Reading the Hugo’s post and the comments on the Enemies of Eros (or whatever the pretentious title was) made me realize just how sick the men we’re dealing with are.
For context, I provided on that thread a pretty detailed summary of my sex life. I wanted to demonstrate that it is possible to have heterosexual sex that doesn’t end or even center around intercourse, mostly for the benefit of straight women who feel like they just have to accept it as “part of” sex, even though for most “foreplay” is the most enjoyable part. Secondly, I wanted to see how they’d respond to the lived experience of someone (me) who belongs to a group demonized as anti-sex and anti-male. Would they ignore it, call me a liar, or realize that radical feminism has never been against sex and that its portrayal as such is a simply a lie used to dismiss it? As most could guess, the latter never happened.
The men on that Hugo thread completely ignored my hobbies and anecdotes about my sex life. My sexuality clearly was still unhealthy, because I’m experiencing “anxiety” about intercourse and don’t want to have it. Men never take the female sexuality seriously, unless it’s pleasing to them (see their rationalizations on burlesque/”sex work”). To men, female sexuality requires fucking, because we’re voids just waiting to be filled. If you don’t want to be fucked, you must be a lesbian or a prude.
But, I think that the complaint is not just that we’re against intercourse, judging by their comments and portrayal of me. It’s that we’re setting a boundary-a sexual boundary, at that- that cannot be crossed. We’re saying no, and for that they call us mentally ill. Men have pathologized “frigid” women over the years, as well as demonized those who have sex on their own terms, via masturbation or lesbianism.
No doesn’t mean no, of course-it means we’re immature, we have “anxiety” about intercourse that we shouldn’t have. And instead of dealing with it, by taking hormone-altering substances for the rest of our lives, we’re simply saying no. This is unacceptable.
One person (who also called me an idiot yet was not banned-nice “no attacking people” policy, liverlips) suggested that I and other women who are against intercourse are in need of sex ed, where we would learn how to “negotiate” with our partner and have “healthy sex.” Firstly, it’s mansplaining to the nth degree to suggest that a woman needs sex ed when she clearly knows what she wants and uses the terminology related to sex better than most. (Most importantly, that heterosexual sex != intercourse.) It also suggests that refusing intercourse is simply a product of ignorance-that is, if you knew how to “have sex,” you’d want intercourse. When in fact, the information taught in heteronormative sex ed- about contraceptives, STD risk, and damage control (aka the morning after pill and abortions) are precisely the reasons some radical feminists want to forego intercourse.
We’re supposed to have “negotiation” in our sex lives, as if our bodies were some kind of thing we can trade and agree to use. I doubt it’s a coincidence the first things that come to mind when I think of “negotiation” are car sales and hostage negotiation. Women are not allowed to enter sex with a clear boundary, as I was doing-to do so means you’re messed up or immature.
From this, negotiation seems to not mean, “talk about what you like and don’t like, and then do the only the former.” The only other thing it could mean, as far as I can gather, is being willing to change your mind-that is, be willing to let him “test” your boundaries,* or eventually give your “consent.” This is hardly surprising when you consider how far men will stretch the concept of “consent”: there have been studies (too lazy to find them now) that show even convicted rapists think the “sex” they had with their victim was consensual.
While these “feminists” will argue till they’re blue in the face that you can chose to be fucked using your “agency,” you can’t chose to not be fucked using your agency. If you chose to not be fucked, you’re brainwashed by radical feminist philosophy or conservatism.
This dynamic is especially interesting considering that they argue the culture and upbringing in a world drenched in misogyny and rape has no influence on their choices, or the choices of most people. Obviously, this would suggest that radical feminists somehow have far more influence than the dominant culture and media, since we are allegedly able to influence choices while society does not. Which is a laughable idea, since even the majority of feminists shun us.
Lastly, I’d like to say that, as lame and nerdy as it might sound, fanfiction is a major part of my sexuality. And I have a feeling the reason it’s ignored, stigmatized and mocked is because the primary authors and readers are women.
Really, what’s more sexually messed up: requiring female risk for sex, or foregoing activities that require female risk?
*This is a common thing in bondage, often outright called “pushing one’s boundaries,” more often/specifically pain tolerance, and is often considered an essential part of “good” BDSM. And this is a very large part of D/s relationships, from my understanding, especially when “training” (ew) is involved.
PS: Sorry this first post after a long break kinda sucks.