I wouldn’t lecture anyone about how to fuck or how many people or in what position. But I still think it is worth it to recognize the underlying dynamics of what induces people to behave the way they do, particularly about things that become fads. Brazilian waxing is a good example of that. I don’t think that getting Brazilian bikini waxes, etc. will make “our hard-won feminist gains�, not at all! But aren’t many of us pressured into believing that our pubic hair is gross and shameful for example (let’s say a whiff of it peeping from the bikini)? Some of us don’t like to deep throat or take it up the butt (it hurts after all), aren’t we afraid we might be considered prudes by our sexual partners and other women? I think it’s always legitimate to ask, when following a fad or trend, how much of it is an informed, empowered personal choice. Otherwise why would you have any problems with Muslim women wearing burqa’s. Why is one an acceptable or even “liberating� personal choice, but the other has got to be a result of coercion or ignorance? I completely agree that “Having a full range of sexual options should be a high-priority feminist goal�, that’s why I am uncomfortable with a culture in which the only “fashionable� form of sexual expression for women involves putting on a performance for men. As a woman who loves sex, but not with women, and isn’t really exhibitionist, there just isn’t a lot of appealing imagery out there for me. No, I don’t think it is time to put the debate to bed.

The feminist movement has been struggling with bedroom politics for so long, it might be time to put the debate to bed (no pun intended). As Bussel says, “[It’s] as if coming up with the most politically correct form of orgasm will automatically solve other inequities.�

I like to think of it in terms of religious activism. Christians can be active by helping the poor and fighting racism and agitating for peace. Or they can tell people which sexual practices are Godly and which aren't, and crusade against media images they don't like.

Feminism is the same, although unlike religion it's not based on false metaphysics: feminists can agitate for wage equality and greater political representation and funding for women's shelters, or they can tell people which sexual practices and media images are patriarchal. Fortunately, while Evangelists are largely taking the latter route (I'm not sure about other Christians), feminists seem to be overwhelmingly taking the former.

Sojourner - you wrote:
"Otherwise why would you have any problems with Muslim women wearing burqa’s."

What is the problem with Muslim women wearing burqas? I see the problem with them being forced to wear them, but I don't think that's what you meant. Is it? I believe in freedom of religion, so I believe that people should be able to wear whatever headcovering they choose.

You also wrote "I am uncomfortable with a culture in which the only “fashionable� form of sexual expression for women involves putting on a performance for men."

I would agree with your conclusion, but I'm not sure that I agree with your premise. If a woman is sexually satisfied, can you really call the action "putting on a performance for men"?

In general, feminists tend to be quite supportive of women who choose to wear burqas of their own free will. I can't recall having seen a single feminist critique of Muslim women who wear burqas in the West; the critiques I've seen are entirely about government-enforced dresscodes.

DT, If a woman feels sexually satisfied by giving a lap dance or making out with another woman in front of guys (and I am not saying that these are one and the same), more power to her. I understand that some women might actually enjoy that kind of thing, but when it’s everywhere ( I don’t want to use the word epidemic) then doesn’t it make you wonder why? Why don’t guys strip for us for once? Where are all the hard beautiful male bodies on billboards for my viewing pleasure?
What I am saying I don’t like is that this model of behavior is pushed on us (or me, I can only speak for myself) as the only way to be cool, sexually expressive and not a prude. There is just no alternative offered.

FWIW, I'm not sure how much I agree with this statement.

While couples should be free to do whatever activities they mutually agree on doing in the bedroom, I do wonder how much women being submissive, not so much in the bedroom but at least in certain corners of the dating world in which it is still very much the custom for the man to woo the woman, etc., affects people's ideas of gender roles in general.

Considering the key role of the dating scene in forming people's opinions about what it means to be a man or a woman (excepting a few omni-sexuals, most people, in the dating scene, do care about whether they are pursuing a man or a woman -- even those who would pursue either -- so it stands to reason that many of our views on the sexes would be informed by that environment where the differences between men and women do matter and come most to the fore), I wonder if, when a man always encounters women being relatively passive and not assertative in the dating scene, whether this causes him to develop stereotypes about women being passive and not assertive that make him discriminate against women, e.g., in the workplace.

While men and women should both feel free to be able to transcend or conform to traditional (itself a misnomer considering how much of what we consider as "traditional" are relatively modern constructs) sex roles in their love lives, I worry that too much conformity to sex roles in the place where sex/gender is most important leads to a general acceptance of gender stereotypes even where such stereotypes are definitively wrong and damaging.

I take it Sojourner never saw a Diet Coke commercial.

Or a Calvin Klein Billboard.

I have a lot of issues with the article, but in heterosexual-focused, ranting I'll-regret-this-later-when-people-call-me-names brief:

1) The only solution she offers is "don't talk if you have anything critical to say about sex." So are there any limits to anything sexual being okay? If I want to sew my labia mostly together because I'm with a guy who'll be turned on by my pain and I say that I'll be happy if he's turned on, is that okay? If I want to be beaten hard enough that I require hospitalization, is that okay? If I think I never deserve to orgasm because I have Catholic guilt, is that okay? What if I think I never deserve to orgasm for S&M reasons? These are all equally valid feminist choices?

I am talking as someone who enjoys the physical sensations of rough sex, for the record. I'm close-minded prude, but I'm almost as disgusted by women - and men - who insist their orgasms are sacred and unjudgeable as I am by fundies who think female orgasms are a myth.

2) Women insisting that they have rape fantasies and that's not be criticized lends support to men who have fantasies about raping women. Yes, that's because of old patriarchal stereotypes, but why should feminists be happy with those stereotypes being celebrated and eroticized? Why are raping-fantasies okay? I have never seen a defense, but they're just as important as rape fantasies. I don't think rape porn is okay. I'm not in favor of censorship, but I don't think this kind of stuff does women any good. I don't see how one woman's orgasm from playacting rape makes up for however extra many women are raped because however many men got really excited about the idea of rape through viewing rape porn.

Brief citation: Dr. Diana Russell's work: http://www.dianarussell.com/porntoc.html

3) To draw a loose analogy, I'm someone who wears makeup. My choice to wear makeup supports a sexist beauty industry, satisfies patriarchal standards, and in a a very tiny way harms other women. But I recognize the reasons I wear makeup, would never defend them as feminist, and am slowly wearing it less often. I'm not a monster for doing what I do, and neither are the women who support "anything goes."

I'm someone who wears makeup. My choice to wear makeup supports a sexist beauty industry, satisfies patriarchal standards, and in a a very tiny way harms other women. - nerdlet

I always wondered if there was an aspect of a prisoner's dilemma (sp?) in make-up wearing: everyone would benefit if no-one wore make-up (well, except for the cosmetics industry: which adds an interesting twist to the prisoner's dilemma: the option to cooperate may be a less favorable one as far as the prisoners are concerned, but it does benefit someone -- is this ever considered in considering the prisoners' dilemma?), but if no-one else is wearing make-up, you benefit while if you are the only one not wearing make up you have a loss.

Is my (being a male dolt, I am very dense about these things) analysis correct or is it un-intentional flame-bate?

Women insisting that they have rape fantasies and that's not be criticized lends support to men who have fantasies about raping women.

Diana Russell's research about porn and rape contradicts far better-established and more mainstream studies (citations available on demand). Rape porn may induce rape fantasies, but rape fantasies don't cause rape; in fact, going by Wikipedia's numbers, the percentage of male rapists who have rape fantasies is barely higher than the overall percentage of men who have rape fantasies (something like 74% vs. 70%).

The only solution she offers is "don't talk if you have anything critical to say about sex."

You'll be surprised how good a solution it is. If you don't like sex, don't judgmentally talk down people who do. Ditto if you don't like homosexuality or dark skin or women with breasts smaller than a D cup.

what?! 70% of men have raping fantasies?!

The problem is that this article creates a false dichotomy between "tell people how to fuck" and blindly accepting that all kinds of sex is just peachy keen, and that's bizarre.

Does Bussel seriously believe that sex somehow takes place in a magic land that is completely separate from the gendered power relations that inform all other aspects of daily life and relations between the sexes? And that conversely, that whatever one does in this magical land has no significance whatsoever with respect to the culture at large and one's own place in it? You'd have to be willfully blinding yourself to believe so.

Bussel may like to be spanked until she screams (and quite frankly, I could have lived quite happily without that piece of information--I have a low tolerance for hearing the intimate details of strangers' lives). Whether or not she should like that is a moot issue. But what the prevalence of S&M says about our culture, the relations between the sexes, the kind of cultural work that is done by female submissives, why someone would find that arousing--all those issues are part of the cultural analysis as a whole, and I don't see why feminists shouldn't analyze and discuss them.

I'm partial to Angela Carter's book, The Sadeian Woman, myself.

what?! 70% of men have raping fantasies?!

It's a normal thing. Most people have fantasize about raping (I think the statistics are the same for both genders); most people also fantasize about being raped. Needless to say, having a fantasy in which you're raped is very different from actually being raped.

But what the prevalence of S&M says about our culture, the relations between the sexes, the kind of cultural work that is done by female submissives, why someone would find that arousing--all those issues are part of the cultural analysis as a whole, and I don't see why feminists shouldn't analyze and discuss them.

Because what passes for analysis among anti-BDSM feminists is unmitigated bullshit. For example, "the prevalence of S&M" is fairly low in real life, unless couples who like to tie each other up once in a while are considered S&Mers. One not particularly reliable site puts the number of people who regularly engage in BDSM play at 2% of the population. For another example, males aren't likelier than women to be dom(me)s; they are slightly likelier to be into BDSM, however.

So, because there's a lot of bad analysis (and note I'm taking your word for this, as I haven't done any research on it myself), nobody should do any analysis? Nope. I don't buy it.

In my opinion, such studies should look at couples who dabble in bondage, as it suggests a continuum, and since I'm interested in the cultural work BDSM play does, it is especially of interest when it factors into non-BDSMers lives (speaking academically, of course--as I said before, interpersonally, I don't want to hear about it!). I'm also interested in the cultural significance of the submissive man vs. woman; the fact they occur in equal numbers doesn't mean that they signify the same things culturally.

So, because there's a lot of bad analysis (and note I'm taking your word for this, as I haven't done any research on it myself), nobody should do any analysis? Nope. I don't buy it.

It's good that you don't, since it's not what I advocate. I think it's perfectly legitimate to analyze why people do BDSM. However, the analyst needs to tread carefully because of anti-kink oppression, in a similar manner to how a researcher analyzing the black/white IQ gap must be careful not to pass off prejudice as fact. Further, since I've yet to see a good analysis based on feminist theory, I think it makes sense to favor analyses based on mainstream psychology and sociology.

I'm also interested in the cultural significance of the submissive man vs. woman; the fact they occur in equal numbers doesn't mean that they signify the same things culturally.

Whether they do wildly depends on the nature of submission. In general, there's very physical BDSM, which is based on the sensation of pain, and psychological BDSM, which is based on emotional submission. There is some difference in psychological play, but you'll have to ask real BDSMers how much there is. All I know is that male subs can be feminized, whereas female subs are very, very seldom masculized. On the other hand, differences in physical play are entirely trivial.

"I'm also interested in the cultural significance of the submissive man vs. woman; the fact they occur in equal numbers doesn't mean that they signify the same things culturally."

Actually, they don't occur in equal numbers. I've seen multiple studies, but at a quick google of young BDSMers:

"When it comes to role pattern however, the young men seem to be much less clear about their orientation. Only half of the male group indicates a positive dominant role (52%), 14% indicates to be submissive and 34% indicates to switch roles. The vast majority (71%) of the female respondents indicates they are submissive, 19% switches roles and 10% has a dominant orientation."

Nerdlet, your link doesn't strike me as especially credible. In particular, the sentence that "Not a real phenomenum - in fact pretty well known in sexology - is the fact that young women are not so sure about their general sexual orientation as young men are" comes off as very amateurish.

That's analysis of the study, not the study itself.

So, where's the study?

To clarify (is this really necessary?), the piece you quoted was an analysis of the study that that group, whatever their research is worth, apparently ran. I have seen other such studies with similar numbers and I have never seen a study where men and women are reported to be dominant and submissive in equal numbers. I don't see what the big deal is.

Ah... I thought that when you said "analysis," you meant that they report the results of an established study.

I'd like to point out that having a "rape fantasy" is WAYYYYYYY different than actually wanting to rape or be raped. Miles apart. And going through a rape role-play with a consensual parter is not anywhere near actual rape, either.

As for the rest of this stuff, my opinions are pretty much the same ones I expressed in the blowjob thread.

I have to admit that I get easily tired of analysis of sex.

Basically, I'm fairly uncomfortable with extrapolating private in-the-bedroom behavior into the wider areas of society.

I don't mind analysis of, say, stripping, because stripping is a social phenomenon; But what two (or more) consenting adults do in private isn't really my concern.

I especially get concerned because extrapolating general behavior from bedroom antics has been a strategy used by anti-gay folks. I just find condemning people because they engage in BDSM or blow-jobs or whatever disturbingly similar.

When we come to the issue of fantasies we have to remember that we are not discussing reality but somebody's imagination.

Having a rape fantasy is NOT the same as wanting to be raped, to rape nor are they glorifying rape. In fact, rape fantasies I think thrive on the idea of being 'taken passionately' rather than the act of rape itself.

I think that society needs to understand how male and female sexuality and fantasy works - to understand that what we create in our minds is different from reality - we should be encouraged to enjoy whatever our fantasies are - there is a difference between a man who likes the idea of raping a woman in his fantasy and the men who actually rape women in reality.