity is consistent with a long-term healthy body?” It’s pretty clear that starving yourself to be model-thin isn’t consistent with that. It’s pretty clear that eating lots of high-fat, high-calorie, processed foods is inconsistent with that. The question is: “How do we shape lives that are sensible, sane and consistent with both physical, emotional and mental, long-term health?”
These are difficult conversations to have in a society that’s essentially gone mad, from my point of view.
People present themselves to other people in ways that have lots of different objectives, including the desire to be sexually attractive. There’s nothing psychologically pathological about wanting to be sexually attractive. The question is, “How much of our time are we spending on those activities around presentation, and how are those gendered?” “How are the pressures different on women than on men, for instance?”
The other question is, “How much of that comes from authentic desire?” and ‘authenticity’ is a difficult word in this context because all of our desires are in some sense, conditioned by society. I’m not sure anybody has individual, authentic desires. What I come to desire is always going to be, in part, shaped by the society around me. But we have to be able to ask, “How are those social pressures sometimes healthy, or unhealthy? How are they sometimes connected to domination/ subordination dynamics in oppressive systems like patriarchy? That also ties in not just to clothing and weight, but the growing prevalence of cosmetic surgery where people engage not only in dieting and such, to shape their bodies, but literally, to go so far as to mutilate healthy tissue to shape a body into some, what they think is socially desirable form. All of these questions, are, I think, profound indications of how disturbed this culture is.
♦◊♦
Lili: And it’s not just women. I’m hearing more frequently now from men who feel pressured to conform to some often difficult-to attain ideal of male beauty. I’m not really seeing much of that, though, not even an iota of what I see we, as women, put ourselves through. Especially disturbing to me is how young it starts, too….
Bob: Well, there’s two points about the assertion that men are now under the same kind of pressure.
Number one, to some degree it’s true. There are certainly more intense pressures on men to present themselves in ways to be sexually desirable. But, number one, as you’re pointing out, are those equal to the pressures on women, especially girls…and the answer is obviously no.
And the range of presentation that men can engage in and be in the category of attractive is far wider than the range for women. So these aren’t equivalent. But, even if there are more pressures on men to look a certain way, that’s not a sign that we’ve reached equality. It’s just a sign that the culture’s degraded even further.
So then in patriarchy now, even though male dominance is still the defining dynamic, men have internalized some of the insanity themselves. I don’t see that as something to celebrate; it’s just another indication of the corrosive nature of this culture.
Here, we’re not just talking about patriarchy—of course, we’re also talking about capitalism. These are trends fueled not only by the dynamic of male domination / female subordination—they’re also trends fueled by the relentless, pathological quest for profit, especially in late-consumerism capitalism when we’ve been sold virtually everything we can be sold, so the market consistently tries to find new ways to generate profit, no matter how psychologically damaging they are to people. That’s the cosmetic industry, much of the fashion industry, and the non-medically necessary plastic surgery industry. They’re all a sign, from my point of view, of a culture in collapse, a culture in which human flourishing is subordinated to, in this case, the desire for profit.
♦◊♦
Read Part 2 of the interview: Erotica, Patriarchy, and Pornography
♦◊♦
About Robert Jensen, Ph.D
Robert Jensen is a journalism professor at the University of Texas at Austin and author of “All My Bones Shake: Seeking a Progressive Path to the Prophetic Voice” (Soft Skull Press, 2009); “Getting Off: Pornography and the End of Masculinity” (South End Press, 2007); and several other books. Jensen is also co-producer of the documentary film “Abe Osheroff: One Foot in the Grave, the Other Still Dancing,” which chronicles the life and philosophy of the longtime radical activist.
Jensen can be reached via Email [email protected] and his articles can be found online.
—
photo: (main) djnavv (inset) toestubber on Flickr
I was following along with this and agreeing with the points about not having to like _all_ sex and relationship practices… until we got to the part where Robert Jenson claims that he doesn’t know any anti-sex, sex-shaming feminists. I know lots who *aren’t*, but there’s a lovely post by Charlie Glickman today pointing to exactly that behavior by Gail Dines.
http://www.charlieglickman.com/2010/09/if-gail-dines-would-stop-shaming-people-maybe-folks-would-listen/
This is a awesome blogpost. I truly respect this.. Thanks SO much!!
Trackback Link…
[…]Here are some of the sites we recommend for our visitors[…]…
I will stay out of the mainstream discussion and simply remark that this makes me look at where I am with my own sexual behavior and how I look at others. I wasn’t even aware of the “Sex positive” movement..thanks for enlightening me on what’s happening.
I will say this; ANY of my behavior that feels out of balance with me, Is out of balance. If I’m in denial of my own feelings, then I’m probably even Further out of balance…food for thought.
Keep writing! Keep questioning!
KT
“So…what, Lance, if someone doesn’t want the stigma of being called “anti-sex”, does that mean they have to condone porn use in their relationships, just as one example?” Well, It certainly means that they might have to take the time and trouble to understand why their partner uses porn, in the same way that they might have to take the time and trouble to understand why a partner has a deep desire to go golfing on a Sunday. And it’s very possible that they will have to abide with a certain amount of porn enjoyment going on in another room,… Read more »
Stella Omega, when you wrote, “..they will have to abide with a certain amount of porn enjoyment going on in another room, for the sake of the relationship”, were you suggesting that one would need to betray their own sense of healthy boundary and personal integrity? The healing discussion that hopefully happens in these discussions is not met by critiquing those who open the dialog but in expanding and sharing our own views. I would like to know more of what you mean in your comment above, especially in how it pertains to boundaries. It seems to me that any… Read more »
Addiction is not controlled by “reasonable” , polite conversation. Addiction requires 3rd party cognitive behavior therapy to resolve. The 2nd half of this relationship needs to get help to restore healthy non-addictive boundaries, or it could progress.
Hi Stella, If I understand you correctly, you are saying that if I don’t want porn in my relationship, it makes me anti-sex (unless I engage in negotiations about it, etc.)
Is that right?
“Hi Stella, If I understand you correctly, you are saying that if I don’t want porn in my relationship, it makes me anti-sex I can’t speak for Stella, but no, that doesn’t make you anti sex. When you cross the line and start telling other people what they can and can’t look at, in their own lives and in their relationships, then there’s a problem. “(unless I engage in negotiations about it, etc.)” Um, maybe you ought to be engaging in negotiations in a relationship just on general principal. Rather than assuming your sexual norms are righteous and other people’s… Read more »
I have not read anywhere, even between the lines, that anyone is telling anybody else that they are “perverted” or is anyone telling anyone what to do with their sexuality, on either extreme of these issues. These writers are speaking their minds, expressing their educated perspectives and making themselves vulnerable so that there may be a little bit more social awareness, change and harmony in society. What is not happening is enough people sharing of their perspectives on what their expression of healthy sexuality is.
That’s a weak argument, Kenny. Terre and Lilly have been clearly defending the antiporn *movement*, and Lilly is doing this in the form of a soft-pitch interview with one of that movement’s leading figures. It is disingenuous in the extreme to ignore that context. Every bit as much as if GMP just happen to publish a series of critiques of the pro-choice movement that just happened to draw on leading pro-lifers without naming them as such. And “What is not happening is enough people sharing of their perspectives on what their expression of healthy sexuality is.”? People can “share” their… Read more »
Iamcuriousblue, what writers like Dr. Jensen, Lili and Terre seem to be saying is not that they are anti-porn, at least in the way that you seem to be reacting to. They seem to be trying to find ways to deepen relationships and to heal the damages caused by addictions to porn and sex from all of the lying, abuse and cheating that often happens in committed relationships from porn and sex addiction. You do not seem to be aware of porn and sex addiction. It is likely much different than what you would consider good, fun sex and all.… Read more »
Kenny, it is clear to me now that you quite simply do not know what you’re talking about here or the context of any of this. Do you have any idea of who Robert Jensen is, beyond simply being the person interviewed in this article? He’s one of the leaders in the current “feminist” antiporn movement and a co-founder of Stop Porn Culture. He’s also a close collaborator with Gail Dines. The goals of these people go far beyond merely personal issues of porn addiction or “sexual imagination”, but have specific political goals that ultimately would roll back basic sexual… Read more »
You seem anything but curiousblue. You seem to be a frustrated protester but don’t have anything to add, only issues to attack, to dissolve with vitriolic acid. I know exactly who Robert Jensen is, where he comes from along the evolution (and devolution) of our culture and the attitudes he has formulated because of it. He states his educated perspectives clearly and is not forcing them down anyones throat. You are entitled to have your opinion too, and I’d rather read a real opinion than your angry bias and blather. I’ve read quite a bit of Jensen’s work and think… Read more »
Iamcuriousblue, in my own curiosity, I took a look at your blog which you interestingly link here. My inner psych-professor is intrigued as to why you so radically rage at such officially recognized liberals such as Jensen and Dworkin? And I now seem to understand what you are fighting for.. you seem less of an enigma. Are you disappointed that the good fight of freeing feminism from under the patriarchy didn’t align with your specific cause? And are you feeling vindictive for your lack of validation? Do you want photographers such as Mapplethorpe (or yourself) respected in grade school libraries?… Read more »
OK, Kenny, thanks for confirming you really are basically a troll (and a shockingly ignorant one at that), because you’ve made it abundantly clear that time invested in seriously engaging you is time wasted.
And, uh, yeah, as a matter of fact I very much think Mapplethorpe was an artist deserving of enormous respect. OMFG, my opinions are just so extreme and beyond the pale, I know.
Curious. I’ve never been called a troll before, interesting view of the bridge tho. Just to clarify something, when I wrote you above to “Get therapy” it was not meant for any of your art or lifestyle, it’s for your undisciplined, poorly explained and unprocessed rage. So if any of your current layer of fury was a result of my lack of clarity then I do apologize. I do admit to at least partial ignorance, and sincere curiosity (unlike your BS moniker) of alternative lifestyles and gender issues. I am confused as to why some pioneers for feminist liberation and… Read more »
There is no “curiosity” or “openness” in your game Kenny, that much is clear. You’re a troll, plain and simple. And you will not be fed.
Dworkin no more represents the whole of the feminist movement than Sid Vicious represents the entirety of English music. She was just one woman, with one point of view and one drum to bang. It was a drum worth beating on, certainly. But she did not have a congenial sexual relationship, and cannot be considered an expert on congenial sexual relationships. Her view of sexuality was pretty distorted– having a husband that used your head as a softball will skew pretty much everything in a woman’s life. I would really like to see that fact more acknowledged, when people talk… Read more »
Thank you Stella. I was not, or never will suggest, that everything anyone does or says is the most productive or enlightened way to go. People are infallible. Sometimes a riot is needed to get a healing discussion started. I was suggesting that, at the time of the early revolution, that certain people had the courage to get out there and fight against a mountain of historical misconception and injustice. And that these pioneers in the Feminist movement should, in my opinion, be honored at least within particular contexts. It appears that what the more popular leaders have to say… Read more »
I often wonder if sex has to always be a Deep Communication. Can’t it be a shallow communication? Do all meals have to be perfectly nutritionally balanced? What role does human creativity in taking nutrients and creating art from them (Molecular Gastronomy, Slow Food etc). There is no reason to get all fancy with food (or cheap and dirty) if we could just eat bland and basic for nutrients sake. What role does human creativity play in the pursuit of pleasure? I’d say it’s very important for us as a culture to be able to see sex as communication sure,… Read more »
“Um, maybe you ought to be engaging in negotiations in a relationship just on general principal. Rather than assuming your sexual norms are righteous and other people’s are perverted. Just sayin’!”
The use of the words “righteous” and “perverted” are yours.
Never said them, and I don’t think them.
That was the point of the piece. Non-shaming from/towards all sexual parties would be a goal to strive for.
Agree?
“Um, maybe you ought to be engaging in negotiations in a relationship just on general principal. Rather than assuming your sexual norms are righteous and other people’s are perverted. Just sayin’!”
The use of the words “righteous” and “perverted” are yours.
Never said them, and I don’t think them.
That was the point of the piece. Non-shaming from/towards all sexual parties would be a goal to strive for.
Agree?
Yes, non-shaming of “sexual parties” is worthwhile. However, I think that when somebody like Jensen is pursuing political antiporn goals, that if realized would take away others free expression rights, not to mention Jensen’s regular use of stigmatizing and shaming language (and, yes, I’ve read his book), claims that opponents are “shaming” people like him are disingenuous and passive-aggressive in the extreme.
And I think it’s important to say that everyone has an agenda. Everyone. Including yourself. You seem to be advocating for the right to sexual expression and freedom of expression in general. Then why not extend that same freedom to others, in this case, someone like Jensen, whom you claim has an agenda, too? Is it because it’s so different from your own that you vilify him? Just as you vilify GMP for subversively sneaking in some writer(s) who turned out to have a pro-life “agenda” that no one but you seemed to know about? Well in this country there… Read more »
Well, that’s a nice way of claiming to be in some way put upon in this conversation, but I think it’s a serious reversal of what’s actually going on here. It is extremely hard to have an honest conversation when both yourself and Terre have been disingenuous in the extreme. Both in terms of trying to reframe what is essentially a political argument between the sex positive movement and the antipornography movement, as represented by Robert Jensen, as simply a case of the former group being a bunch of heartless neo-puritans (huh?) trying to force others into unwanted sexual openness.… Read more »
She was referring to sex addiction, pre-occupation w/ online porn, vs. time and energy devoted to healthy relationship w/ partner.
The detachment to partner, while addict engages in porn,sports,drugs,alcohol,gambling,shopping, or any other distraction, is damaging to all. Relationships end over these issues.
Sorry to answer a question with a question but– when you say “you don’t want porn in your relationship” what does that mean for you, relating solely to your own personal experience?
What does that mean for your partner?
Sorry, Stella, my response ended up in the wrong spot!..it’s 3 comments south of here.
Wait, what? If someone doesn’t want to be in a relationship with someone who interacts with porn, that’s totally their prerogative. What’s not okay is invoking sexual, cultural or moral norms to sidestep actual negotiation of and communication about the relationship, whether that’s saying “everybody does it so you have to be okay with it” or “that’s perverted and you have to stop.” As long as nobody is acting entitled to a relationship on terms that their partner is unwilling to agree to, then there’s nothing wrong with having dealbreakers. Which isn’t to say compromises can’t be beneficial if everyone’s… Read more »
Ignorance of addiction is a problem in society and relationships today. Do people know what excessive is w/ 24/7 services to every household?
You can die of a broken heart, due to (self) neglect. Health is about balance. Public health education over-due. Balance is not a competition between couples. Win-win.
“Well, It certainly means that they might have to take the time and trouble to understand why their partner uses porn, in the same way that they might have to take the time and trouble to understand why a partner has a deep desire to go golfing on a Sunday. And it’s very possible that they will have to abide with a certain amount of porn enjoyment going on in another room, for the sake of the relationship. Their partner also has a responsibility, to moderate their use of the stuff so that it isn’t in the offended party’s face.… Read more »
Arrgh…. I keep trying to answer this question, and I keep getting stuck on “Fireproofing.” Nothing is that certain, yanno?
if you want to discuss this in depth with me, I would prefer that we do so by email. There are so many nuances, and blog comment threads are so difficult to navigate!
Thank you both (Julie and Stella) for writing and furthering the conversation…. Why I tried to pin you down to an answer, Stella, is because I believe you were heading in the direction of making my point for me. And that is that shaming is still going on, albeit towards those of us who don’t believe in the majority-rule, which in this case, is “porn is good/healthy in a relationship”. The pro-porn voice is certainly the loudest voice out there in our culture today, and if we aren’t all careful to mind our own tendencies to paint others with a… Read more »
I’m probably not going to speak as eloquently as I’d prefer, but I”ll try. How do we discuss the components of healthy sexuality? I’d love to keep discussing it (how I wish we were all in a room together!). Who defines the “health?” Who polices group behavior (for there always have been police around sexuality from times beginning)? How do we find and use language that can state a preference (I don’t like mcdonalds) that doesn’t shame others? Or is it my job to deal with my own preference (liking mcNuggets fine) and being ok with someone else’s judgment? I’m… Read more »
I’m with you on wishing we were all in a room discussing this! Well…how about we create a summit? Why not? You’re hitting on exactly the real reason I write: to foster the kind of dialogue you just furthered, Julie. I want to believe that there’s room at this big table for ALL of us. So, that’s about “form”. And when I wrote this piece, I wanted to begin with a personal anecdote and use it to lead into the bigger picture (the political) Now, onto “content”: I love what you said, that the most important thing is the intersection… Read more »
I bet we can. I like three ways 😉
I take utmost offense at your objectifying me Julie
(kidding).
Love that frisky nature coming out in you :-0
That’s how I roll…frisky all the way! Consensually of course.
Can one do a three-way conversation online?
One can– in a forum, (I can host a forum either private or public) or a chatroom (and again I can host this)
I suggest a forum, because we could treat so many of the very disparate separate aspects so much more easily… And invite other folks to join in if it looks like it’s really going somewhere.
I would totally love that! Thanks for thinking of this idea. Count me in.
I love that argument. “You’re shaming me telling me I use shaming language when I express my judgement on your sexual preferences!” What a merry-go-round! Here are some very random responses, forgive me for jumping around. It’s Saturday after all *grin* making one person (or group) the authority over how someone else should live, or else suffer the ugly stigmatization of being called “anti-sex”. Wait a minute– a group that says “live your life and and let others live theirs” is telling other people how to live? What exactly are they telling you to do? Watch porn? No… Not really.… Read more »
Yes. Exactly that last sentence there. I love this comment. Also the shame cycle…reminds me of The Simpsons 😉 Marge: That video really opened my eyes. I can see that I’m just a passive-aggressive co-culprit. By nagging you when you do foolish things, I just enable your life script. Homer: And that sends me into a shame spiral. Marge: Exactly! I think sexuality is obviously a highly charged topic and what may be happening is that everyone (and I’m generalizing) feels a little touchy about their own stuff. There are family of origin issues at play, culture of origin issues,… Read more »
Hi Stella- Thanks for clarifying your position. I appreciate it’s Saturday and you took the time to write. I’m not sure we’re on different sides of this. I think we’re more alike than not, but we are bothering to refine the conversation which is always advantageous, I believe. You wrote: “ Wait a minute– a group that says “live your life and and let others live theirs” is telling other people how to live? What exactly are they telling you to do? Watch porn? No… Not really. It reminds me of the “marriage defense” crowd who don’t think gay folk… Read more »
What you’ve said sounds pretty much like what i would do, by choice– what I do now, certainly, after a half-century of trial and error! But you are still dodging my question which is very very pertinent to my assesment of whether or not I think you’re ‘sex-negative” 😉 if YOU say “I don’t want porn in my relationship” what does that mean? What does that mean to your partner? If I, myself, said “I don’t want porn in my relationship” that would mean– to ME– that I, personally, would not watch it, and would not want my partner to… Read more »
Stella- you wrote: “Someone who says they don’t want porn “in their relationship” makes me worry that they believe they have the right to demand that their partner give up all porn for their sake. Which is a big old can of large, wriggling, dirty worms and doesn;t bode well for anyone involved.” Someone not wanting porn in their relationship would have to state that unequivocally right from the beginning. In fact, when I offer pre-marital counseling for couples who want me to officiate their wedding, I ask for real clarity on this between the two parties, because “fidelity” is… Read more »
I can agree wholeheartedly with everything you’ve said here. So I guess we need to talk about how you present your project to other people– so that you can be free of the sex negative assumption.
Our world, sadly, lives on soundbites these days, and it’s both a total pain in the butt and a useful thing to remember. If we can create a few soundbite-types of statements for you, that offer your listener a sense of plausibility so that they will continue listening– that might be a great tool for your communications with newcomers and outsiders.
“Yet the point of my Lance anecdote in the article I wrote is that WITHOUT asking me a single question about porn, he jumped right to lumping me in with Anita Bryant.” Um, here’s where you went wrong WITH THIS ENTIRE ARTICLE. Bringing in top anti-porn activist Robert Jensen as your star witness. It’s the equivalent of saying, “No, I’m nothing like Anita Bryant, and here’s my friend Jerry Falwell to explain why you’re wrong.” (And, BTW, spare me the arguments that “Dr. Jensen” is in some way not the same caliber of moralist just because he happens to identify… Read more »
Yeah, I’m stuck on fireproofing too. I suppose I don’t see much wrong in negotiating with your partner what sexual acts you have in common and like, have sort of common and could care less about (but don’t hate) and then things you each like that the other doesn’t. While sex and food are not entirely comparable, it’s like….I hate blue cheese. My husband loves it. He’s more than welcome to enjoy it all on his own. I’ll even cook things with it, though I won’t really partake. He likes movies a lot more than I do, so I watch… Read more »
One last thing…. I think that sex is considered (generally) in a dichotomous way in our culture. It is the the thing we all seem to want, dress for, exercise for etc (and perhaps layers into that whole women give sex for relationships and men give relationships for sex economic model I find so terribly distasteful), but then it’s the first thing we say is unimportant if the relationship is suffering. Like if a woman or man left their partner because their sex life had died. Let’s say everything else was pretty stable (bills, kindness etc), but one partner refused… Read more »
Julie, I am incomplete agreement with both of these posts.
LOL that should have been: ” I am in complete agreement with both of these posts. “
Hee!
Julie, I really want to thank you for your clarity and open expressiveness. I fully agree with you, 100%, about having rights and resources for healthy play and interests. I want to support a society that maintains a healthy expression of life, sex, love and adventure without religious dogma, etc. I also vote for equality and respectful expression of perspectives. Respect and love seem to be qualities that return to you the more you give them away. Where I believe there is confusion in these sexuality-related comment threads is when people get entangled in their own perspectives and are unable… Read more »
Thank you Kenny. I’m glad that I was able to provide some good options for conversations. That’s always my goal.
A few phrases stood out to me. Two things, out of context, on a very personal level: 1. I’ve always been in conflict w/ how 12-step programs for sex and love addicts (SLAA, which is nearly identical to AA) always seem to be religiously-based. The whole ‘higher power, as you see them’ bit, is still a recipe for guilt and *shame.* Idolizing or emulating any power outside that which is humanly attainable can and will lead to an inferiority complex, if not worse, a God-complex. Still, some people like to be parented all their lives, even spiritually. Are *morals* and… Read more »
Speaking of balance, who am *I* to say what’s wrong or time wasted?
And yes, righteouscordycept, the ‘date-rapey” bit took me back to situations that I was coerced into things that I never. ever wanted to do. Horrifying.
Are those persons arrested as attempted rapists? That would be the responsible thing to do for the self-referiential sex-positive movement. Are those boundaries in place?
I don’t know case by case. Some are, some aren’t, just like in regular life. Many women may not go to the police because (as we know) many women aren’t believed if the date rape occurred in a vanilla setting. There is a lot of “he said/she said, she was dressed too sexy, she drank too much and regrets it” kind of questioning. If a person is in a kink setting, in bondage let’s say, and the top does something not negotiated for (and believe me kink and bondage scenes usually require a complex amount of negotiating), what will the… Read more »
Except in Canada recently a man was convicted of raping his partner in a S&M type encounter, so it is possible to be believed and charges to be laid.
I must say it is a struggle to stay in conversation with those who refuse to believe that sex trafficking, sex slavery, porn addiction/compulsivity exist in statistically meaningful numbers. I will because we simply must keep talking until we hear each other. I have worked with partners/spouses of sex addicts/NPDs for over four years and the numbers here in Atlanta are NOT small or insignificant. I am also an activist for the abolition of sex slavery and sex/human trafficking. That is happening here also. Sadly, just last week the two causes intersected. One of the sex addicts (whose spouse I… Read more »
Also wanted to add as an aside, that Dr. Jensen aptly said: “…it’s very difficult to have a sensible conversation in this culture….” He’s right, we are so polarized about the issues of sex. There is no grey in our society or culture these days. Right wingers lean all the way to the puritanical and old ways, and the leftists say everything should be allowed. No! I don’t abide by either of these two extremes. Quite frankly, I find them frightening and supremely unhealthy. That’s why this article is so great because at least we are having a dialogue. So… Read more »
It’s not much of a dialogue, given that both Bee & Jensen share a lot of the same perspectives. Real dialogue emerges when we have room for different points of view.
Charlie, Good point and hopefully you can follow this up with expressing your opinion. This is the chance to have and participate in this dialog. My POV is that there should be no fences, no sides, no labels. That everyone has a deep respect for eachother’s humanity through dignity and kindness. I can quickly say that this will never happen in my lifetime.. but if I truly believe and follow my intention then this will be achieved in my lifetime, in my life, and that is where it matters.
Hi Julie- Thanks for writing and explaining the inner workings of the poly community. Two things: I don’t think the issue being taken is with how those of like mind in those communities play together. If I understand Lili right, the issue is that though those in the sex positive communities want to be respected for their rights to live the way they want, more and more, many in that movement are taking on the characteristics of fundamentalist religions by “shaming” those not into the sexual activities they’re into. For ex: porn use. Like Terre wrote, if you’re not into… Read more »
There’s so much to unpack about this interview and so much that’s problematic about it that I decided it would be better to write a post instead of just a comment. Here’s my take on why Robert Jensen Doesn’t Understand Sex-Positivity.
While I’m here, I’d also like to offer some thoughts on how sex-positivity can help people learn how to set boundaries and offer some clarity on the topic of sexualization, both of which seem relevant to this discussion.
That’s a really good article there Charlie! Gotta give you some props for that. That was a thorough, well thought out reply to the article here.
I would suggest that the editors link the reply to this article in some fashion, but may cross some line or another….
this is an important conversation worth thinking about. however, i find it painful that some of the most insightful and critical minds on the issue have to ask questions like, “How do we shape lives that are sensible, sane and consistent with both physical, emotional and mental, long-term health? … How do you build a culture in which human beings flourish? is the fundamental question – part of that question has to do with sex: How do you build a culture in which human beings flourish sexually?” i know it’s easy to vilify the church, but there is a God… Read more »
Susie Bright, Patrick Califia, Carol Queen, Tristan Taormino These are some self identified sex positive types. Though I’m sure there are some disagreements within the group, I can assure you that none would support a “carte blanche anything goes” philosophy. A healthy discussion on the politics of sexuality cannot sustain a premise that non-consensual, illegal, unethical activities may be part of the “carte blanche” category. Anal sex is not a gateway entry to cultish divinity sexual sects in Montana. The Bible might be though, but I’m not totally sure about that either…these slippery slope, highly polarized attack argument are akin… Read more »
That’s a beautiful comment, Quantuminc.
As I understand it, sex positivism actually is applying to same rules to sexual behavior as exists for non-sexual behavior. Basically, anyone can make a suggestion, but one must have the consent of all parties involved before actually acting. Forcing someone to play scrabble would be immoral and bizarre, thus rape is like that but much much worse. In my experience, and others seem to agree, sex positive discussions spend just as much time emphasizing the importance of consent as they do the importance of sexual freedom and non-repression. Actually a lot of sex positive feminist discussion can get into… Read more »
Generally a good comment.
However, I completely disagree for my own part that my sexuality is often about ignoring consent when sex is thought of as an achievement (not even sure what that means in fact, but I loudly disagree all the same). I suggest all the men stand up and call bullshit on that one too, because it sounds like man bashing to me. You seem to suggest that men seeking to acheive orgasm through sex are rapists. Ummm… NO!
Please clarify or retract that ridiculous idea.
There seems to be a way of looking at sex where sex occurs because the guy is (for lack of a better word) awesome. Not because two people wanted to do that thing, but because the guy is awesome and got his just rewards in the form of pussy. Men who are obsessed with ‘getting laid’ seem to see things this way. The woman’s desires and actions are rarely mentioned in such narratives, only the man’s actions. I guess the woman friendly version of this is the Dreamboat who “wins her heart” and “sweeps her off her feet”. Either way… Read more »
Ummm… What?
I can’t connect a thing you’ve just said to my criticism above. I’m pretty sure you were trying to respond to me, but I’m honestly not sure. Could you run that by me again, a bit less jargon laden for me. I missed that class at the U, so I’m not following your language too well.
Sorry to be so dumb, but I want to be sure what I should reply to you before I reply to you lest I err in my comprehension.
Thanks!
Emma, I’m sorry your friends treated you badly. I think that’s a very good example of people having a culturally determined view of sex and the ethics around that sex that only fit one “right way” to do relationships. In your case, non-monogamy might have helped your relationship flourish and grow (or not) but you felt it was a healthy and positive place for you to be and you came up against a great deal of shaming connected to group norms. “We don’t do this!” We come up against this all the time in our society. I recently have been… Read more »
I keep seeing this assertion that sex-positive feminism advocates against the setting of personal boundaries when it comes to sex, and this puzzles me, as everything I’ve encountered suggests the opposite. (The closest thing that comes to mind is Dan Savage’s sketchy “good, giving and game” formulation, but he’s hardly a sex-positive feminist.) Where is this coming from? I’m not saying prude-shaming doesn’t exist. We live in a culture that simultaneously slut-shames and prude-shames; one just can’t win. But I just don’t see it being expressed within the framework of sex-positive feminism, and in fact I quite often see the… Read more »
Dan Savage may not be a feminist, but he sure as heck is a sex positive gay man! I think he is a feminist though (more so than not, he’s no male chauvanist that’s for sure). How is GGG sketchy? Do tell? That is extremely odd to me…. Should we all try to meet each other halfway or forget having a relationship with that person? Seems totally reasonable to me, or am I on crack and not know it????
That one is a real headscratcher their friendo. A real headscratcher… Hmmm….
Note that’s “there” not “their.” Ei Carumba! That’s a brutal typo!
Just like there’s a difference between religious/cultural based anti-porn activism and feminist anti-porn activism, I think there’s a difference between a “pro-sex” outlook and sex-positive feminism. Dan Savage is most definitely pro-sex, but has never struck me as all that feminist, and to my knowledge he doesn’t claim to be. If I were making the world’s shortest feminism/sexuality quiz, it’d probably have the following categories: Mainstream/patriarchy: non-sex-positive (*not* necessarily sex-negative!), non-feminist (also *not* necessarily sexist/misogynist!) Anti-porn feminist: non-sex-positive, feminist Pro-sex: sex-positive, non-feminist Sex-positive feminist: sex-positive, feminist (Obviously, this is biased as hell.) GGG is sketchy to me because it comes… Read more »
That’s why Savage says you shouldn’t be in a relationship with that person if they don’t suit your needs. He’s pretty big on dumping people who don’t work for you. I think it’s part of his belief in personal agency and personal responsibility. Could be wrong though…
The only way I can explain my thoughts on the sex positive movement is with an anecdote. I’ll try to keep it as short as possible. A while ago, I was living in a different country from my boyfriend for about three months. We were going to be seeing each other for a weekend once a month or so in that time. It was a fairly new relationship (6 months). We both had pretty high sex drives, so we decided to have an open relationship for that time, so we could each get our sexual needs (well, wants) met. And… Read more »
Do certain regular commentators (commenters?) here reflect the same attitudes and reactions of your friends described in your personal annecdote? I certainly seem to sense some sex negativity amongst certain folks on GMP. Just a feelling of course, but the Force is passingly strong with me so…
Clearly Lili’s friend Lance was afraid that Lili’s stance on porn that agreed with even a tiny fraction of the far right would endanger the few gains that the gay community has garnered. I want to know about that. That matters to me even if I am not engaged with the all-or-nothing platform approach. That fear is clearly fueling the high-octane fury around the issue of sexual mores. My fear is that discouraging individuals (especially women) from setting clear sexual boundaries and developing their personal relationship discernment, other women will experience the eighth-ring-of-hell that my own lack of discernment and… Read more »
Truly beautifully said Terre…along with Lilii’s comments as well. I see this issue the same exact way you and her both expressed and couldn’t have put it better.
Especially this: “My fear is that discouraging individuals (especially women) from setting clear sexual boundaries and developing their personal relationship discernment, other women will experience the eighth-ring-of-hell that my own lack of discernment and weak boundaries brought me.”
Terre – I think the point you miss is “approval of all CONSENSUAL sexual acts”. That’s a big one, and if you knew the first thing about about sex-positivity, you’d know the concept of consent is pretty damn central. And that non-consensual violations of other’s sexuality is very frowned upon. The flip side is that non-consensual *restrictions* on other people’s sexuality is likewise frowned upon. You might dismiss this as “lack of discernment on a social level”, which to my mind puts you on the same level as conservatives who use the specter of legalized pedophilia as an argument against… Read more »
You misread, iamcuriousblue. I had the misfortune of being involved with a sex addictwho claimed to be a sex-positive . Once it was diagnosed, I was out. Therefore, no recovery needed
Pardon my getting that detail wrong. However, I’ve looked at your website (http://www.posarc.com/) and it seems you’re coming from the “codependency” or “partners of” side of the recovery equation. I still see that as part of the recovery movement, with the same problematic pseudoscientific “spiritualist” excess and prohibitionist views. Very much like the hard-line pro-“War on Drugs” politics that too many in the drug recovery movement are prone to.
Hi Elissa- Am I presenting a particular bias? We all are and obviously writers take a position from which they write. Is someone going to take exception with my views? Probably! And that’s ok and the point of opening up a hopefully expansive discussion. The whole point of my article was to wonder why we couldn’t have more conversation that’s inclusive of differing sexual views from our own, so perhaps your comment illustrates exactly what I meant. You see me as biased and practicing “extreme rhetoric” and therefore, not someone to be taken seriously. That’s the kind of put-down that… Read more »
Lili – to have a fruitful conversation I need to understand your base assumptions and beliefs. If you believe that sex positivism is a movement that grants “carte blanche” to “any and all sex acts / sexual lifestyles” – these are your words, no? – then I don’t think you are qualified to be having this conversation – want to be very frank with you. You can certainly hold those beliefs, but I cannot oblige them in a discussion. If an analogy helps – I would not have a geology discussion with someone who believed the earth is 2000 years… Read more »
Elissa, please explain what sex-positivism to me if not carte blanche approval of any/all sexual acts. Please tell me where the discernment exists both on an individual level and as a culture.
This is a genuine request so that I can understand.
Thank you.
Thank you Terre and Lili! I too would like to know what Elissa means by sex-positive. I think its fascinating that people take a writer’s article so personally when they are clearly not addressing one reader. If Elissa had followed any of Lili’s other articles on GMP she’d know that there were quite a few readers/commenters who did have an “everything but the kitchen sink…Wait! Throw the sink in too, what the hey” attitude about sexual conduct and outside of anyone actually admitting pedophilia or bestiality (no bestiality might have been been on the ok list as well for some… Read more »
I can’t answer for Elissa but I know a lot of women and men in the sex positive community and boundaries and consent and ethics play a HUGE role. At least in the communities I run with. Things like….don’t be drunk and high if you are trying to negotiate a scene, things like if you are poly then everyone meets each other, things like group policing of people who behave in date-rapey ways. I’ve rarely seen a “fuck all the rules” POV, though I have seen a lot of questioning of rules. In the sex pos system you’ll have people… Read more »
What is this text speak? FWIW – For What Its Worth, YMMV – what does that stand for “Your Monkey May Vote?” All the acronyms aside, that’s great to hear that the various communities you belong to actually adhere to boundaries and are somewhat cerebral about their proclivities. As long as no stones are thrown at those who don’t embrace the same style of intimate physical relationships. Just as those who consider themselves “sex positive” don’t want to be labeled as freaks, nymphos, sluts, sex addicts, etc., monogamous people who prefer to only have one long-term partner or spouse without… Read more »
YMMV means (I think) Your Mileage May Vary. At least that’s what it means in the circles I’ve travelled in.
I haven’t called you Sex Negative, Maia. And most of the folks I know who consider themselves Sex Positive have boundaries. It isn’t some kind of thoughtless ravening all day all night orgy 😉 Do people really think that’s what sex positive communities are like? Got the porn going 24/7 and predating on hot bi babes every chance we get? Cause it isn’t, in my experience. It’s people wanting to design better relationships for themselves, and yes, have more pleasure in general after being brought up in a world that tells them pleasure is suspect. Many of my friends are… Read more »
Well I’m relieved to see that there are those in the sex positive community who are mindful and have thought out their decisions. That’s great and really good to know! It’s when people are not aware of collateral damage that it becomes an issue to review more closely. As long as there are no hard feelings; that no one gets hurt at the end of the day and everyone who enters into the “arrangement” knows what the score is then there’s little to discuss. Again, and if this doesn’t apply to you, you need not feel pressured to respond- there… Read more »
“As I’d stated in a previous response, there are a lot of people who are taking what they’re reading quite personally. No one is sleeping under your bed (I hope,) no one is spying into your sex life (if they are you have more important issues than reading or writing here) and if people are judging you on an online forum, you don’t know them so why do you even care? ” It’s funny that you say that. Are you aware of the many laws against things like homosexuality, oral sex, fornication (sex between unmarried people) and sex toys? Are… Read more »
The current media (including porn) treatment of sex is what Marcuse called repressive desublimation. You sell the surface, but repress in essence. Still, I think we’re currently in an intensely sex negative time. I’m reading Sex at Dawn, which says that women’s repression of their natural eroticism is quite understandable due to the non-support and non-safety coming from patriarchy. We’ve 8,000 years of evolved institutions that have developed to do just that. I disagree with radical feminism, however, because the approach to male sexuality is often very sexist.
Lili – when you believe and say things like the following just below, it makes it very difficult to take you seriously. Your bias is overwhelming. If you truly want to foster open conversation, then I would suggest you tone down the extreme rhetoric.
“To me, it comes across as a movement that just grants carte blanche to any and all sex acts/ sexual lifestyles and the only real issue seems to be, well, if you have an issue with any of it.”
You’re also right, Wet One, that this should be an interesting discussion. I predict myself getting pissed off a lot and agreeing with radicals occasionally just to get a word of agreement in. The article really did bring to my attention that the sex-positive movement also brings with it the implication that people who don’t completely agree are “negative.” I’m not actually sure how to deal with that yet. This quote particularly makes me wonder: “And as you’re pointing out, when especially women in contemporary culture resist the pornographic nature of this culture, by saying, “I don’t want to replicate… Read more »
Really quickly, I have to say that recently, feminists say sex absolutely does not equal rape. Sex is a CONSENSUAL, usually fun, sometimes awkward act that can be done for love, pleasure, to cure boredom, make the most of a relationship, alleviate boredom, make a baby, etc… Rape, on the other hand, is a violent act about power and humiliation. I’ve written it somewhere else, but that’s why soldiers in Bosnia and Libya were ORDERED to rape their enemies, why women in the Middle East are raped so that someone can get back at the victim’s fathers or brothers, why… Read more »
Interesting discussion for sure. Should be plenty of head scratchers, outrageous hilarity, inanity and idiocy coming up in the next little while (re: the upcoming posts). I look forward to it with relish!