"Women aren’t jars of spaghetti sauce or CD’s. They don’t come with a vacuum “pop” seal or a cellophane wrapper, because they’re not products. Virginity doesn’t have a physical quality. It’s lost when a woman makes a free choice to lose it, and not before."
Or maybe nothing in actuality is lost, but rather, an experience is gained.
[Sexologist Havelock Ellis] argued first of all that men and women were entirely different biologically and therefore psychologically. Using this idea of difference, he set out to show how male and female sexuality were entirely distinct. Not surprisingly, the map he gave us of male and female sexuality showed that male sexuality was absolutely and inevitably aggressive, taking the form of pursuit and capture, and that it was normal and inevitable for men to take pleasure in inflicting pain on women. Women’s sexuality, he said, was passive. Women were supposed to be captured and took “delight” in experiencing pain at the hands of male lovers.
According to Ellis, female sexuality was based upon evolution, and derived from female animals who were coquettish and led the male animals on. The human female was supposed to be coquettish, too. She was supposed to keep looking over her shoulder, egging on the male animal. At the last moment she was supposed to give in. Female sexuality was passive and masochistic. How did Ellis know this? Well, he said, it was obvious. Women in France enjoyed being beaten up by their pimps; working-class women in the East End of London enjoyed being beaten up by their husbands; and then there was the woman undergoing a clitoridectomy who had an orgasm as the knife passed through her clitoris. Ellis insisted that you could tell from the expression on a woman’s face during orgasm that it was pain she was feeling. For women, he concluded, pain and pleasure were inextricably linked.
Sheila Jeffreys, Sexology and Antifeminism (via ultraleftist)
The most frequently cited explanation for why some women have rape fantasies is that these fantasies allow women to avoid blame or responsibility for expressing their sexuality. According to this explanation, women have been socialized as to the importance of not being perceived as promiscuous, overly sexual, or insufficiently reticent with regard to sex. Powerful labels, such as ‘‘loose,’’ ‘‘easy,’’ ‘‘tramp,’’ and ‘‘slut’’ have been used to control and restrict women’s sexual behavior and, by extension, their sexual feelings. This theory suggests that, for some women, a sexual fantasy of their own in which they participate or seek out consensual sex may arouse anticipations of self-blame and feelings of guilt, anxiety, and depression, which would inhibit sexual gratification. By having the fantasy take the form of rape, the woman is forced to do something she does not want to do, so she cannot be blamed for what happens. The use of force combined with her own nonconsent allows her to avoid blame, reduce guilt and shame, and therefore enhance sexual gratification as compared with engaging in a fantasy of consensual sex.
It has been well documented that, across nearly all cultures, female sexuality has been actively suppressed. Thus the precondition for this theory is sound. Researchers have inferred from this theory that women who are raised in sexually repressive environments, women who are high in sex guilt, and women who have negative attitudes toward sexual stimuli would be more likely than other women to engage in rape fantasies.
Women’s Erotic Rape Fantasies: An Evaluation of Theory and Research, Joseph W. Critelli and Jenny M. Bivona
One of many theories regarding rape fantasies and the lack of understanding behind them.
Responses: “….I’m not hurting anyone else.”
2013-01-03 13:45 In response to “Stop identifying oppression as empowering”, I personally don’t find kink empowering. To me it’s a sexuality just as homosexuality is, it’s not a choice, it’s not something I enjoy and it’s not something I particularly take pride in. But it’s not something I can change, it works for me and I’m not hurting anyone else. I don’t see that as taking part in oppression anymore than a same-sex couple is taking part in oppression she also responded to things.”
It is near impossible to pin-point primary, direct influences to the human psyche. It’s also unrealistic to isolate and understand a single event or singular influence as being entirely responsible for preferences or certain, characteristics we are able to identify in ourselves. Although there is evidence to support the opinion that people with same-sex attraction can have a genetic predisposition or biological inclination to it, there is none of the sort for kink preferences (or none that I am currently aware of).
More so, sexuality, like gender, like race is at least partly constructed. How we receive and perceive these things is obviously impacted by external factors, such as societal norms and cultural ideas about what is and isn’t normal. So far, it’s quite clear that Patriarchy is very much a normal part of society and everyday living and very much something that cannot be escaped, since it’s an internationally, institutionalized phenomenon of male-power and male-run politics. In other words, all things, all actions, all preferences fit within a patriarchal context. Patriarchy constructs our sexuality.
Why is it that people are raised under the assumption that we will be attracted to a person of the opposite sex? Why are gender roles imposed in a way that fits under the heterosexist viewpoint that women need men and are not complete without them? These are just some simple, vague examples, but they show that culture does play a role in sexuality. Patriarchal heteronormativity teaches us that relations between men and women function under a strict hierarchy and dichotomy. Maleness/femaleness, masculinity/femininity, aggressive/passive, giving/receiving, dominance/submission. Masculine conditioning treats men as if a drive to be dominant or to be domineering towards other people is a natural trait of maleness. While the complementary aspects of femininity, which are supposed to suit patriarchal male needs, are assumed to be an innate part of femaleness and female existence.
To argue that “kink,” particular kinks that rely on female subjugation and male domination, is “natural” is an extension of the belief that it is natural for women to want to submit to men and for men to want to dominate them.
Plenty of people believe that female masochism has an evolutionary, biological basis and that male sadism is just an externalization of some evolutionary drive for men to demonstrate their dominance and power to attract submissive women (Just pick up a book on evolutionary psychology that analyzes male/female sexual relations).
You say you are not “hurting anyone else,” yet your beliefs alone are upholding bigoted, oppressive, out-dated assumptions. That unequal, hierarchic power-dynamics between people is natural and cannot be changed.
In other words, you are upholding oppressive beliefs and these beliefs have social ramifications. Every person is a socialization agent. Who you interact with, who you share your ideas with, etc has the potential to further shape their perception of the world around them and what is and isn’t normal/natural/acceptable/tolerable, etc. Believing that a sex culture that specializes in re-enacting slavery (“Bondage”), corporal punishment (“Discipline”), sexual[ized] torture and the acceptance of it (“Sadism/Masochism”) is just NATURAL and doesn’t stem from a male-dominated culture that serves the male gaze (which is sadistic concerning it dehumanizes feminine-presenting people and degrades them) is illogical.
Patriarchy affects everything and everyone, although its impact on minorities in the female sex class will always be the most severe.
At that, I leave you with these two quotes: “Our sexuality is not immune to the social and political forces which shape other dimensions of our lives - the sexual is also political. As such, it is also subject to evaluation, modification and change.” - Karen Rian, in Sadomasochism and the Social Construction of Desire
“The construction of S/M sexuality is a mighty clever play for the Oppressor. Our resistance is undermined in our very guts if our response to the torture of others…is erotic rather than politically indignant. It is very hard to fight what turns you on.” - Sheila Jeffreys, in The Lesbian Heresy, pg. 73
Cultures that endorse modesty and cultures that endorse hypersexualization are the *same* thing. Both define female sexuality by how it relates to the male gaze. In both cases the female body exists as an ornament either to be kept carefully hidden or put on display. Neither is an empowering feminist achievement.
"But I think that we should also stop blaming women just for being in naked pictures, or for sexting, or for having private photos or correspondence when they occasionally surface in ways they’d rather them not. Blaming women for taking private, nude photos of themselves is tantamount to blaming them for being nude in the privacy of their own showers, what with the potential for window treatments to billow in the wind, or the possibility of a fire breaking out…
It doesn’t make you stupid to take naked pictures of yourself, but it does make you an asshole if you share someone else’s naked photographs with other people."
Julieanne Smolinski on the shaming that happens when women, especially young female celebrities, sext and these naked photographs are leaked to the public (via thefemcritique)
It doesn’t make you stupid to take naked pictures of yourself, but it does make you an asshole if you share someone else’s naked photographs with other people.
(Source: xojane.com, via theamburglar)