Previous post
Feminists just love telling teen girls to have sex. In their mind, teenage girls are women adult and mature enough to make decisions regarding their own body, and as long as they’re “safe”, then hey — do what you want and don’t let anyone tell you otherwise! Emotional consequences be damned!
A Dear Abby column incurred the latest feminist wrath:
DEAR ABBY: My boyfriend “Adam” and I are high school seniors. We have been serious for only three months, but we’ve been dating for more than a year. He is sexually experienced, but I am not — I’m still the “Big V.”
On prom night, I want Adam to be my “first,” but because I have been disappointed in the past, I don’t want to be left heartbroken. I love Adam with all my heart — he’s all I want in a guy. But I feel torn about what to do. Should I go ahead and “seize the day”? Or should I make him wait? Please help! — TEEN GIRL IN THE GAMBLING STATE
DEAR TEEN GIRL: Your boyfriend may be a wonderful person, but to lose your virginity simply to celebrate prom night is not a mature decision. Sex carries with it responsibilities — and can result in unplanned “surprises,” as the following letter shows. Read on:
The letter Abby included was from a 32-year-old woman who was an A student and accepted into two Ivy League colleges. She got pregnant, and kept the baby. She married the father. All this time later, they are still together with two more children but she explains that they had a very hard time getting to where they are now. They had extreme financial problems, almost ended their marriage, and she felt her dreams were shattered. She made the point that children were precious blessings, but that you shouldn’t waste your youth, and that children deserve parents who can give them what they need.
The feminist, of course, blows it all off. If only the woman in the cautionary letter had known about contraception, see, she could’ve had sex and been happy.
I’ll spare you having to read the whole the letter which is about a young woman who gets pregnant in high school, marries the father, has the baby, gives up an education at a prestigious university, basically feels she threw away her life. This cautionary Afterschool Special tale is, I guess, meant to impress upon TGITGS the utter irresponsibility of having sex with her boyfriend. See what happened to that other girl when she had sex??
OK. There are many reasons not to have sex, especially if it’s because of pressure from someone else. And lots of people have less than magical first times, although it does get a whole lot better. But Abby’s answer is right out of 1950s.
Dear, dear Abby: I hear there are things out there called contraceptives. I’m not exactly sure what they are since our school won’t teach us about them, and advice columns won’t talk about them either. But rumor has it that I can have sex and not get pregnant if I use them properly. Not only that, there are also some pretty good ways to protect me from STDs. Why are you keeping them a secret? When did you join the abstinence lobby?
If TGITGS loves and trusts her boyfriend and wants to see what all the fuss is about sex-wise, the advice Abby should give is “If you’re going to have sex, protect yourself from pregnancy and STDs, so you don’t end up forced into a life, any life, you didn’t choose.”
Apparently, having sex as a young teenage girl is A-OK as long as you don’t get pregnant. Feminists rarely ever even mention STDs, and when they do, it’s usually as an afterthought (like the feminist did above). Protection from STDs is like a side bonus of birth control. Pregnancy’s the real thing they want to avoid. So as long as you can keep from getting pregnant, then hey — have sex! It doesn’t matter if you’ve only been dating the boy three months. It doesn’t matter if he has much more experience than you. It doesn’t even matter that there’s a good chance that you’ll lose your virginity to him and then have your heart broken and your innocence lost.
Feminists never consider the emotion repercussions of young teenagers having sex. Time and time again, studies have shown that most teenagers who have sex at a young age go on to regret it. They also go on to have higher rates of depression and more suicidal tendencies. If a girl gets pregnant, she’s also more likely to live in poverty and be on welfare. Feminists will undoubtedly twist what I’m saying and call me a hypocrite (hell, they already have). Let me be clear: I am not now, nor have I ever said, that the only good sex is sex after you are married. I do believe, however, that it is in teenagers’ own best interests to wait until they are older and mature enough to make the right decision about who they have sex with. Giving it up to anyone who catches your fancy as long as you’re “safe” — which feminists assure women over and over again is OK to do — is not smart and it’s not healthy. It can have devastating physical and emotional consequences.
Oh, and about contraception? Despite what feminists like to claim, using The Pill and a condom is not foolproof. I have personally known people who have gotten pregnant while using both before. Contraceptives are not 100% safe, even when used correctly. There is still the tiniest chance they will fail, and that’s if there’s no accidents in using them. When you factor in regular old human errors, there’s an even bigger chance they’ll fail. I’m not saying this to discourage anyone from using protection, but making girls feel like sex is perfectly safe and healthy as long as you roll on a rubber and pop a pill is a lie. And it’s doing girls a disservice.
Abby gave this teenage girl good advice. Leave it to a feminist to twist it around into something completely different, and suggest a potentially devastating alternative for a young girl instead of what is in her best interest.
Typical.
You know,
I never really did get that concept. Feminists don’t really like men, it’s obvious in their posts online and in their literature, but they go out of their way to act like total skanks. I do find that rather ironic and highly amusing…
Mat: it’s almost like they are objectifying men and using them for sexual pleasure – the very thing that they detest so in men. As I’ve pointed out, modern “feminism” isn’t so much about making an egalitarian, just society so much as changing oppressors.
K. Iss. says: Ahhhhaaahahaha. Never mind Cassie, one day some man will want to bone you too. And then you’ll be able to be an anti-feminist and say no!
Rob says: K. Iss.
What an intelligent thing to say. “I don’t like your argument so I’m going to call you ugly!” While I wouldn’t describe it as wanting to “bone” her, I find Cassie to be quite attractive. If you don’t like what she has to say or her views, why are you here reading?
Andy says: Mat,
I don’t really think its that ironic. When women sleep around, they just reduce men to living dildoes, which is completely consisted with their hatred of men. Feminists hate the idea of man as a protector and provider, and want to just reduce him to a sex object in the same way a male womanizer objectifies women.
What I believe is ironic is how feminists are always complaining about rape and abuse. This stuff happens when women hang out with moral-less men who don’t mind being treated as sex objects.
Well said, Andy.
Cassy, I wonder what Jessica at Feministing has to say about this (no, not really). I recall you and I were singled out for her ritual lashing-out after we dared to infer what her new book might be about, from the title that, like any other book title, was clearly selected to produce inferences about what the book might be about. And yet you don’t have to skim that “flog” for very long, or any other, to figure out they want any copulation that might happen — along with any abortion — to actually happen.
I find the current- and likely future-environment for young women to be toxic. It’s gone beyond the “if it feels good, do it” mentality. Not only has it turned men into flesh dildos, as Andy mentioned, it’s also turned women into objects whose sole purpose in life is to provide a receptacle for some man. Any man. As many men as can fit in there, apparently.
The problem goes back years. I’ll bore you with an example from one of the first two seasons of Friends. In this story arc, Joey is dating Phoebe’s twin sister Ursula. When Phoebe expressed some misgivings, Rachel made the following comment:
“They’re not serious. They haven’t even slept together yet.”
Yet. Yet. As if the act of penis-vagina penetration is all that makes a relationship serious. No mention of emotional commitment or support of any kind. Instead, the seriousness of a relationship is reduced to essentially a one night stand, or a series of one night stands.T
Urk. Hit enter when I wasn’t looking. To finish my thought:
When you reduce the unbelievable emotional complexities of a serious relationship to a physical act on par, you exhibit a shallowness that frog ponds everywhere would envy. I find it troubling and not conducive to a healthy society.
Scott says: Feminists invented and have forced society to accept the phony concept of “reproductive rights”. Its the girl/woman’s body. If she wants to experiment with sex it’s her choice. And if she accidently gets pregnant she has the choice of either being responsible for the life she created or she can choose to kill it before it’s born.
It’s all about her rights to do with her body what she wants. It’s so liberating. I was somewhat amazed the feminist didn’t suggest abortion is also an option.
Melinda P says: The question they all fail to ask or answer is, what happens when these same women who have had sex with every man possilbe get an STD? Then what happens to their chances of ever having children? See the feminists forget that abstinence is good. Not sleeping around with everyone lessens your chances of becoming infertile because of an STD. All they care about is getting as much as they can from the men they meet. Is it any wonder teenage girls and boys are so confused today?
Melinda,
To add to that: what happens if you get herpes when you are 17 because you are young, silly, think you are in love, and no one tells you to wait? Years later, in your 30s, you meet someone that you want to marry, but explain that you have some horrible, incurable STD that you’ll likely pass on to him.
Brilliant.
Roxeanne and Andy,
It’s not almost, it’s definitely a “use” thing. However, my point in the irony (and I should have explained it better, but I was leaving work, so I wrote it quickly) is that feminists tell women they don’t need men. They just need to be with other women. A good portion of the feminist ideology also advocates lesbianism (i.e. by choice, which has nothing to do with genetics), so why they would advocate that and still hang around guys is, in fact, pretty bizarre.
Also Roxeanne, your point about STDs is valid. I read a report the other day that said 1/4 of all women in this country have some sort of STD. Not exactly encouraging…
Al says: I’m torn. As a man that was once a teenager who really liked sex with girls, I found the ones that said “they were waiting” to be the most hypocritical of all. In fact, the ones that did wait said they regreted waiting so long. It didn’t make their marraiges any better either. Of all the people, the girl in my class with the slutty rep is the one who has had the longest lasting marriage!
Who knows. But the feminists that I know do promote contraceptives as STD prevention. It might just depend on where you are.
Al,
Just because someone has “the urge” doesn’t necessarily mean that one should follow through on it.
Secondly, as Cassy pointed out, you can use contraceptives, but that doesn’t guarantee you’ll avoid getting and STD. Like I said, 1/4 of the young women in this country have had some form of STD already, so obviously something doesn’t really compute with the feminist message. And why would I want to risk getting something from one of them? With 1/4 it’s kind of a crapshoot…
who really liked sex with girls
Huh. I’ll simply channel Roger Staubach from an interview that I once saw. He was replying to a comment about Joe Namath:
“I enjoy sex just as much as Joe Namath. I’m just doing it with one person.”
Tori says: There are just so many misconceptions about feminism in this blog and its comments that I feel like I have no choice but to respond.
Firstly, feminism does NOT encourage girls to sleep around with as many men as they can. It encourages young people (and all people) to not be ashamed of their sexuality and desires, whether they want to have a variety of partners, just the one in their lifetime, none at all, or any number in between. Most importantly, it emphasises the necessity of being comfortable with one’s own body and sexuality. Girls (and boys) should not be shamed for having sex as a teen, just as they should not be shamed for waiting until they are in a long-term, committed relationship (be that a marraige or otherwise). Having sex because you’re being pressured by culture or a partner has negative emotional consequences just as waiting until marraige because you’re scared of the physical consequences of sex can have emotional repercussions. Feminism is about taking control of your own body and sexuality, and not letting anyone else tell you that you are dirty, slutty, frigid, or just plain wrong.
Secondly, feminism is NOT about objectifying men. It does not seek to take away the rights of men or to initiate some kind of revenge oppression. It advocates equality, open communication and the examination of societal gender norms. Feminism helps men in this way, and encourages them to step away from the hegemonic masculinity they are presented with and to not be afraid of emotion and perceived ‘weakness’. It asks us all to take a look around, take responsibility for ourselves and for our actions, and to create a better world in which no one is judged, excluded, placed into a box, restricted or harrassed because of their gender. It is not as simple as women are one way and men are the other – women and men are the same in that they are all different. Not all men want to have sex all the time and not all women want to avoid it. Feminism is understanding this and not demanding that a young person have sex now or wait until they are married simply because that is what their culture (or gender) says is supposed to happen.
As far as STDs and accidental pregnancies go: these usually occur because of a lack of education. Schools that preach abstinence-only do NOT help the kids that don’t want to wait. Time has shown that teens who have abstinence-only education are the ones that end up with STDs and accidental pregnancy because no-one taught them how to use contraceptives properly or even how STDs and pregnancy really happen. Bristol Palin, anyone? Young people need to be taught about all these things, but most importantly they need to be taught to only do what feels right for them. They need to understand that you should not have sex because it seems like you have to, and that you should not wait and wait because it seems like you have to. Comprehensive sex education is the only way to let young people be comfortable with their sexuality, no matter how they choose to express it.
In conclusion, you cannot shut up a woman by calling her a lesbian. Yes, lesbians exist, and yes, some lesbians are feminists, and yes, some feminists are lesbians, but you cannot ignore the large portion of feminists are heterosexual women (many of whom are in fulfilling relationships with men). Feminists are NOT man-haters. In fact, one recent study has shown that women who identify as feminists have LESS hateful feelings towards men than women who DON’T identity as feminists. One explanation for this would be that women who don’t identity as feminists are more likely to accept and adopt the gender norms that label them as inferior to men.
People, feminism is not a dirty word. Feminists are not trying to castrate you or turn you into sluts. They only want you to be comfortable with yourself, and to question forces that try to make you uncomfortable. I highly recommend books like Ariel Levy’s ‘Female Chauvinist Pigs: Women and the Rise of Raunch Culture’, Betty Friedan’s ‘The Feminine Mystique’, or just popping over to jezebel.com if you’re interested in debunking stereotypes.
Thankyou.
Red T says: Wow, Cassy, she’s a genius, eh? Ways to ensure you won’t get pregnant?
Oh Dear, dear Feminist Honey,
My first child was conceived when we used a condom. Yes, the right way. My second child was conceived when I was on the pill. No, I didn’t skip any days.
And I KNOW you were not just trying to say that there are contraceptives that can keep you from getting every STD out there…
because that would be stupid.
Sincerely,
Me
It’s natural for people to have sexual desires. We would be so much better off if people could be comfortable with their natural sexuality. If you want to have sex, just do it, and don’t listen to anyone who tries to preach to you about how this is “wrong”.
It’s natural for people to want material things. We would be so much better off if people could be comfortable with their natural greed. If you want something that you can’t afford, just steal it, and don’t listen to anyone who tries to preach to you about how this is “wrong”.
It’s natural for people to feel anger. We would be so much better off if people could be comfortable with their natural emotions. If you want to beat someone up or kill them, just do it, and don’t listen to anyone who tries to preach to you about how this is “wrong”.
Funny how #2 and #3 don’t sound as persuasive as #1. Oh well, give it time, I’m sure society will come around to those also.
Tori,
“There are just so many misconceptions about feminism in this blog and its comments that I feel like I have no choice but to respond.”
Well go ahead and respond. As for choice, well, there’s always a choice. But since you’re a feminist, you’ll shoot your mouth off and I’ll “choose” to respond to this “response.” (yeah, this is going to be a long one…)
“Firstly, feminism does NOT encourage girls to sleep around with as many men as they can…”
Yes, actually, it does. I think Jessica Valenti, among others, have made this point quite clear at Feministing…
“It encourages young people (and all people) to not be ashamed of their sexuality and desires, whether they want to have a variety of partners, just the one in their lifetime, none at all, or any number in between.”
So how is this exactly not encouraging girls to sleep around again?
Seriously, re-read your sentence.
“Most importantly, it emphasises the necessity of being comfortable with one’s own body and sexuality. Girls (and boys) should not be shamed for having sex as a teen, just as they should not be shamed for waiting until they are in a long-term, committed relationship (be that a marraige or otherwise).”
Again, I think it’s the idea of just sleeping around whenever you feel like it that has people riled up. For example, why would I honestly trust someone who’s slept around with 20 different guys in her lifetime before she meets me (yes, this is very hypothetical). In contrast, why would any woman want to be with a guy who does the same (think STDs)? That, to me, just smacks of gross indiscipline. We’re human, which means we actually have the means of controlling ourselves. Otherwise, that makes us no different than many in the animal kingdom. BTW, if someone’s “comfortable” with screwing goats, does that fall under your idea of “hey, it’s all good?” Because, personally, I think that’s a bit bizarre.
“Having sex because you’re being pressured by culture or a partner has negative emotional consequences just as waiting until marraige because you’re scared of the physical consequences of sex can have emotional repercussions.”
As can just getting laid for the hell of it. You can’t make the argument for “emotional repercussions” and not have it apply conversely. Besides, aren’t feminists, in a fashion, “pressuring” girsl to have sex? It seems to me that you don’t have an issue with pressure in general, just who’s doing the pressuring.
“Feminism is about taking control of your own body and sexuality, and not letting anyone else tell you that you are dirty, slutty, frigid, or just plain wrong.”
Fine, and I have the right to say someone’s a slut. Up to this point, you really haven’t convinced me of anything other than the idea that you love gross irresponsibility. Can’t say that I’m shocked by this. This is a typical feminist mantra.
Let me give you a real example of how idiotic your argument is at this point. Back in the 80’s, San Francisco had a shitload of gay bathhouses. Then AIDs came. The authorities wanted the bathhouses shut down because it was a literal petri dish for AIDS. The gays refused because it went against their “rights.” The bathhouses stayed open and many, many gays died because they were totally irresponsibile. You want the right to sleep around all over? Fine, but don’t expect me to pay the medical bills through taxes because of your irresponsibility. And don’t be surprised if I don’t want to be around a woman because it’s an effing crapshoot as to whether they have an STD (1/4 of young women today have an STD…that’s rather high, wouldn’t you say?). Sorry, but I don’t feel like getting herpes because you say, it’s a-ok.
“Secondly, feminism is NOT about objectifying men.”
Um, yeah it does.
“It does not seek to take away the rights of men or to initiate some kind of revenge oppression.”
Yeah, next time I read a feminist article in a journal who makes the statement of “I wishing we can engineer men to have kids so that I can actually work normally (this was a nuclear engineer, BTW),” I’ll remember this. Again, you can say what you want, but the wealth of feminist blogs, journals and books suggest otherwise.
“It advocates equality, open communication and the examination of societal gender norms.”
Open communication such as:
Woman: I can say anything I want without fear of punishment.
Man: Me too.
Woman: I’m suing.
Trust me, I had an ex-friend who was a feminist who told me that I couldn’t say things just because I happened to be a white male while women could. Because I just couldn’t (this was her explanation, BTW).
Feminism helps men in this way, and encourages them to step away from the hegemonic masculinity they are presented with and to not be afraid of emotion and perceived ‘weakness’.”
Huh, what??? Are you freaking serious? Ok, so you’re seriously implying that I need help because I’m a guy? Really? Wow, and you say men are arrogant? Hegemonic masculinity, eh? That’s pretty rich. To be honest, I kinda like not being a weepy-eyed girly man/eunuch.
“It asks us all to take a look around, take responsibility for ourselves and for our actions, and to create a better world in which no one is judged, excluded, placed into a box, restricted or harrassed because of their gender.”
And yet, in your last paragraph, you were totally against all irresponsibility because of your “hey, if it feels good, just do it, to hell with the consequences.” That’s irresponsibility. When an entire gender can just say, “fuck it, I’ll just do what I want because I just want to do it and to hell with the overall consequences,” then that’s about as far from responsibility as you can get. As for judging, weren’t you doing that a monet ago because I’m part of some “hegemonic masculinity?” Sorry sweetie, but that’s being judgmental.
“It is not as simple as women are one way and men are the other – women and men are the same in that they are all different. Not all men want to have sex all the time and not all women want to avoid it.”
Well, yes they are. Women, and women alone, have the ability to have kids. Men don’t. That’s just a cold hard fact. That simple biological function alone (if it can be called simple) makes men and women inherently different. There are inherent similiarities among the genders that you cannot simple wave a magic social rod and make them go away.
“Feminism is understanding this and not demanding that a young person have sex now or wait until they are married simply because that is what their culture (or gender) says is supposed to happen.”
Yeah, I’m beginning to understand that feminism doesn’t seem to understand very much that is logical. Again, your judgement is showing when you mention “gender” in an offhand way. I think we both know what that implies. I thought we weren’t supposed to be judgmental or something like that?
“As far as STDs and accidental pregnancies go: these usually occur because of a lack of education. Schools that preach abstinence-only do NOT help the kids that don’t want to wait.”
How many public schools teach abstinence again? Hey, you’re the one advocating sleeping around whenever the mood takes you. You think the fact that 1/4 of girls having STDs is merely a coincidence? Think patterns…
“Time has shown that teens who have abstinence-only education are the ones that end up with STDs and accidental pregnancy because no-one taught them how to use contraceptives properly or even how STDs and pregnancy really happen. Bristol Palin, anyone?”
Um, Bristol Palin went to a public school I believe and I’m pretty sure they didn’t teach abstinence, so I’m not sure how this relates to yuor argument. Yes, people will have sex. However, contraceptives do not eliminate completely the possibility of getting pregnant, much less get STDs.
“Young people need to be taught about all these things, but most importantly they need to be taught to only do what feels right for them.”
That’s kinda the problem isn’t it? Again, this notion of “just do whatever you want,” you keep talking about seems pretty childish. Where is the responsibility in all of this? And if someone gets pregnant or gets and STD, what then? You really don’t sound like an adult.
“They need to understand that you should not have sex because it seems like you have to, and that you should not wait and wait because it seems like you have to. Comprehensive sex education is the only way to let young people be comfortable with their sexuality, no matter how they choose to express it.”
Um, young people generally don’t understand much. That’s because they’re freaking KIDS. They don’t have the same life experiences that an older person doee. To paraphrase a blogger who wrote about a similar subject, your notion is akin to going to a toy store, handing a 5 year-old $50 and then tell him to shop responsibly. Kids (both boys and girls) go through a serious hormonal surge in their teens. They don’t know any better. But they have (supposedly) parents who should keep them in check. What you’re advocating is that we should all just revert to total animal instinct. Sorry, but I think humanity is a bit higher than just the Freudian Id.
“In conclusion, you cannot shut up a woman by calling her a lesbian.”
Um, whereever in my post did I say that a lesbian should shut up? I said that feminism does advocate lesbianism (which it does). That’s a fact. You can’t deny that. What I said is that feminists push women to stay away from men and instead have sex with women (more of that girl-power, I guess). So perhaps maybe being gay isn’t so much genetics as it is choice (or both). In that case, I think we really need to take a good hard look at ourselves.
“Yes, lesbians exist, and yes, some lesbians are feminists, and yes, some feminists are lesbians, but you cannot ignore the large portion of feminists are heterosexual women (many of whom are in fulfilling relationships with men).”
True, but again, many do advocate lesbianism to further cement this odd idea of “sisterhood.”
“Feminists are NOT man-haters.”
Yeah, I’ll remember that next time I go on Feministing or some other blog…
“In fact, one recent study has shown that women who identify as feminists have LESS hateful feelings towards men than women who DON’T identity as feminists.”
Ah, so they’re merely LESS hateful? Wow, that makes me feel a whole lot better. I think I can kinda explain this. Feminists think men are shit, so they just hate them. It’s a gender-thing, you know? However, feminists cannot fathom why some women would not be feminists. That is the highest form of treason there is. Therefore, you really didn’t help your argument much with this statement.
“One explanation for this would be that women who don’t identity as feminists are more likely to accept and adopt the gender norms that label them as inferior to men.”
Well, I…suppose…you could look at it that way. Or… Personally, most non-feminist women I know just want to get on with their lives. As far as I can tell, they don’t feel one bit inferior to men (nor should they). BTW, my own cousin is one of these and she’s a fire chief in a department in Illinois. Trust me, she’s quite capable of doing her job and she doesn’t act like a first class psycho-bitch about it.
“People, feminism is not a dirty word.”
No, merely dumb.
“Feminists are not trying to castrate you or turn you into sluts.”
Read above.
“They only want you to be comfortable with yourself, and to question forces that try to make you uncomfortable.”
And those forces are, what? Can anyone guess? Yes, the male patriarchy. Thank you all, and I’ll be here all night!
“I highly recommend books like Ariel Levy’s ‘Female Chauvinist Pigs: Women and the Rise of Raunch Culture’, Betty Friedan’s ‘The Feminine Mystique’, or just popping over to jezebel.com if you’re interested in debunking stereotypes.”
Actually I read both of those books and they pretty much confirm what I just wrote. BTW, Friedan was a bit of lying psycho who said a lot of things about her own life that weren’t true (and later on admitted such) But thanks for stopping by.
Tori says: Mat, thanks for taking the time to respond to my comment with your misreadings and less-than-sound arguments. Let’s get into it, shall we?
My favourite part was that although I never identified myself as a feminist, and you repeatedly accused me of being judgmental, you assumed that I was and immediately made an offensive comment about feminists shooting their mouths off. I’m sorry that you chose to lower the tone of what could have been a civilized discussion, but I’ll try to extend to you the courtesy of respect that you failed to extend to me.
It seems as though you read my advocacy of comfort with one’s own sexuality as an advocacy of everyone getting it on as much as they can. That is most certainly not what I said. Have another read of the sentence:
“It encourages young people (and all people) to not be ashamed of their sexuality and desires, whether they want to have a variety of partners, just the one in their lifetime, none at all, or any number in between.”
Here I acknowledged a range of desires: from those with large, varied sexual appetites, to those who only desired one partner in their lifetime, to asexuals. Obviously, promiscuity can come with a number of health consequences, so let’s discuss that.
As far as your comments about irresponsibility and indiscipline go, having multiple sexual partners is only irresponsible if you are irresponsible about it. The wise thing to do, if you’re going to do this, is always for you and your new partner to get tested for STDs before engaging in sexual activity. This way you know what you’re getting yourself into if you choose to forge ahead. As I stated before, not everyone desires this kind of lifestyle, and so safety from STDs and accidental pregnancy come easier for those who are not promiscuous.
As for your ridiculous goat comment, obiviously a goat cannot consent to intercourse. If you were so driven by a desire to have sex with a goat that you actually went and did it, you would be raping a goat. And that’s a crime.
Once again, you got it wrong when you responded to this comment of mine:
“Having sex because you’re being pressured by culture or a partner has negative emotional consequences just as waiting until marraige because you’re scared of the physical consequences of sex can have emotional repercussions.”
I think you may have missed the first part of the sentence. Absolutely getting laid for the hell of it has emotional consequences. Especially when being pressured. The whole culture around male virginity (and the pressure to lose it) is a huge problem, but that seems like another discussion for another day. I wouldn’t say that feminists, particularly, are pressuring girls to have sex when they don’t want to (and I’m sure they’d be upset if that was the message girls were getting from them), but there are certainly forces that do, notably the popular media. I absolutely have a problem with pressuring, from both sides, and have experienced them both in my lifetime. I have found, in my years of reading, researching and exploring, that feminism, at its core, is about fighting the forces that pressure you, and forging your own path, always mindful for the rights of others. Maybe some of the movement have diverged from this message (as happens in a lot of movements), but the bulk of feminist thought centres around this right to autonomy.
As for your AIDs comment, I’m not 100% up on my 80s AIDs knowledge, but from what you mentioned it seemed like the bulk of that spread happened because of a lack of education about the disease. Because of their long history of oppression I imagine the bathhouses would have had an emotional significance with the gay community, but yes, a health hazard is a health hazard and everyone today can see that with the power of hindsight.
The STD rate? If that is correct then yes, it is very high. The solution? Education. I cannot press that point enough. Get tested and get your partner tested. Find out what STDs are covered by contraception. Use contraception. If you’re not willing to do all these things and don’t want to risk infection, then it’s best to just not have sex. That’s what needs to be taught.
Objectifying men? Where’s your evidence? I need better than a “does too!” type comment to take your argument seriously.
As is always the case, there are a few people that just ruin it for everybody else. As I tell my brother “I’m not hating on you, you’re a good person. I’m hating on the patriachal system”. Just as there are sexist men that perpetuate the patriachy, there are sexist women who bitterly rage against it. Those few voices do not speak for the entirety of feminism and women, just as those male voices do not speak for the entirety of men.
It is always confusing to be the member of a historically oppressive group when you yourself do not share those ideals. For example, I am a white woman and I have to deal with the history of racist behaviours that white people have used against other racial groups. I am not racist, but because of my racial identity the language that I use will be scrutinized. The same thing applies for gender. Although it is a highly complex issue that seems to be made up largely of a grey area, open communication does not allow for sexism against men, as you suggest it does.
You grossly misread my comment about hegemonic masculinity. My point was that men are presented, as boys, with a very narrow (hegemonic) definition of what it means to be a man. They are taught that to be a man you must be strong, confident, successful, assertive, dominant and in complete control of your emotions (no crying allowed). While some men are like this, a significant portion aren’t. My point was that feminism works to break down gender divides in terms of what behaviours and personality traits make a man or a woman. It tells women that they don’t have to be passive, fragile, emotional and submissive, and tells men they don’t have to conform to the traits I previously listed. This is how it helps men. It lets them be free to be who they are, whoever that may be, too. (ps. I never, ever said men were arrogant.)
For your essentialist gender divisions, yes, females have vaginas and males have penises. But sexual organs do not dominate and control our personalities. Gender (women and men) as we understand it today IS socially constructed – femininity and masculinity are not inherently female and male, they are created and perpetuated socially. Judith Butler’s ‘Gender Trouble’ is a great read for that one. Transgender people are the living proof of these social constructions.
As for the rest, I feel like this comment has gone on far too long already, but I’ll try to quickly mention some more before I have to dash off to work.
I think you have grossly underestimated the intelligence of young people (who are significantly older than the kids you mentioned getting money from their parents in a toy store), and when they’re educated they CAN understand issues. It seems adults would rather shut them up than hear their opinions.
Feminism does not ‘advocate lesbianism’ in the sense that it sees it as some kind of preferable lifestyle choice. Being gay is NOT a choice, and feminism understands this, and accepts lesbians, bisexuals, and heterosexuals alike into the fold. Maybe in the 70s experimenting with lesbianism was just a part of the movement, but today it is about strong, supportive friendships.
Perhaps I didn’t word the information about the study correctly. In general, women did not harbour sexist attitudes and resentment towards men, but amongst those that did, the majority were women that did not identify as feminist.
I think a lot of women don’t call themselves feminists because they are afraid to be associated with the movement (which has been demonized in the popular media). A lot of women support women’s rights, but jump away from the ‘f’ word. It is unfortunate, but it’s reality.
As for the rest, your comments got increasingly more juvenile, so I think I’ll call it a day.
I also apologize for the extreme length of this post.
Bob says: Tori,
You were pretty much discredited by the time you got to “It encourages young people (and all people) to not be ashamed of their sexuality and desires, whether they want to have a variety of partners, just the one in their lifetime, none at all, or any number in between.”
If you are an adult and seriously feel that encouraging “young people” to have “a variety of partners” because they “want to” is one of your available options, you are pretty much clueless.
“Mat, thanks for taking the time to respond to my comment with your misreadings and less-than-sound arguments. Let’s get into it, shall we?”
Yes, you may fire when ready, Gridley.
“My favourite part was that although I never identified myself as a feminist, and you repeatedly accused me of being judgmental, you assumed that I was and immediately made an offensive comment about feminists shooting their mouths off.”
Hmmm…I think it’s pretty safe to say that given the tone of your previous comment and the fact that you were hell bent on defending the notion (not to mention the phrase-dropping of common feminist terms), you are indeed a feminist. So please drop the hurt feelings mask, k? And I do generally think feminists shoot their mouths off. Case in point: I don’t recall seeing you post on here much and you’re all hot and bothered to “educate” us noble savages on this site about the true calling of feminism. And yes, you were being very judgmental and rather arrogant. The fact that what I said blew right over your head pretty much reinforces my original position. A lot.
“I’m sorry that you chose to lower the tone of what could have been a civilized discussion, but I’ll try to extend to you the courtesy of respect that you failed to extend to me.”
A civilized conversation? Really? I made my point about the noble savage thing, so I won’t say much more on that. As far as respect, you lost that when you came in here with your holier than thou notion on how men are part of the “hegemonic masculinity” (BTW, normal women do not use this term…). It was clear from the get-go that you were not interested in understanding the opposite side but rather wanted to fire off a long winded post about how we’re all a bunch of idiots for not understanding feminism. Trust me, I think I’ve read as much feminist literature as you, so I feel qualified to make comments about it.
“It seems as though you read my advocacy of comfort with one’s own sexuality as an advocacy of everyone getting it on as much as they can. That is most certainly not what I said.”
Like hell you didn’t. Look, I can smell bullshit a mile away. I thrive on these type of arguments because people try to throw a bunch of sugar-coating on what they really mean. Whether you understood what you were implying is another story. Like I said, I thought your argument was all over the place.
“Have another read of the sentence:
“It encourages young people (and all people) to not be ashamed of their sexuality and desires, whether they want to have a variety of partners, just the one in their lifetime, none at all, or any number in between.”
Again, I fail to see where promiscuity does not come into play here. “Variety” or “any number in between” means multiple partners. Yes, I think that’s what you’re advocating. Again, do you truly understand the argument you’re trying to make?
“Here I acknowledged a range of desires: from those with large, varied sexual appetites, to those who only desired one partner in their lifetime, to asexuals. Obviously, promiscuity can come with a number of health consequences, so let’s discuss that.”
Um, we’re not asexual. One-celled organisms are. It’s called budding. That’s a pretty basic concept that one learns in high school. Last time I checked, babies don’t grow as an offshoot from a mother. Hey, I’m just going by what you’re saying at this point.
“As far as your comments about irresponsibility and indiscipline go, having multiple sexual partners is only irresponsible if you are irresponsible about it.”
Huh, what??? That’s one of the most run-around sentences I’ve ever come across. Wow, talk about circular logic. Either you’re responsible or you’re not. You can’t have it both ways. If you have irresponsible behavior, you can’t be responsible about it.
“The wise thing to do, if you’re going to do this, is always for you and your new partner to get tested for STDs before engaging in sexual activity. This way you know what you’re getting yourself into if you choose to forge ahead.”
Or if you’re truly wise, you don’t enter that situation at all. It seems like an awful lot of work just so you can work your magic with as many as possible. I’m curious…what if you’re the one who has the STD and you’re trying to have multiple partners? Seems to me that the vast majority (and laughing, I could be way off base here) of people who have STDs are the ones who are sleeping around with lots of people. Yes, there is the occasional person who just has bad luck, but…
“I stated before, not everyone desires this kind of lifestyle, and so safety from STDs and accidental pregnancy come easier for those who are not promiscuous.”
Ya think?
“s for your ridiculous goat comment, obiviously a goat cannot consent to intercourse. If you were so driven by a desire to have sex with a goat that you actually went and did it, you would be raping a goat. And that’s a crime.”
Um, no you established the parameters. You said whatever makes you feel good, go ahead and do it. Don’t blame me for your absurdities. On a side note, does the goat know it’s rape? Personally, I still think that it’s just wrong period, but like I said, you set the boundaries. Don’t get mad at me for interpreting such an equally ridiculous open-ended philosophy.
“Once again, you got it wrong when you responded to this comment of mine:
“Having sex because you’re being pressured by culture or a partner has negative emotional consequences just as waiting until marraige because you’re scared of the physical consequences of sex can have emotional repercussions.”
No, I don’t think I was wrong at all. Remember, I’m responding to what you wrote. Next time, tighten up your argument. You’ll be better for it.
“Ithink you may have missed the first part of the sentence. Absolutely getting laid for the hell of it has emotional consequences. Especially when being pressured.”
Ah, but where is the pressure coming from, that’s the question? Everything has a consequence in life…everything. What you said was only part of whatever argument you were trying to make at that point. I merely added context to make it more logical. You talk about societal pressure, and I can fire back that there is pressure from feminists for girls to do exactly the opposite. Like I said, feminists don’t have issues with pressuring itself, but who’s doing the pressuring.
“The whole culture around male virginity (and the pressure to lose it) is a huge problem, but that seems like another discussion for another day.”
It’s called the sexual revolution. It’s a 60s’ thing. Read about it and get back to me. It’s what started the “if it feels good, just do it” nonsense. When the feminists then told women to just have sex all the time without repercussions, that pretty much meant that guys pretty much got a free ride. Why bother to wait for marriage when there’s so many women out there who’ll give it to you at any time?
“I wouldn’t say that feminists, particularly, are pressuring girls to have sex when they don’t want to (and I’m sure they’d be upset if that was the message girls were getting from them), but there are certainly forces that do, notably the popular media.”
Ok, but Cassy did talk about Valenti’s book as an example and that pretty much advocates exactly what you seem to have a problem with reconciling. On the contrary, feminists aren’t bothered in the least by this. As I said long ago, the main goal of feminism is to radically re-shape society into one where the women become the new men and the men the new women. That hasn’t changed. Having girls sleep around all over helps to break down the family system, which the feminists detest.
“I absolutely have a problem with pressuring, from both sides, and have experienced them both in my lifetime.”
You have a strange way of explaining it. The only pressure I read about was societal. And you seem to give your feminists a free pass on the rest. You seem to think that pressure is a bad thing. Pressure is only one way for a society to interact. Every culture has it. To try to deny that is to deny civilization. Otherwise we’d have anarchy.
“I have found, in my years of reading, researching and exploring, that feminism, at its core, is about fighting the forces that pressure you, and forging your own path, always mindful for the rights of others.”
Hmmm…maybe the old-style feminists (I mean the ones in the early part of the 20th century and most of the 19th), but the ones now? Bullshit.
“Maybe some of the movement have diverged from this message (as happens in a lot of movements), but the bulk of feminist thought centres around this right to autonomy.”
Some of it??? Ok, but with autonomy comes responsibility. When you say, “do whatever the hell you want,” that’s just not being responsible. I don’t see why this is such a difficult concept to understand.
“As for your AIDs comment, I’m not 100% up on my 80s AIDs knowledge, but from what you mentioned it seemed like the bulk of that spread happened because of a lack of education about the disease.”
No, it happened because people were arrogant and pig-headed about it.
“Because of their long history of oppression I imagine the bathhouses would have had an emotional significance with the gay community, but yes, a health hazard is a health hazard and everyone today can see that with the power of hindsight.”
Hindsight? You had medical experts at the time warning them to shut down the bathhouses because AIDs was already spreading. This wasn’t a case of Monday morning quarterbacking, the facts were out there at the time. The gay community simply refused to look at the data. As for the oppression nonsense, yeah, it really worked out for them in the end, didn’t it. Hey, they kept their “rights,” but they did so at the cost of killing most of them. Yeah, seems like a fair trade-off to me (major sarcasm alert here).
“The STD rate? If that is correct then yes, it is very high.”
Yes, at least we can agree on this and yes, it’s correct.
“The solution? Education. I cannot press that point enough. Get tested and get your partner tested.”
Or…don’t have multiple partners. Less partners means less probability of getting something.
“Find out what STDs are covered by contraception.”
There are STDs that contraception does not cover.
“Use contraception. If you’re not willing to do all these things and don’t want to risk infection, then it’s best to just not have sex. That’s what needs to be taught.”
And I think we both know that’s not what will be taught, so let’s not beat around the bush. And contraception doesn’t always work. I believe one of the posters gave pretty good details of this, so I won’t delve into it.
“Objectifying men? Where’s your evidence? I need better than a “does too!” type comment to take your argument seriously.”
Maybe you need to read your buddies’ literature a bit more closely then.
As is always the case, there are a few people that just ruin it for everybody else. As I tell my brother “I’m not hating on you, you’re a good person. I’m hating on the patriachal system”.
(laughing my ass off) And you had the gall to act hurt when I called you a feminist earlier? I think we can call off the con game here.
“Just as there are sexist men that perpetuate the patriachy, there are sexist women who bitterly rage against it.”
I’m really curious. What exactly constitutes the patriarchy? It seems like such a generalized concept. If it’s generalized then it means that it’s an overall concept. This also means that you are hating on your brother (and if I were him, I’d be insulted by your slight of hand).
“Those few voices do not speak for the entirety of feminism and women, just as those male voices do not speak for the entirety of men.”
Perhaps, but I when you start throwing the “patriarchy” nonsense around, I kinda wonder about the entirety thing. Like I said, patriarchy is a pretty broad-based concept, so I don’t think you’re fooling anyone here about what it really means. It’s not like I’ve ever started railing about a “matriarchy.” Besides, if you truly are bitching about a patriarchy, what’s the solution? A matriarchy? Yeah, I think you just painted yourself into a corner.
“It is always confusing to be the member of a historically oppressive group when you yourself do not share those ideals. For example, I am a white woman and I have to deal with the history of racist behaviours that white people have used against other racial groups. I am not racist, but because of my racial identity the language that I use will be scrutinized. The same thing applies for gender. Although it is a highly complex issue that seems to be made up largely of a grey area, open communication does not allow for sexism against men, as you suggest it does.”
Hooboy, where to start on this? Unlike you, I’m not going to wring my hands about something I had nothing to do with. Besides, you act like whites did everything wrong. Historically oppressive group? That can be pretty much said of any civilization at any time. Are you kidding me with this Marxist crap?
Let me tell you something, sweetie. Yes, it is true that western civilization isn’t totally perfect. However, consider this. White men died in the tens of thousands to set slaves free. White men in India were the ones who put down the Hindu practice of suttee (you might want to read up on that little gem). White men were the ones who got the ball rolling as far as this country is concerned. It was a white male US Senate which acted to give women the vote. It was white males in general which stopped the Nazi menace. And it’s western civilization that has the best chance of stopping and Islamic flood (and I don’t think I need to cite the stuff they do). That’s just a few examples and if I wasn’t in a semi-rush to get out of work, I could cite a dozen others. Therefore, I think you can get off your high horse about that.
As for “open communication” try watching some TV commercials next time. It’s so overlaid in our culture that we scarcely recognize it anymore.
Yes, it’s such a burden, isn’t it? I think Kipling wrote something about this…oops, wrong gender…
“You grossly misread my comment about hegemonic masculinity. My point was that men are presented, as boys, with a very narrow (hegemonic) definition of what it means to be a man. They are taught that to be a man you must be strong, confident, successful, assertive, dominant and in complete control of your emotions (no crying allowed).”
I’m sorry, and this is a problem in what way? Boys like to make and break things. Cripes, they’ve already done studies on behavior. This is pretty common knowledge.
I love to play military simulations on the computer. I always have. I strongly suspect most guys do. It’s hardly hegemonic. It’s called testosterone. It’s a chemical thing. And no, I don’t really like to cry that much. I find it embarrassing. I’m really curious as to what you think the alternative should be. I’ll keep reading because I think I’ll get an answer in the next part…
“While some men are like this, a significant portion aren’t.”
Horseshit. Plain and simple. Every civilization has had men act like what you described above more or less.
“My point was that feminism works to break down gender divides in terms of what behaviours and personality traits make a man or a woman. It tells women that they don’t have to be passive, fragile, emotional and submissive, and tells men they don’t have to conform to the traits I previously listed.”
Ok, in a roundabout way, what you’re describing is, in fact, social reengineering. You pretty much proved my argument correct with this. Women should become men, men should become women. Yes, I see your point, clear as crystal.
“This is how it helps men. It lets them be free to be who they are, whoever that may be, too. (ps. I never, ever said men were arrogant.)”
I’m really trying hard to see how this exactly helps men when you have gender reversal. Creating a new group of 2nd class citizens doesn’t really make things right. So men would be, I don’t know, say, free to be homemakers? Rear kids? Stay at home? I’m not sure how where you’re going with this other than the obvious conclusion I reached above…). This just seems to be a very ingenious way of getting guys to do mostly “female” work while the women become the true breadwinners. Yes, I’m aware that this may irritate even a few people on this post.
“For your essentialist gender divisions, yes, females have vaginas and males have penises.”
Oh no, she hit me with a big word. Whatever shall I do? Congrads on graduating from Biology 101.
“But sexual organs do not dominate and control our personalities.”
Um, yeah they do. You’re honestly telling me the testes has nothing to do with male behavior? Really? Yeah, there’s a reason for biological configurations…
“Gender (women and men) as we understand it today IS socially constructed – femininity and masculinity are not inherently female and male, they are created and perpetuated socially. Judith Butler’s ‘Gender Trouble’ is a great read for that one.”
Again, I guess we’ll have to simply agree to disagree on this one. It’s pretty obvious we on total opposite sides here. Read above.
“Transgender people are the living proof of these social constructions.”
Well, the jury is still out on that. Transgender is, let’s face it, not the human norm and it’s certainly not something we should be aspiring to. Nothing against them, but when you have complex organisms such as us, there are bound to be glitches along the way (yeah, I’m pretty sure this will also piss off some people here).
“As for the rest, I feel like this comment has gone on far too long already, but I’ll try to quickly mention some more before I have to dash off to work.”
Hey, you’re the one who had “no choice” but to teach the unwashed masses the shining truth.
“I think you have grossly underestimated the intelligence of young people (who are significantly older than the kids you mentioned getting money from their parents in a toy store), and when they’re educated they CAN understand issues. It seems adults would rather shut them up than hear their opinions.”
Heh heh. Well, it’s funny that you say that because I work at a university and, trust me, I see plenty of these people every single day. Not very impressed by them. Perhaps adults shut them up because they themselves thought those same thoughts so long ago? Again, it comes back to experience. As an example, I thought my parents were full of shit when I was 15. Now that I’m 36, I totally understand their viewpoint. When you mature, you’ll understand that as well.
“Feminism does not ‘advocate lesbianism’ in the sense that it sees it as some kind of preferable lifestyle choice. Being gay is NOT a choice, and feminism understands this, and accepts lesbians, bisexuals, and heterosexuals alike into the fold.”
Yes, it can be both a choice and something that is genetic. When you’re middle aged and you start hanging around feminist women and then they suddenly see the light and quit a relationship with a man so they can shack up with a women, I think that’s definitely choice. If you truly have feelings for the same gender, I think that manifests itself at a pretty early age. So yes, I do believe there is an awful lot of choice preference mixed in there with the genetics.
“Maybe in the 70s experimenting with lesbianism was just a part of the movement, but today it is about strong, supportive friendships.”
Again, I fail to see how this contradicts anything I mentioned way back when. When you start telling women that they don’t need men and that they need to start being with women, that goes way beyond experimentation. It just means that without true relationships, that’s just going another step towards objectifying men and pushing them into another class.
“Perhaps I didn’t word the information about the study correctly. In general, women did not harbour sexist attitudes and resentment towards men, but amongst those that did, the majority were women that did not identify as feminist.”
I would loooove to see what study this is, because it simply goes against anything that you and other feminists have noted. Remember, you’re the one who said you hated the “patriarchy” which is an overarching concept for men in general.
“I think a lot of women don’t call themselves feminists because they are afraid to be associated with the movement (which has been demonized in the popular media).”
Gee, I can’t imagine why. And it’s hardly demonization. Feminists such as yourself trip themselves up all the time.
“A lot of women support women’s rights, but jump away from the ‘f’ word. It is unfortunate, but it’s reality.”
There’s a distinct difference between supporting women’s rights (which I do, more or less) and advocating a total gender-reversal because you think you’ll form some sort of utopia if only women were in charge. I have news for you, women would screw it up just as badly as the guys. There is no magical cure-all for society.
“As for the rest, your comments got increasingly more juvenile, so I think I’ll call it a day.”
(yawn) This is a euphemism for “I can’t really answer this stuff, so I’ll pull the juvenile card.” I reiterate: you’re the one who posted first.
Again, there really isn’t much here that’s different from what you stated in your post and it pretty much reinforces my original comment about feminism. My thanks for letting others see the light.
sonja says: Tori – you seem to be going for the old versions of feminism, which brought us good things like the female vote.
Modern feminists are outspoken in their hatred for men, censor all dissenting (and half the time even just questioning) voices, state that all evil comes from men, and even worship SCUM Manifesto, which advocates Androcide. I’ve read posts from feminists stating that all males should be castrated at birth, that men cannot be raped, aren’t able to be oppressed/disadvantaged in any way, shape or form and generally should be oh-so grateful for their so-called “privilege”. Try to comment about male victims of domestic violence, and you’ll get a response along the lines that they’re in such a small minority as to virtually be non-existent, and all men have to stop females from becoming victims (take a look at WhiteRibbon’s website). Male suicide rates meets with a wall of silence, and any male voice on the abortion of their child(ren) is quickly shouted down as being “her choice”. Any man who’s lost custody of his children and relegated to a wallet in their lives must have deserved it and be a bad parent.
These are all attitudes I see expressed by feminists regularly. Like Mat said, just take a quick look at Feministing, because that place is rife with these sickening attitudes.
Tori,
Mat has done a good job responding to you, so I’ll just throw a few comments out there:
Girls (and boys) should not be shamed for having sex as a teen
Yes, they should, and for a very simple reason: slutty girls make it harder for the rest of us. Yes, Tori, your choices have a negative effect on my life. If they didn’t, I wouldn’t care, but they do, so I shame slutty women.
Once slutty sex is seen as “normal,” healthy, normal girls are pressured into being treated like sluts. I cannot tell you how many men have asked me – a glasses-wearing, professional/boring-clothes-sporting, demure woman – if I will sleep with them. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist (although it does take someone who thinks for herself and doesn’t drink Kool-Aid) to figure out that the seemingly bizarre behaviour of asking a stranger for sex is due to the deeply misguided ideology that has been pushed on our culture for years. Once sex is nothing more than a good time, refusing it is like refusing calorie-free candy.
Response to Tori, Part II:
As far as STDs and accidental pregnancies go: these usually occur because of a lack of education. Schools that preach abstinence-only do NOT help the kids that don’t want to wait. Time has shown that teens who have abstinence-only education are the ones that end up with STDs and accidental pregnancy because no-one taught them how to use contraceptives properly or even how STDs and pregnancy really happen. Bristol Palin, anyone?
Two things: Bristol Palin had comprehensive sex ed at Wasilla High. I’m sorry that your ad hominem, “conservatives are evil and don’t teach their kids about sex” talking point got in the way of actual facts, but that’s life as a liberal.
Second: if contraception is so reliable, and if teenagers will reliably use it if properly educated, why not just impose comprehensive sex ed, distribute free condoms, and make abortion illegal? After all, according to your logic, contraception is super-reliable and sexually active teens can use it consistently and correctly.
Mat,
Another point, not to kill our detente or anything:
“I think a lot of women don’t call themselves feminists because they are afraid to be associated with the movement (which has been demonized in the popular media).”
Gee, I can’t imagine why. And it’s hardly demonization. Feminists such as yourself trip themselves up all the time.
Leftist/progressives have a nice feminist bait-and-switch routine: they use a definition of feminism that describes an ideology that most sane people agree with, ask how anyone could oppose it, and, having concluded that most Americans are feminists, proceed to throw abortion, the welfare state, affirmative action, amoral and emotionless sex, and misanthropy onto their definition.
Some of us are feminists who fight back against the progressive abuse of the term. As feminists will claim to speak for me, and as classical feminism has done so much for my life and my opportunities, I will continue to fight for the term; in doing so, I fight women like Tori the most.
Roxeanne,
I said before that I don’t have an issue with old-style feminists (i.e. the ones in the 19th and the early 20th century). As far as I’m concerned, those were the true and really only feminists.
However, there is a modern feminism, a la Tori, that is slowly permeating our society. Unfortunately, that’s the one which is making inroads.
Andy says: Roxeanne,
Good point about Bristol Palin. People really need to put the “she got pregnant because she grew up in a conservative home and did not know about contraception” theory to rest. She knew damn well what contraception was, and no amount of additional “education” would have helped. Levi Johnson stated they used protection “most of the time”. This would be like when a 16 year kid gets busted for driving his car 110MPH, people saying kids need more education on what speed limits are. What were Todd and Sarah supposed to do. Make sure Levi had a condom in his wallet everytime he saw their daughter, make sure Bristol took her pills every morning. It really is rediculous.
Cassie says: “Yes, they should, and for a very simple reason: slutty girls make it harder for the rest of us. Yes, Tori, your choices have a negative effect on my life. If they didn’t, I wouldn’t care, but they do, so I shame slutty women.”
No they shouldn’t. I knew a girl who was at my high school who was known sleep around and people shamed her everyday until they found out she was actually getting gang raped by her neighborhood boys on a daily basis and she didn’t open her mouth about it until a year later. So again shaming isn’t good because you don’t know all the details of a person’s life.
Plus I would need you to explain how another woman’s decisions affect your life? I personally have been around truly slutty girls before in my life and I’m don’t understand how they’re choices could at all affect me. Now yes I had a slut recently try to steal my boyfriend who he doesn’t want but besides that I don’t see how sluttiness affects me as a person. I think the only things that affect my life is things that I get involved in and choices I make so I’m not following on how you allow other people’s choices to affect you. And to say you shame slutty women sounds like you have a high school mentality. How about you worry about yourself and stop talking shit about other human beings and they’re decisions, it’s none of your business.
“Once slutty sex is seen as “normal,” healthy, normal girls are pressured into being treated like sluts. I cannot tell you how many men have asked me – a glasses-wearing, professional/boring-clothes-sporting, demure woman – if I will sleep with them. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist (although it does take someone who thinks for herself and doesn’t drink Kool-Aid) to figure out that the seemingly bizarre behaviour of asking a stranger for sex is due to the deeply misguided ideology that has been pushed on our culture for years. Once sex is nothing more than a good time, refusing it is like refusing calorie-free candy.”
Your first sentence makes me laugh. I don’t know what normal is but I will put myself in that category because even though I’m not a virgin, I’m not a slut either and I’m very picky on who I sleep with and I’ve been asked by total strangers if I would sleep with them since I was 12. It has always been a normal part of society as well as sex has always been seen as a good time (because don’t lie we all know here sex does feel good). And trust me I don’t dress real slutty either (unless you count the summer time of crop tops and shorts). I’ve been hit on workout clothes, baggy pants, and big coats as well as no makeup and/or my hair in a messy ponytail so obviously it has nothing to do with sluttiness, it’s just that some people out there are pigs, deal with it and quit whining.
Cassie: interesting that you think that I have a high school mentality; I’m probably almost twice your age.
That you cannot see anything wrong with total strangers asking you for sex is your own problem – and a large one.
That you choose to refute my very bland comment with a (fictional) anecdote about a girl who was gang-raped is absurd. First of all, even if it were true, that girl does NOT need a society that tells her to just sleep around; she needs a society that tells her that sex is special. If sex isn’t special, then she has no grounds upon which to fight back, to say no, and to understand the horrific psychological damage that rape brings. She does not need, on top of that psychological damage, any incentive to compound the harm by sleeping with other men.
Second of all, thank you for demonstrating that normal, healthy women don’t sleep around and that the pro-sex culture is normalising psychologically disturbed behaviour. Fact is, healthy women take sex seriously; only those with a screw loose don’t do it. Frankly, I see no more reason to treat the latter as normal than I would to treat cutting as normal. If the behaviour is primarily associated with psychologically damaged people, it is the exact sort of thing that we, as a society, need to condemn.
Finally, nice one anecdote! Babe, maybe YOU are too immature to care whether or not men treat you worse than they would treat a prostitute (whom they would at least pay for the encounter) and haven’t had enough relationships to know better, but let me tell you, hon: the pro-sex attitude messes with the lives of women. As you get older and your high school/college mentality fades, you’re going to want more than sex (or sex with nice men). You’re going to want sex to mean something. You’re going to want to have a relationship that’s more than sex from a nice guy. At that time, you’re going to understand what I’m talking about.
Cassie says: lol I guess I should explain myself better.
I never said I don’t see anything wrong with men treating me like a sex object but it’s their problem not mine. I choose to ignore them and if they bother me some more I tell them to kiss my ass or I flip them the bird and go about my day because I know in my mind I’m not that type of person and if they don’t realize it well they missed out getting to know a good person. I have too much to worry about in my life than to think about some pig that approached me on the street that I had only met in life for a quick minute.
And I love how you assume I don’t know that sex is special. First off sweetie, I’m not the type of girl who just goes and has sex for fun. Yes I find sex fun but I only find it fun if I care about the person. And I’ve been with the same guy for 2 years, we’re planning on marriage and buying a home together already and trust me he’s a nice guy that has a huge amount of respect for me so yes I do know what having sex with someone I love feels like because I have that feeling and that’s the reason I am pro-sex is because I find the love and intimacy that can be in sex and I don’t see it as an evil thing.
Another thing I find it highly offensive that you found my story to be fictional. My friend was 14 at the time it happened to her and I do agree with you that she doesn’t need to be encouraged to sleep around (which she never did willingly). But at the same time she didn’t deserve to be called a slut constantly through her freshman year when what was happening was her being raped constantly by men in their 20s. And you don’t need to explain the damage through rape, I understand first hand what it causes. But being called a slut after being raped brings more pain than someone sleeping around afterwards in my opinion.
I also think you should rethink what pro-sex means to people. Like I find myself to be pro-sex because I feel good when I have sex with my boyfriend I love the intimacy we share. Even if he doesn’t end up being my last (which I pray to God he will be), I can still know in life that intimacy in sex does exist and not many people get to have that feeling and I want people to have that feeling of intimacy, lust, and love one day instead of just one night stands and I’m doing this because I’m horny attitudes. I think condemning sex just causes another level of something we don’t need. There should definitely be a middle ground when it comes to sex.
Well, Cassie, when you argue against a straw man (i.e. all of us evil conservatives think that sex is bad and only for making conservative babies), you’re going to find that people misconstrue you.
Hon, if you think that sex is special with your boyfriend, then you’re obviously a lot more on our side than you are on the modern, “sex positive” side. If you get a lot out of it emotionally, then you’re on our side. That you seem to think that you can reconcile piggish male behaviour, sluttishness, and the happy gooey feelings of making love doesn’t make you correct (or even a nuanced thinker); it just means that you’re too blind to see the internal inconsistencies in your thinking.
Actually, on the part about your internal inconsistencies: unless you’re totally okay with a boyfriend of only a few weeks doing you up the butt while you both watch porn, you’re obviously not quite as modern and hip as you think you are.
If it’s never “just sex” to you – which your posts seem to indicate – then you have a lot of ‘splaining to do. That ‘splaining, though, is not to us – I could care less – but is to yourself and how you can reconcile promotion of an ideology that directly undermines everything you claim to want from your life and for other women.
38 Comments